The Czech President Vaclav Klaus is a man of reason and integrity, the more you learn about this extra-ordinary politician, the more he gains in respect.
By Vaclav Klaus - Vaclav Klaus Website
I am surprised at how so many people in Europe, the United States, and elsewhere have come to support policies underpinned by hysteria over global warming, particularly cap-and-trade legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and subsidies for "green" energy sources.
I am convinced that this is a misguided strategy - not only because of the uncertainty about the dangers that global warming might pose, but also because of the certainty of the damage that these proposed policies aimed at mitigation will impose.
I was invited to address this issue at a recent conference in Santa Barbara, Calif. My audience included business leaders who hope to profit from cap-and-trade policies and from subsidies for renewable energy and "green" jobs. My advice to them was to not get caught up in the hysteria.
Europe is several years ahead of the United States in implementing policies intended to mitigate global warming. All of the European Union's member countries have ratified the Kyoto Protocol and adopted a wide range of policies to lower their emissions and meet their Kyoto targets.
These policies include a cap-and-trade initiative known as the Emissions Trading Scheme, steep fuel taxes, and ambitious programs to build windmills and other renewable-energy projects. These policies were undertaken at a time when the EU economy was doing well and - one hopes - with full knowledge that they would have significant costs.
With the global financial crisis and the sudden economic downturn, two things are becoming clear. First, it will be difficult to afford these expensive new sources of energy. Second, energy rationing policies like cap-and-trade will be a permanent drag on economic activity. Ironically, emissions have not decreased as a result of these policies, but are doing so now as the world economy moves into recession.
This is not a surprise to someone like me, having been actively involved in my country's transition from communism to a free society and market economy. The old, outmoded heavy industries that were the pride of our Communist regime were shut down - practically overnight - because they could not survive the opening of the economy. The result was a dramatic decline in carbon-dioxide emissions.
The secret behind the cut in emissions was economic decline. As the economies of the Czech Republic and other central and eastern-European countries were rebuilt and began to grow again, emissions have naturally started to increase. It should be clear to everyone that there is a very strong correlation between economic growth and energy use.
So I am amazed to see people going along with the currently fashionable political argument that policies like cap-and-trade, government mandates, and subsidies for renewable energy can actually benefit an economy. It is claimed that government, working together with business, will create "a new energy economy," that the businesses involved will profit, and that everyone will be better off.
This is a fantasy. Cap-and-trade can only work by raising energy prices. Consumers who are forced to pay higher prices for energy will have less money to spend on other things. While the individual companies that provide the higher-priced "green" energy might do well, the net economic effect will be negative.
It is necessary to look at the bigger picture. Profits can be made when energy is rationed or subsidized, but only within an economy operating at lower, or even negative, growth rates. This means that over the longer term, everyone will be competing for a piece of a pie that is smaller than it would have been without energy rationing.
This does not augur well either for growth or for working our way out of today's crisis.
Václav Klaus, The Gazette (Montreal), 1.5.2009
Sunday, May 31, 2009
The Czech President Vaclav Klaus is a man of reason and integrity, the more you learn about this extra-ordinary politician, the more he gains in respect.
I was astonished how accurately Jamie Glazov described the left and it's self-hating motivations with it's romance for the most evil and dictatorial despotic regimes throughout recent history as we are well aware from the last century or so, the lies and the apologetic admiration for genocides - I highly recommend to watch and listen to Jamie Glazov who has got an extra-ordinary story to tell about his family and how they escaped from Communist Russia.
Jamie Glazov - Part 1
Jamie Glazov - Part 2
From The Gates Of Vienna
The occasion for his talk was Mr. Glazov’s promotion of his new book, United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror.
In the first video, he relates some of his background, of having been born “a slave” in the USSR to parents who were dissidents against Communism. The arrest of his father on trumped-up charges was imminent; most likely he would have been arrested and sent away had there not been “ a tiny window of opportunity” during the détente created by Nixon and his secretary of state, Henry Kissinger. As a result of that thaw, some dissidents were permitted to leave and the Glazov family was among them. Arriving in New York when he was five, Jamie Glazov most vividly recalls being able to “smell the freedom”.
After watching both parts of his speech, I was intrigued enough to see what other readers were saying about his book. Here is the second comment left on the Amazon site by Steven Clark Bradley, who seems to be an author himself. His remarks closely reflect Glazov’s themes:
[…]…The title says it all and the diabolical linkage that Jaime Glazov reveals between those who kill for god and leftists who kill because they think they are God. I really admire the way Mr. Glazov compared apparent contradictions, bringing out very clear and convincing proof that tyrants and fanatics have a natural affinity for one another.
Glazov…speculates as to why the leftists, who talk of rights for their fellow believers, find it so easy to wrap their arms around Islamic terrorists, the most gay-hating, woman-hating and minority-hating force on earth today. He also pondered why “progressives” heap admiration upon regimes under which they themselves would be eliminated. Why would Liberal women, who have a long history of talking about helping themselves right up to the highest rungs of the social ladder, ignore the suffering of millions of women living under gender-based Islamic oppression?
…United In Hate’ is not just another book written about Islam, nor is it a book that only rehashes histories about Stalin or Lenin. Jamie Glazov has written a book that goes beyond actions or words to expose the motivations of why these two natural enemies, Radical Islam and the Liberal Left, are caressing each other in a warm embrace of death.
The Left’s hatred and rejection of Western civilization, its freedoms and values, begins with an acute sense of alienation from it, and unable to “fit in” the Left believes radical societal change, regardless of the consequences, is necessary. After all it’s the West’s fault that the Left has no sense of purpose or direction. Although the Left vehemently argues against this premise, its words and actions prove Dr. Glazov’s case.
The ideological descendents of the communist/progressive Left that spent its capital hoping the West would lose the Cold War to the Soviet Union are today’s leftist core. Based on their hatred for the United States, the Left has forged a symbiotic relationship with radical Islam, whose hatred for America equals theirs. Both make it clear that they consider Western civilization evil and unworthy of preservation. Violent revolution is the Left’s path to change; the Jihadists’ follow the path of war and annihilation.
Some might think Dr. Glazov has taken a wrong turn in his analysis of the radical Left’s agenda and beliefs. If so, they should read the scurrilous quotes of Michael Moore extolling the virtues of the “Iraqi freedom fighters,” or Ward Churchill’s and Jeremiah Wright’s crowing after 9/11 that “America’s chickens have come home to roost.” Or, they should examine the genuflexing before the world’s tyrants by the likes of Jimmy Carter, Sean Penn and Tom Hayden. Dr. Glazov’s take on the radical Left is correct and as sharp as a tightly focused laser.
The Czech President Vaclav Klaus is a true hero of the European people who understands the dangers of oppression and tyranny, who have lived and experienced a totalitarian dictorship, the USSR where the Czechs and the Slovaks were under the thumb of tyranny, crushed down in 1968 by Soviet tanks and soldiers when they wished for basic freedoms.
The European Union is truly emerging as a sinister and evil entity, worthy of the name the EUSSR, undemocratic and led by unelected bureaucrats exactly like the politbureau in the Communist USSR.
Vaclav Klaus gave perhaps the most important speech in the European Parliament the 19th of February 2009, which is featured below in it's whole length, during his speech he was both applauded from some MEP's and boohed by others, and some of the undemocratic Transnationalists walked out protesting with cowardice and contempt for a democratic debate, such debates are heresy in the European Parliament.
The President of the EP Hans Peter Göttering trashed Vaclav Klaus speech and ironically proved the point of Vaclav Klaus in his own Authoritarian words:
"The European Parliament is an important institution, were we not so influental today, were we not the legislators in 75% of cases today, and were we not the co-legislators in almost 100% of the cases under the Lisbon Treaty, the citizens of Europe would decide for themselves directly, but it is now the European Parliament that is deciding."
It leaves little doubt in mind that the EUSSR is a reality and our freedoms are rapidly disappearing, our countries dissolved, the free markets vanishing replaced with central planning control which has proven disastrous throughout history, the creation of a Transnational Socialist Utopia is in full swing, and true to it's totalitarian nature those standing in it's way will be crushed, individuality no longer has a place in a collectivist nightmare were people are regarded as the masses and looked upon with contempt, expendable and if you are not part of the their final solution you are a problem and thus an enemy.
God bless Vaclav Klaus, he is one of my heroes, individuals like Vaclav Klaus gives us hope and utter admiration for the Czech Republic, may it live forever.
Czech President Václav Klaus stands up for Freedom
From Vaclav Klaus website:
Mr. Chairman, Members of European Parliament,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
First of all, I would like to thank you for the possibility to speak here, in the European Parliament, in one of the key institutions of the European Union. I have been here several times but never before had the opportunity to speak at a plenary session. Therefore I do appreciate your invitation. The elected representatives of 27 countries with a broad spectrum of political opinions and views make a unique auditorium, as unique and in essence as revolutionary as the experiment of the European Union itself. For more than half a century, the EU has attempted to make decision-making in Europe better by moving a significant part of decisions from the individual states to the European institutions.
I’ve come here from the capital of the Czech Republic, from Prague, from the historic centre of Czech statehood, from one of the important places where European thinking, European culture and European civilisation has emerged and developed. I come as a representative of the Czech state, which has always, in all its various forms, been part of European history, of a state that has many times taken a direct and important part in shaping this history and which wants to continue shaping it also today.
Nine years have passed since the president of the Czech Republic last spoke to you. That was my predecessor, Václav Havel, and it was four years before our accession to the European Union. Several weeks ago, the Czech Prime Minister, Mirek Topolánek also gave a speech here, as a leader of a country presiding over the EU Council. His speech focused on topics based on the priorities of the Czech presidency, as well as on the topical problems EU countries are facing now.
This allows me to focus on issues that are more general and – at first sight – perhaps less dramatic than solving the current economic crisis, the Ukrainian-Russian gas conflict or the Gaza situation. I do believe, however, these issues are of extraordinary importance for the further development of the European integration project.
In less than three months, the Czech Republic will commemorate the fifth anniversary of its EU accession. We will commemorate it with dignity. We will commemorate it as a country which – unlike some other new member countries – does not feel disappointed over unfulfilled expectations connected with our membership. This is no surprise to me and there is a rational explanation for it. Our expectations were realistic. We knew well that we were entering a community formed and shaped by human beings. We knew it was not a utopian construction, put together without authentic human interests, visions, views and ideas. These interests as well as ideas can be found all over the EU and it cannot be otherwise.
We interpreted our EU accession on the one hand as a confirmation of the fact that we had managed, quite rapidly, over less than fifteen years since the fall of communism, to become a standard European country again. On the other hand, we considered (and we still do) the opportunity to actively take part in the European integration process as a chance to take advantage of an already highly integrated Europe and – at the same time – to influence this process according to our views. We feel our share of responsibility for the development of the European Union and with this feeling of responsibility we approach our presidency of the EU Council. I believe that the first six weeks of the Czech presidency have convincingly demonstrated our responsible attitude.
At this forum, I would like to repeat once again clearly and loudly – for those of you who don’t know it or do not want to know – my conviction, that for us there was and there is no alternative to European Union membership and that in our country there is no relevant political force that could or would want to undermine this position. We have been therefore really touched by the repeated and growing attacks we have faced; attacks based on the unfounded assumption that the Czechs are searching for some other integration project than the one they became members of five years ago. This is not true.
The citizens of the Czech Republic feel that European integration has an important and needed mission and task. It can be summarized in the following way:
- removing unnecessary – and for human freedom and prosperity counterproductive – barriers to the free movement of people, goods, services, ideas, political philosophies, world views, cultural patterns and behaviour models that have been for various reasons over the centuries formed among the individual European states;
- a joint care of the public goods, existing on the continental level, meaning projects that cannot be effectively carried out through bilateral negotiations of two (or more) neighbouring European countries.
The efforts to realise these two objectives – removing barriers and rationally selecting issues that should be solved at the continental level – are not and will never be completed. Various barriers and obstacles still remain and the decision-making at the Brussels level is certainly more numerous than is optimal. Certainly it is more numerous than the people in the individual member states ask for. You, Members of the European Parliament, are certainly well aware of this. The question I want to ask you is therefore a purely theoretical one: are you really convinced that every time you take a vote, you are deciding something that must be decided here in this hall and not closer to the citizens, i.e. inside the individual European states?
In the politically correct rhetoric we keep hearing these days, we often hear about other possible effects of European integration which are, however, of lesser and secondary importance. These are, moreover, driven by the ambitions of professional politicians and the people connected to them, not by the interests of ordinary citizens of the member states.
When I said that European Union membership did not have and does not have any alternative, I only mentioned half of what must be said. The other – logical – half of my statement is that the methods and forms of European integration do, on the contrary, have quite a number of possible and legitimate variants, just as they proved to have in the last half century. There is no end of history. Claiming that the status quo, the present institutional form of the EU, is a forever uncriticizable dogma, is a mistake that has been – unfortunately – rapidly spreading, even though it is in direct contradiction not only with rational thinking but also with the whole two-thousand-year history of European civilization. The same mistake applies to the a priori postulated, and therefore equally uncriticizable, assumption that there is only one possible and correct future of European integration, which is the “ever-closer Union”, i.e. advancement towards deeper and deeper political integration of the member countries.
Neither the present status quo, nor the assumption that the permanent deepening of the integration is a blessing, is – or should be – a dogma for any European democrat. The enforcement of these notions by those who consider themselves – to use the phrase of the famous Czech writer Milan Kundera – “the owners of the keys” to European integration, is unacceptable.
Moreover, it is self evident that one or another institutional arrangement of the European Union is not an objective in itself; but a tool for achieving the real objectives. These are nothing but human freedom and an economic system that would bring prosperity. That system is a market economy.
This would certainly be the wish of the citizens of all member countries. Yet, over the twenty years since the fall of communism, I have repeatedly witnessed that the feelings and fears are stronger among those who spent a great part of the 20th century without freedom and struggled under a dysfunctional centrally planned and state-administered economy. It is no surprise that these people are more sensitive and responsive to any phenomena and tendencies leading in other directions than towards freedom and prosperity. The citizens of the Czech Republic are among those I’m talking about.
The present decision-making system of the European Union is different from a classic parliamentary democracy, tested and proven by history. In a normal parliamentary system, part of the MPs support the government and part support the opposition. In the European Parliament, this arrangement has been missing. Here, only one single alternative is being promoted, and those who dare think about a different option are labelled as enemies of European integration. Not so long ago, in our part of Europe we lived in a political system that permitted no alternatives and therefore also no parliamentary opposition. It was through this experience that we learned the bitter lesson that with no opposition, there is no freedom. That is why political alternatives must exist.
And not only that. The relationship between a citizen of one or another member state and a representative of the Union is not a standard relationship between a voter and a politician representing him or her. There is also a great distance (not only in a geographical sense) between citizens and Union representatives, which is much greater than is the case inside the member countries. This distance is often described as the democratic deficit, the loss of democratic accountability, the decision-making of the unelected – but selected – ones, as bureaucratisation of decision-making etc. The proposals to change the current state of affairs – included in the rejected European Constitution or in the not much different Lisbon Treaty – would make this defect even worse.
Since there is no European demos – and no European nation – this defect cannot be solved by strengthening the role of the European Parliament, either. This would, on the contrary, make the problem worse and lead to an even greater alienation between the citizens of the European countries and Union institutions. The solution will be neither to add fuel to the “melting pot” of the present type of European integration, nor to suppress the role of member states in the name of a new multicultural and multinational European civil society. These are attempts that have failed every time in the past, because they did not reflect the spontaneous historical development.
I fear that the attempts to speed up and deepen integration and to move decisions about the lives of the citizens of the member countries up to the European level can have effects that will endanger all the positive things achieved in Europe in the last half a century. Let us not underestimate the fears of the citizens of many member countries who are afraid that their problems are again decided elsewhere and without them, and that their ability to influence these decisions is very limited. So far, the European Union has been successful, partly thanks to the fact that the vote of each member country had the same weight and thus could not be ignored. Let us not allow a situation where the citizens of member countries would live their lives with a resigned feeling that the EU project is not their own; that it is developing differently than they would wish, that they are only forced to accept it. We would very easily and very soon slip back to the times that we hoped belonged to history.
This is closely connected with the question of prosperity. We must say openly that the present economic system of the EU is a system of a suppressed market, a system of a permanently strengthening centrally controlled economy. Although history has more than clearly proven that this is a dead end, we find ourselves walking the same path once again. This results in a constant rise in both the extent of government masterminding and constraining of spontaneity of market processes. In recent months, this trend has been further reinforced by incorrect interpretation of the causes of the present economic and financial crisis, as if it were caused by free market, while in reality it is just the contrary – caused by political manipulation of the market. It is again necessary to point to the historical experience of our part of Europe and to the lessons we learned from it.
Many of you certainly know the name of the French economist Frederic Bastiat and his famous Petition of the Candlemakers, which has become a well-known and canonical reading illustrating the absurdity of political intervention in the economy. On 14 November 2008 the European Commission approved a real, not a fictitious Bastiat’s Petition of the Candlemakers and imposed a 66% tariff on candles imported from China. I would have never believed that a 160-year-old essay could become reality, but it has happened. An inevitable effect of the extensive implementation of such measures in Europe is economic slowdown, if not a complete halt of economic growth. The only solution is liberalisation and deregulation of the European economy.
I say all of this because I do feel a strong responsibility for the democratic and prosperous future of Europe. I have been trying to remind you of the elementary principles upon which European civilisation has been based for centuries or even millennia, principles, the validity of which is not affected by time, principles that are universal and should be therefore followed even in the present European Union. I am convinced that the citizens of individual member countries do want freedom, democracy and economic prosperity.
At this moment in time, the most important task is to make sure that free discussion about these problems is not silenced as an attack on the very idea of European integration. We have always believed that being allowed to discuss such serious issues, being heard, defending everyone’s right to present a different than “the only correct opinion” – no matter how much we may disagree with it – is at the very core of the democracy we were denied for over four decades. We who went through the involuntary experience that taught us that a free exchange of opinions and ideas is the basic condition for a healthy democracy do hope that this condition will be met and respected also in the future. This is the opportunity and the only method for making the European Union more free, more democratic and more prosperous.
Václav Klaus, European Parliament, Brussels,
19 February 2009
Saturday, May 30, 2009
This was a decision from last year in October but needs to be reminded prior to the EUSSR election for the Duma, sorry parliament - Remember to vote even though the EUSSR disregards the will of the people when the people has spoken, such as the case with the Lisbon treaty.
It is mindbuggling that someone who is vice president of such an Orwellian title as commissioner for Justice, Freedom & Security - NewSpeak indeed, sure, Justice, Freedom & Security for the EUSSR to implement oppressive measures on freedom, and insane Eurocratic laws often violating the constitutions in the memberstates and undemocratic, as well as dismantling the respective European countries, Stalin used the method of deplacing large population groups to destroy the national cohesion in the vassal-states, the EUSSR is using the same methods.
The Vice President of the EUSSR commission for Justice, Freedom & Security, Jacques Barrot follows the path of EUSSR corruption. In 2000 he was convicted in a French court of "abuse of confidence". The case involved the diverting of £2 million of government money to his party. He received an eight month suspended prison sentence but was pardoned by Jacques Chirac.
Rising unemployment in Europe, economic crisis and recession, the EUSSR continues down the path of destructive policies deluting our economies, straining and draining the welfare, the Eurocrat policy making reflects the Utopian dogma 'If the people rejects Utopia, change the people' and they create indeed a pseudo-proletariat serving as voting cattle so they can stay in power long enough to abandon Democracy altogether, multiculturalism can only exist in a totalitarian regime.
From The Brussels Journal:
European Commissioner for Justice, Freedom & Security: “Islam Is Welcome. Immigration Is Moral Necessity”Barrot: "Yes. The demographic situation of Europe means a need for focused migration. Europe's vocation is also to facilitate exchanges between countries. Immigration is both an economic and moral obligation."
Helmut Schmidt, former chancellor of Germany explains the EUSSR policies:
“The concept of multiculturalism is difficult to make fit with a democratic society.”
Indeed, multiculturalism was conceived and developed as a Marxist strategy for overthrowing free governments. The former Soviet Union used massive immigration and deportation to dilute the ethnic, cultural, and political cohesion of the peoples of the Baltic states with the objective of making them more compliant and compatible with Soviet rule. Hundreds of thousands of Estonians, Latvians, and Lithuanians were deported to Siberia, and hundreds of thousands of Russians were moved in to take their places.
Lebanon and Kosovo are good examples of what happens, when Muslim immigration and higher Muslim birthrates tip the demographic balance in former majority Christian regions: escalating violence and terrorism, assassinations, and civil war. Most Serbian Christians in Kosovo were forced to flee.
In the European Union, massive immigration has become a tool to reduce the political power of ethnic, religious, or political majorities that might resist the new imperial order. Besides providing cheap labor, massive immigration has become an instrument for political change and control. More immigration makes resistance to the European Union increasingly difficult. This will be true of the North American Union as well.---------------------------
In the UK One Million immigrants are subsidised by the tax-Payers.
More than a million immigrants live in housing subsidised by the taxpayer, a Government-sponsored report disclosed yesterday.
It said the number of foreigners in council or housing association accommodation had soared over the past five years.
One in nine subsidised homes is now occupied by a migrant family.
Brussels economists claim Britain and other EU states will “need” 56 million immigrant workers between them by 2050 to make up for the “demographic decline” due to falling birth rates and rising death rates across Europe.
The report, by the EU statistical agency Eurostat, warns that vast numbers of migrants could be needed to meet the shortfall in two years if Europe is to have a hope of funding the pension and health needs of its growing elderly population.
It states: “Countries with low fertility rates could require a significant number of immigrants over the coming decades if they want to maintain the existing number of people of working age.
“Having sufficient people of working age is vital for the economy and for tax revenue.”
The report, by French MEP Francoise Castex, calls for immigrants to be given legal rights and access to social welfare provision such as benefits.
Ms Castex said: “It is urgent that member states have a calm approach to immigration. To say ‘yes’, we need immigration … it is not a new development, we must accept it.”
The proposals include the creation of a “blue card” system, based on the American green card, that provides full working and welfare rights.
“Higher levels of immigration are the last thing we need with a recession approaching.”
The declaration calls on the EU to assist African governments to set up migration information centres “to better manage labour mobility between Africa and the EU”.
The first was the job centre opened in Bamako, capital of Mali, on Monday. Other centres are expected to open soon in other west African states and later in north Africa.
Posted by Rolf Krake at Saturday, May 30, 2009
The EUSSR is an Authoritarian Transnational Socialist undemocratic power-house, what 'National Socialism' and the 'Communist Internationale' was yesterday Transnational Socialism is today and the EUSSR is similar to the former USSR, the parliament, the Duma, the commission, the Politbureau, not surprisingly it is a nest of corruption and unelected rotten people wielding power and deciding over your life.
The president of the commission, Jose Manuel Barroso was one of the leaders of the underground Maoist MRPP (Reorganising Movement of the Proletariat Party, later PCTP/MRPP-Communist Party of the Portuguese Workers/Revolutionary Movement of the Portuguese Proletariat) - Barroso like many other powerseeking left fascist extremists reinvented themselves into the mainstream, make no mistake, these people are still what they are.
The following illustrates aspects of their morality.
H/T from Hodja
Here we are, a few words about Brussels and how it feels about child abuse. I’ll move onto the elections for the European parliament in a moment, but given the horrors of the Ryan report last week, I thought that you ought to know how seriously the euro-elite treat any suggestion of improper behaviour by adults towards children.
In other words I give you Daniel Cohn Bendit, an MEP for the German Green Party. He is a self-confessed kiddie-fiddler, but pulling down his trouser zip for tiny children hasn’t stopped him becoming one of the most influential members of parliament. Here is his story. Keep in mind this man has more power over the legislation of this country than does any member of the Dail.
Mr Cohn-Bendit is better known as Dany the red of the 1968 Paris Barricades. He is a kind of mid-century leftover leftie who was active in squatting, street fighting and agitation before he re-invented himself as a Green and was elected to the European parliament.
But let me give you another example of how ’seriously’ the euro-elite take the protection of children. You may remember the Marc Dutroux case in Belgium. It could be called the most horrific example of child rape and murder in Europe since the war.
Known as the beast of Belgium, Dutroux is now serving a life sentence for a series of child kidnappings, rapes and murders in 1995-96. He kept some of his victims locked in a dungeon he had built in his basement. Two eight-year-old girls starved to death there after Dutroux was arrested and served a short prison sentence for car theft: his wife didn’t bother to open the dungeon door to feed the girls.
Part of the great mystery and scandal that accompanied the case was the relentless incompetence of the authorities, at that time led by the Justice Minister, Melchior Wathelet. For years, as victims were kidnapped and murdered, police files were full of reports and tip-offs that Dutroux was selling young girls. Yet Dutroux stayed free. In the end Mr Wathelet was forced to resign in disgrace. And his reward for incompetence in the administration of Justice was – to be appointed a judge at the European Court of Justice.
But still back to the elections of the European parliament. And that also takes us back to the arrogance of the euro-elite. Just in case it had slipped past you, the voters of Europe are supposed to be voting to determine the membership of the next European parliament which, under existing European law, that is to say, the Nice Treaty, will have 736 seats. But the euro-elites are manoeuvring to make the voters elect 754 MEPs – that is, to elect an extra 18 politicians to the lushly-paid parliament, even though these politicians will have no seat to fill. The euro-elite want the 18 to have full salary, full tax-free allowance for every day they turn up at the European parliament building, full expenses, business-class travel allowances and all the rest. The 18 will be given everything except a job.
The excuse given? That the Lisbon Treaty allows for the creation of an extra 18 seats. So even though the treaty is not yet ratified, the 18 extra politicians ought to be elected and paid as MEPs until the Lisbon Treaty comes into force. Note that arrogance: the treaty has not yet been ratified, and indeed,
may yet come totally off the rails if Gordon Brown is forced to call a general election in the Britain. It may never become law. Yet the euro-elite intends to ignore that fact. They expect the European voters, sheep that we are all assumed to be (and given the docility of the Irish in accepting a second referendum yet again, we have certainly proved to be sheep) to ‘baaaa-baaaa’ their way into the polling booths and deliver 754 MEPs for 736 seats.
I will remind you of just a few examples of how the euro-elite have been for years seizing important new powers which were supposed to theirs only after the treaty was made law by the member states. There is the European Space Policy (which is now developing military use for the European Gallileo GPS system),the European Defence Agency, the borders agency called Frontex, and the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Each of these institutions was meant to be created only after the ratification of the European Constitution. When that collapsed, and even before it was re-packaged as the Lisbon Treaty, the euro-elite used legal trickery to start constructing these new institutions anyway.
Posted by Rolf Krake at Saturday, May 30, 2009
Thursday, May 28, 2009
After Comrade Obama seized Chrysler and made it government owned the Socialist thug, sorry, the dear leader cracks down on the appointed Kulaks literally stealing their assets, they had the misfortune to donate to his political opponents, now it is paytime, Stalinist style.
From World Net Daily
WND reviewed the list of Chrysler's 789 closing franchises and databases of political donors and found that of dealership owners making contributions in the recent election, less than 10 percent gifted to Democrats while 90 percent gave substantial sums to Republican candidates.
The following dealers are scheduled to lose their Chrysler franchise designation. Based on available records and databases, each of them contributed to political campaigns during the 2008 election.
Many of the dealers who donated to Republican campaigns last year also contributed additional thousands to George W. Bush's presidential 2004 campaign and to campaigns to elect GOP representatives. Those donations are not included in this list.
The listed franchise owners contributed at least $450,000 to Republican presidential candidates and the GOP in the recent election while only $7,970 was donated to Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign and $2,200 was given to Sen. John Edwards' campaign.
Of all political contributions from dealers on the list of closing facilities, President Obama received a combined total of only $450 toward his election.From World Net Daily:
>> Dealer Jim Anderer told Fox News' Neil Cavuto he doesn't understand why Chrysler is shutting down his Long Island dealership because he claims his dealership is quite profitable – with sales volume ranking in the top 2 percent.
Asked why he believes the company targeted him, Anderer said, "They won't tell us. They seem to be running for cover right now because they won't give us a solid explanation. They come up with all these reasons, but none of them seem to make sense."
He continued, "This is insanity. The government is stealing my business. And they're telling me there's nothing I can do about it."
"This isn't about business. It's about politics and control. My dealership is in the top 125 out of the 3,500-plus dealerships nationwide ... yet we are on the list. We are not small nor are we rural. We are in a large major metropolitan area. Our new vehicle inventory alone is well over $4.0 million. Is that small?"
The employee continued, "This is so much more than 'just business.' This is about control and power by our present administration in Washington. An administration that will stop at nothing to bring complete socialism to this once great country. Wake up people or get in line now to 'drink the Kool-Aid.'"
Chrysler's bankruptcy court review process began May 14 and is scheduled to end by June 9. According to a May 14 Chrysler memo, dealers learned of their fate via UPS letters arriving earlier this month. A Senate committee is conducting hearings this week as dealers file their requests to block their termination.
George C. Joseph, owner of Sunshine Dodge-Isuzu in Melbourne Fla., has sent out his plea to several online media organizations, including WND.
Joseph said his family paid for his franchise 35 years ago and employs more than 50 people. The company is active in the community and the local chamber of commerce, and he claims it is financially profitable.
"On Thursday, May 14, 2009 I was notified that my Dodge franchise, that we purchased, will be taken away from my family on June 9, 2009 without compensation and given to another dealer at no cost to them," Joseph wrote. "My new vehicle inventory consists of 125 vehicles with a financed balance of 3 million dollars. This inventory becomes impossible to sell with no factory incentives beyond June 9, 2009."
He said that without the franchise his family can no longer sell Dodge inventory as "new" or conduct any service warranty work. Joseph wrote that his parts inventory – worth $300,000 – is now practically worthless because Chrysler will not be required to buy vehicles, tools or parts from terminated dealers under bankruptcy rules.
To make matters worse, Joseph said Chrysler recently required his facility to be renovated, requiring a multi-million dollar debt in the form of a mortgage.
"This is a private business, not a government entity," he wrote. "This is beyond imagination! My business is being stolen from me through no fault of our own. We did nothing wrong."
Joseph continued, "This atrocity will most likely force my family into bankruptcy. This will cause our 50+ employees to be unemployed. How will they provide for their families? … How in the United States of America can this happen?"
The irony is staggering, who would have believed that would ever happen, lets say in 1988, or 1998 even under Clinton?
Comrade Obama is spat upon by the freedom loving Russians, what an irony, it is hilarious as well as it is sad, if someone understands Marxism and what it is like the Russians are a fair bet, and trashing the USA for going down the murderous and oppressive road towards totalitarian slavery under Marxism does not come out of the blue, the columnist from Pravda Stanislav Mishin has got a point.
The story has been around but it deserves attention for it's accuracy and sheer irony it exposes - long live Mishin!
By Stanislav Mishin - Pravda
It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.
True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.
Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.
First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish.
Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America.
The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.
These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?
These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has put up little more then a whimper to their masters.
Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motor) president step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American president now has the power, the self given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, the centurion commands his minions.
So it should be no surprise, that the American president has followed this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two months ago, warned Obama and UK's Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride.
Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper...but a "freeman" whimper.
So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation that would give the American Treasury department the power to set "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance and control how private companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator Barney Franks, a social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry that has ever received a tax break or incentive.
The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left.
The proud American will go down into his slavery with out a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker.
This story is horrible beyond imagination, the kidnapping, torture and murder of Ilan Halimi, a DJ and a phonesalesman who happened to be Jewish and therefore is a target by Muslim gangs or rather street-mujahedins, a phenomena common in virtually all the major European cities with a large minority of Islamic immigrants, be it Paris, Brussels, Rotterdam, Berlin, Copenhagen, Oslo, Malmö, London, Manchester, Bradford, Marseille, Amsterdam, Athens, Milan and the list goes on, same trends are found in each and every city, gangs, crimes, rapes, gangrapes, violence, murders, rioting, selling of drugs, NoGo zones, harrassment against the native population.
The EU has sat the agenda and sat in motion for 50 million more Muslim immigrants to be forced upon the EU memberstates, the Halimi case is what to come when the numbers rise with the nurtured feelings of impunity because of the EU support, the EU has already started with a new wave of Muslims from Mali, the Transnationalist Socialist and Utopian elite is using the same methods as Stalin to break down the vassal states, replacement of whole populations in order to destroy the national cohesion in each country and the Socialists and Social Democrats needs the pseudo-proletariat as their voting cattle to stay in power.
On the Halimi murder the mainstream medias are in silence thus indirectly supporting and protecting the pseudo-proletariat, individuals are expendable in the collectivist and utopian mindset, therefore the murder of a Jew due to ideological Antisemitic Jew-hatred is silenced, in most cases the hatred is shared with the Socialists and Social Democrats, for ex. with their 'Kauf nicht bei Juden' campaigns under the banner of Anti-Zionism and boycott of Israel, the left in academia excludes now Jews from numerous universities from the UK to Norway.
The Halimi story is not unique, the shocking aspect is that it has come to Paris, the horror is unimaginable by any civilized non leftist thinker, the left is per definition deprived of morality and not surprisingly it is leftists who volonteered to defend Fofana, the muslim leader of the gang and murderer of Halimi, we can expect to see various socalled 'experts' - Read Marxoids - To come out and apologizing for the murder and moralizing us all that the Muslims are the true victims, and with the intellectual impotent notion of cultural relativism telling you what you see in your local neighborhood is not what you see start happening.
From New Majority
....The photo of Ilan Halimi whose publication by the magazine Choc is supposed to represent such a scandal in France has in fact already been shown in the French media. (On the photo, see my earlier report here.) In an interview yesterday on France’s Europe1 radio, Choc editor-in-chief Paul Payan pointed out that the photo of Ilan Halimi – “and others that are even more harrowing” – was already shown in 2006 on the French television network M6. Youssouf Fofana, the chief of the “Gang of Barbarians” that kidnapped Ilan, is known to have sent several photos to Ilan’s girlfriend and family during Ilan’s captivity and before he was murdered. The photos were included in an episode devoted to the crime on the M6 news magazine “Secrets d’Actualité”.The revelation that the photo has already been shown raises new questions about the decision of a Parisian court to prohibit further sale of the Choc issue. The publisher of Choc will be fined €200 for each issue of Choc that remained on the newsstands after 2 pm (Friday 22 of May)....
by Pamela Geller - Atlas Shrugs
The photo is worthy of the name of the magazine whose cover it adorns: “Shock” or “Choc” in French. It shows a man whose head has been wrapped in duct tape. His face is completely covered except for a small space that has been left for his nose. The nose is bloodied. The man’s hands are bound in front of him, likewise with tape. A key chain has been hung on his fingers: perhaps to help identify him or perhaps as a subtle threat to his family or friends. The man is seated in front of an orange and purple drape, evidently to hide his surroundings. A copy of the Parisian daily Le Parisien has been propped up on his arms in front of his chest, thus indicating the date. Emerging from off frame, a gloved-hand holds a gun pressed against the man’s temple. The man in the photo is Ilan Halimi: the 23-year-old French Jew who was kidnapped, tormented, and killed by a self-styled “gang of barbarians” in the Parisian banlieue in early 2006.
PARIS (JTA) -- A French magazine featuring a handcuffed Jewish murder victim on its cover was ordered removed from sales racks.
The photo of the 23-year-old Halimi was taken by his kidnappers, a gang called the Barbarians, and sent to the victim’s family as part of a threat demanding ransom money. Not long afterward Halimi was found naked, bound and beaten to the point of death beside subway tracks near Paris in February 2006. He died a short time later.
In the photo Halimi’s face is covered with silver masking tape, with an opening for air left around his bloodied nose. His hands are bound, and the arm of one kidnapper can be seen holding a black pistol to his head.
The gang is now on trial for kidnapping and murdering Halimi. Some of the 27 suspects, including leader Youssouf Fofana, also are accused of committing the crime from anti-Semitic motives.
NY Times reporter Meg Bortin wrote last week: "In the two and a half weeks since 27 people went on trial [in Paris] for the brutal 2006 kidnapping, torture and killing of a young Jewish man, little has filtered out about the proceedings." Worse still, the little that has emerged indicates the government and law enforcement did everything in their power to hide and obscure the Jew hatred motivation of this crime by these Muslims.
Despite the sensational nature of the case and the serious issues it has raised — from the rise of anti-Semitism in some sectors of French society to the way the police handled the investigation — the French are essentially unable to follow the courtroom drama because of a law that bans the public and the media from trials that involve minors. …
Missing … is a public engagement with the troubling issues that were raised by the horrifying nature of the crime, in which Ilan Halimi, 23, was kidnapped, bound in tape, hidden in sordid conditions, beaten, slashed, burned and finally thrown into the street after 24 days, only to die of his wounds before reaching a hospital.
“I find it abnormal that the trial is being held behind closed doors,” his mother, Ruth Halimi, said during a break in the trial. She said the defendants were displaying a casual attitude that she found shocking. “The trial should have been held in public,” she said, “so that everyone could know what took place.”
The law mandating that the trial be closed applies to defendants who were under 18 at the time of the crime, even if they are no longer minors. In this case, two of the accused were 17 when Mr. Halimi was kidnapped. Only they can ask that the secrecy be lifted, and they did not do so.
Lawyers on both sides of the case voiced regret.
“The culture of secrecy has no place in a democracy,” said Daphné Pugliesi, who is representing Cédric Birot Saint-Yves, who has been charged with being one of Mr. Halimi’s “jailers.” Ms. Pugliesi asserted that the aim of a criminal trial was “for society to understand the reasons why a grave crime like this one was committed.”
…As a result of the media ban, virtually nothing will be known soon about what is said by the accused — 18 men and 9 women, all French nationals aged 20 to 35 — or the 162 witnesses and 50 experts who are expected to testify before the trial is to conclude on July 10.
…When the trial began on April 29, reporters were allowed into the courtroom for a few hours — long enough to hear [Youssouf Fofana, now 28,] shout “Allah Akbar,” God is Great, and declare his date of birth as Feb. 13, 2006, the day Mr. Halimi was found dying alongside railroad tracks in a suburb south of Bagneux.
…On May 12, according to the Observateur blog, the presiding judge, Nadia Ajjan, appointed two new lawyers to represent Mr. Fofana because of the frequent absence from court of his original attorneys: Emmanuel Ludot, who helped defend Saddam Hussein in Iraq in 2004, and Isabelle Coutant-Peyre, who is married to the terrorist known as Carlos the Jackal and has defended several radical Islamists.
One of the issues debated since the crime took place is the police’s handling of Mr. Halimi’s kidnapping. [His mother, Ruth Halimi,] asserts in “24 Days,” a scathing book published last month, that the elite Criminal Brigade bungled the case by imposing secrecy during the kidnapping and by missing several opportunities to arrest Mr. Fofana, who made two trips to Ivory Coast while Mr. Halimi was being held.
…Mr. Halimi was kidnapped on Jan. 20, 2006, just weeks after rioting erupted across France in low-income suburbs. Many of the rioters were young people of North African or black African origin, and many were Muslim.Mrs. Halimi said the anti-Semitic aspect of her son’s kidnapping made it all the more imperative for the world to know what was said at the trial.
I covered this act of depraved Islamic Jew hatred here, scroll: Ilan Halimi: Islamic Jew Hatred in France. Halimi's homemade concentration camp and the inconceivable horrors that were suffered by this French Jew who was chosen by Islam's soldiers for unimaginable torture, were blacked out by the corrupt media aligned with jihad force. They covered up the religious aspects of this depraved barbarity. Law enforcement did as well. It was another brutal Islamic slaughter of a defenseless Jew. The reliable witness who broke the true story back in February 2006 and took it to the world was Nidra Poller. It was how I met her.
Ilan Halimi's Muslim torturers/murderers phoned the family on several occasions during the period Ilan was held hostage and made them listen to the recitation of verses from the Koran, while Ilan’s tortured screams could be heard in the background.
23 people participated in torturing Ilan. Another 20 were involved indirectly. The custodian of the building gave them the key to an apartment where they said they wanted to "keep someone."
Three weeks of unimaginable torture. Three weeks. So many clues. So many guilty animals partaking in the continuing torture in their "homemade concentration camp."
The screams must have been loud because the torture was especially atrocious: the thugs cut bits off the flesh of the young man, they cut his fingers and ears, they burned him with acid, and in the end poured flammable liquid on him and set him on fire.
Horrible tortures. Horrible torturers. One of the torturers would go to work at a TV station everyday and come back and partake in the torture. The girls who lured young men. They knew he had been kidnapped. They knew Yosef (the leader of the Barbarians) was extremely violent. They knew Ilan was still in his hands three weeks later. All they had to do was make an anonymous phone call to the police. No one would have known. They did not do it. No neighbor thought to say to the police that something strange was going on in this building.
The police told the family not to say a word. The Jewish community was not warned when prior attempts to kidnap Jewish men had failed. The Jewish community was not warned before the successful attempt.
Even one member of the gang who dropped out of the gang because he was shocked by their violence did not call the police.
These neighborhoods are not ghettos. They are not sordid. Not squalid.
When Ilan was found, the head of the fire department who was called to the scene, this man with decades of experience, almost fainted when he saw him. The last thing Youssef Fofana (leader of the murdering gang, the barbarians) did was to slit Ilan's throat twice and pour an inflammable liquid on him and try to set it on fire. But this did not burn him to death, because Ilan walked for perhaps one hour, trying still to find a way to live.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Global warming gets hot, and the climate worshipers are approaching climaxes of their own.
The warm up to the Global Warming gangbang, sorry summit this week in Bella Centret, Copenhagen, before the summit to take place later this year has relieved some of pressure, at least some are welcoming them with open arms in Copenhagen and with no qualms bending over for Al Gore and Co. Indeed, the Global Warming has reached a Climax.
Translated from Jyllands Posten
The whole day the faces are laid with serious frowns, when business men, politicians and burocrats are gathered in Bella Centret in Copenhagen and discusses the Global Climate. But during the night they got laid on the sheets, which has got their full focus, when the conference attendees from the whole world enjoy themselves with Danish and foreign prostitutes.
- We have been busy like mad. The politicians do also need to relax after a long day, is the verdict from 'Miss Dina', who works as a prostitute.
It is the News bulletin 3F, which has made phonecalls to various escort agencies and prostitutes, to know, if they have been extra busy during the Global warming conference. And they all agree: Top summits in Copenhagen is good for the economy.
The chairwoman of Reden [The nest] International [The prostitutes association] Doris Otzen acknowledge, that big events in Copenhagen attracts more sex-workers.
- Lots of men gathered at one place means more work for the prostitutes. Then we have got a government which do not want to forbid prostitution, so we actually invites the visitors to go to prostitutes, says Dorit Otzen to the News bulletin 3F.
Posted by Rolf Krake at Wednesday, May 27, 2009
By all accounts Adolf Hitler is the father of Social Democrats, though not awarded he achieved bringing Social Democratic politics into life, the Nazis were green, a youth movement and pioneering the hippie culture.
From an economic perspective Nazism is analysed by the Ludwig von Mise Institute and evidently is pure Socialism - Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian and Nazism is Socialism
The Hitler myth translated from Het Vrije Volk for Gates of Vienna
By Duns Ouray
One day you just do not believe it anymore.
“Hitler was a unpredictable idiot. A dictator who ruled Germany with an iron fist. He had a special gift: with his speeches he was hypnotizing his audience.
“The industrialists financed the Nazis to make profits from the German rearmament. Hitler was nothing more than a sock puppet of the capitalists. Hence the fierce struggle of the Nazis against the Social Democrats and the Communists.
“The Holocaust was anti-Semitic madness. But without the German law-abiding culture, the Holocaust could not have happened. “Befehl ist Befehl” [An order is an order] was the motto.
“The followers of Hitler were socially frustrated. The middle class were hoping to climb the social ladder with a membership in the NSDAP.
“With the military defeat in 1945, Nazism was consigned to the dungheap of history.”
That was roughly the image of Nazism I grew up with. The image that was presented to you in history class, in films, and in the newspaper. This image we might call “the Hitler myth”.
It is not the first time that myth has won out over reality. Perhaps Plato’s myth about the death of Socrates is the oldest example. Another historical myth is the idea that the Indians had a high culture, a pacifist mentality, and lived in harmony with nature, and that they were exterminated by white settlers.
This poses the following question: when does a myth win out over the reality? My answer: when all parties that benefit prefer the myth over the unwelcome reality. The Indians have an interest in their role as victim. And from the side of Westerners, history is written by left-wing pseudo-intellectuals: they want to paint capitalist society, and Christian America, in as bad a light as possible.
Back to the Hitler myth. At some point in time I started doubting. Just as children start having doubts about Santa Claus. It simply cannot be true. In this I was struggling with the following questions:
- If Hitler was a madman, how could he come to power?
- Can anyone really hypnotize his audience with a speech?
- If Nazism only attracted losers, how could they suddenly grab power?
- The Holocaust is a major operation and a historically unique. Would the motive for this have only been anti-Semitism? For anti-Semitism is (literally) as old as the way to Rome.
- If Hitler was a sock puppet of the major capitalists, why did he call himself a national socialist?
- This was the first speech of Hitler as Chancellor… a strange little man that is just screaming anything. Do you feel the spell of his hypnotic power come over you?
- Via a “health care fund” the Dutch State pays the cost of health care of the below average income segment of our people. This fund is hailed as “a pinnacle of civilization”. However, it was established by the Nazis on November 1, 1941 [during the occupation of the Netherlands].
- In 2006, the PvdA (Socialists) blocked the loosening of Dutch employment protection. The labor unions even called this employment protection “holy”. However, this measure was also introduced by the Nazis.
- The dependent child allowance, one of the shrines of the Christian Democrats, was introduced by the Nazis in 1941.
- After a long leftist life, Jacques van Doorn wrote German Socialism. In this book he demonstrated that historians traditionally portray the conservatives, the Reichswehr, the nobility and industrialists as the trailblazers to Hitler. However, the NSDAP was one of the few political parties in the German Weimar Republic that was not funded by these groups.
- Did the massive support for Nazism really suddenly evaporate in 1945?
With so many contradictions, our image of Hitler cannot possibly be based on reality. There is a Hitler myth, but how could that occur?
Where did the Hitler myth come from? And why would you believe it?
In Part I demonstrated that a Hitler-myth exists. Our image of Hitler and Nazism is a fantasy. This fantasy was created by some special interest groups, who together wrote history. This section deals with these stakeholders:
- - - - - - - - -
|1.||The pre-war political establishment, which was restored after 1945.|
|2.||The baby-boom generation, which took over power in the 1960’s.|
|3.||The Germans who survived the war.|
What special interest did they have?
1. The pre-war establishment had to explain why they did not stop Hitler and the Holocaust. They also, after 1945, had to channel popular support for Nazism to their aid. The following components of the Hitler myth were in their interest:
Hitler myth versus the interest:
- “Hitler was a unpredictable madman.”
— The political establishment had been unable to predict the Second World War or the Holocaust.
- “The followers of Hitler were mainly socially frustrated.”
— Hitler’s followers were standing outside the establishment. Hitler was hated by the establishment.
- “With the military defeat in 1945, Nazism was consigned to the dungheap of history.”
— The political establishment is responsible for the cleaning up the remnants of Nazism.
2. The baby boom generation were the first “children of the welfare state”. They pinched the power of the establishment. In this struggle, the leveling of the “fascism-reproach” proved to be a strong weapon: anyone who stands in the way of the baby boomers is called “a fascist”.
Hitler myth versus the interest:
- “Hitler was financed by the great industrialists.”
— The baby boomers saw capitalism as an obstacle on their way to power. Therefore capitalism had to be portrayed as the breeding ground of Hitler and Nazism.
- “The Nazis disputed social democrats and communists.”
— The baby boomers identified themselves as socialists and/or communists. Now they also could delude themselves as the “victims of Hitler”.
- “The Holocaust was enabled by the German law-abiding culture.”
— If a law-abiding culture had led to the Holocaust, then the fight against the authority simply had to be justified. And the baby boomers fought against authority in the 1960s.
- “The followers of Hitler were the middle class that grabbed the chance to improve their situation through he Nazis.”
— The baby boomers view themselves as real intellectuals. They detest the middle class.
3. Germans who survived the war had to find ways to justify their participation. Therefore the reality was modified:
- Hitler myth versus the interest:
- “Hitler ruled Germany with an iron fist. And with his speeches Hitler hypnotized his audience.”
— The Germans themselves were also victims of Hitler.
- “Hitler was financed by the great industrialists.”
— Against this financial force majeure the Germans stood no chance.
- “With the military defeat in 1945, Nazism was consigned to the dung heap of history.”
— Nazism is a black page in history, but fortunately we left that behind us.
To me, the book by Sebastian Haffner (Anmerkungen zu Hitler and Geschichte eines Deutschen) was a real eye-opener. Haffner describes the bizarre everyday life in the Weimar Republic. Nevertheless, Hitler in general was regarded as a distasteful little man, cherishing weird ideas.
But when he came to power in 1933, Hitler proved to be hugely successful: unemployment was resolved, prices became stable, Germany hosted the Olympic Games, and regained international respect. Haffner summarized this as follows: if Hitler had lost his life in 1938, he would be have been remembered as the greatest German statesman of all time. Therefore you had to be very confident in the 1930’s to abhor Hitler. 
Another eye-opener is the book Hitler’s Beneficiaries by Götz Aly. It describes how the Germans progressed financially under Hitler. You can even question whether Hitler might be called a dictator. Firstly, Hitler came to power after a resounding election victory. Secondly, the popularity of Hitler rose enormously between 1933 and 1938.
Thirdly, a widespread repression was not necessary at all for Hitler to keep power: the Gestapo in 1937 had only 7,000 men in service, which includes office workers and supporting staff. That is probably proportional to the security personnel that currently keeps the Netherlands on track. And compare that to the DDR (only 25% of the size of Hitler’s Germany). They had 190,000 “observers” in service.
In other words, the Nazis could count on the support of a large majority of the German population. That was not so strange since Socialism had been for generations the Political Hope for the people. But the Nazis were the first to successfully bring socialism into practice.
Götz Aly cites these examples:
- The Nazis brought the automobile within reach of the people.
- They doubled the number of holidays for workers.
- They introduced agricultural subsidies for farmers to protect them against the risks of weather and a fickle world market.
- Prices of food were set by the government.
- The Nazis introduced the progressive income tax (still a “sacred” item for the leftist parties).
- The Nazis were not just leftists, they were green as well: they were the first to make care for the environment a government responsibility.
- Landlords were required to charge their tenants affordable rents.
- The legal position of tenants was strengthened.
- Child benefits were introduced.
- Pensions were increased.
- The cost of health care was paid for by the government. 
- The only tax increase that hurt “the common man” was a 50% increase on the duty on tobacco and alcohol.
- And in the war a “special social benefit” was introduced: benefits for the cost of rent, insurance, coal, potatoes and other essential goods.
And the great industrialists? How did they do under Hitler? Companies had to pay 98% tax under Hitler. In some cases even 104% of profits had to be paid. And the weapons industry? The Nazis seized all “war-related” profits. Or, in the words of Hitler himself: “As long as there are soldiers fighting at the front, nobody will be allowed to make profits from the war.”
Investors had to hand in all dividends above 6% to the State. In 1941 this was followed by a special profit tax. In that year homeowners suddenly had to pay property tax in advance over the years ahead. An increase of residential rents was not allowed.
How socialist was Hitler? Let us look at the government contributions to social security between 1938 and 1943 (in millions of Reichsmarks)
This is how socialist Hitler was. He commanded a solidarity and social justice policy the current Social Democrats can only dream about.
The question is: how could Hitler pay for this all? Well, the 31% decline in spending on social security in 1942 reveals it. In that year, the expropriation of the rights of Jews to social security was processed in the accounts.
Hitler’s welfare was paid by the theft of Jewish property and wealth. First in Germany and later in the lands under German occupation. Six million people were first robbed and then forced to work without payment. Only when Hitler’s Socialists couldn’t make any money on them anymore were they murdered.
There was nothing irrational about the Holocaust. It was the only way Hitler could finance his social security. And that very same social security was the reason that the Germans got carried away with him, despite the hardships of war. They gained: the companies and houses of Jews were available for “nothing”. Jewish household goods and clothing went to those who lost their homes in the bombings. Money, jewels, and gold went to the state.
Götz Aly explains the explicit link between the welfare state and the Holocaust: “Significantly, the will to achieve social reform was strongest among those leaders within the Nazi Party who were also the most actively involved in pushing forward the agenda of ethnic genocide.”
It seems unlikely that Hitler’s followers were amongst the wealthy, or even amongst the small firms and traders. They lost out. But if you were earning a below-average income, you gained substantially.
The Social Democrats and the Communists shared their constituencies with the Nazis, and were therefore also the biggest political threat. That is probably the reason why leftist political leaders were terrorized by the Sturm Abteilung [SA].
Besides workers, also young people were attracted to the Nazis. Jonah Goldberg points out in his superb book Liberal Fascism that fascism was a youth movement. For example, what were the ages of the Nazi leaders? When they came to power in 1933, Joseph Goebbels was 35, Reinhard Heydrich was 28, Albert Speer was 27, Adolf Eichmann was 26, Joseph Mengele was 21, and Heinrich Himmler and Hans Frank were both 26. Hermann Göring was 40 years and a real granddad amongst Hitler’s socialists.
Jonah Goldberg claims that Nazism was an egalitarian youth movement with free sex. No “Befehl is Befehl”, but a precursor of the hippies. Regarding Frei Körper Kultur there has to be no doubt that it did exist. But in Intelligence in War John Keegan adds a salient example:
The Germans developed their secret weapons in Peenemünde. The intellectual achievements, especially in V2 [rocket] design, were formidable. This was made possible by the egalitarian, free atmosphere in Peenemünde. Everyone could talk to about anything. Nobody cared for rank and status. But Peenemünde was as leaky as a sieve: the British were well aware of everything.
The contrast with the British intelligence center, Bletchley, is substantial. Ten thousand men worked there on a strict need-to-know basis. The Germans never knew of the existence of Bletchley.
How Hitler won the war: Socialism and Democracy
The inherent problem of democracy is “the dictatorship of the majority”. In order to come to power, the politicians have to forge a majority coalition. This majority will only vote for them when there is something to gain. But where should that money come from? That can only be taken away from the minority.
In they era before Hitler, Socialism was seen as weird, intellectual, and unsuccessful. Hitler made two innovations that were crucial for the practical success. And finally Hitler succeeded in transferring money from a minority to a majority.
1. The Pincer
Hitler went to work as a pincer. At the top the NSDAP took part in democracy as a legitimate party. At the bottom “the activists” terrorized his opponents. Hitler maintained sufficient distance from his activists to prevent legal and public-relations trouble.
Moreover, Hitler himself was (in Mein Kampf) rather generous. He gave the Social Democrats all the credits. Hitler supposedly learned the Pincer from the social-democratic activists in Vienna. But who will say whether this is just propaganda?
2. The Coalition of the Profiteers
Hitler welded a coalition of people who benefited from his policies. That was “the common man” and “the youth”. They were favored. The bill was paid by wealthy people and especially by the Jews. Since those who gained from Nazism were more numerous than its victims, Hitler had no need for widespread repression to stay in power.
Modern social democracy
While he is not awarded the honor, Hitler is the founder of modern social democracy. Both tactical innovations, the Pincer and the Coalition of Profiteers, were embraced by leftist parties after the war (and of course Hitler’s welfare state was expanded further).
In this matter we recognize the Dutch squatters’ movement, environmental activists, and other (professional) demonstrators. It is their duty to eliminate social opponents outside the parliament. Officially, the leftist parties keep themselves well-distanced from this terror. But there are many links between them.
- Firstly, the puppets are often the same. Many leftist politicians have a history in activism.
- Secondly, the living costs of the activists are paid for by leftist parties, through benefits and grants.
- With regard to housing we must congratulate the leftist politicians on their inventiveness. Hitler arranged “affordable rent” by law. But by squatting, our present politicians arrange for rent-free housing for their activists. It is no coincidence that the losing parties, the property owners, are not supporters of the leftist parties.
The power of the Left is still formed by the Coalition of Profiteers. But there have also been some changes in it. Because of technological progress, labor productivity rose substantially. Therefore you can grab enough from the minority through taxes keep the majority happy.
Moreover, high taxes are much more elegant than a holocaust:
- Firstly, you can only rob and murder someone one time. However, higher and higher taxes can be demanded each year. 
- Secondly, the Holocaust was a publicity nightmare for Hitler’s Socialists. But high taxes can be justified with beautiful concepts such as “solidarity”, “social justice” and “redistribution of wealth”.
Because changes in society happen quickly, the composition of the Coalition of Profiteers has to be adjusted as well. The “Fortuyn-period” [2001-2002] was such a landslide: the classical worker nowadays faces more drawbacks than benefits from the welfare state. He is the main victim of crime and lack of civil order, while the Santa of increased prices tiptoed past his little rented house [late nineties]. And therefore the Left can no longer rely on “the people in the old neighborhoods”.
(If you remove the social housing associations, and the offer the houses at a reduced price to the tenant, the Right will finally be able to score a large election victory.)
Hitler had it much easier. He could work with a majority of workers, but the workers nowadays are threatened with extinction. They have been replaced by an army of managers and bureaucrats.
It is not difficult to point out the new Coalition of Profiteers. Just follow the money. The media, universities, NGOs, the immigrants, the beneficiaries, officials, the semi-officials and care sector. They all gain from the welfare state.
The leftist policy is the art of a balancing act: one must over and over again forge a Coalition of Profiteers. And when this is successful, the left owns the future!
|||One of the first measures of Hitler when he was in power was to make May 1 not only the official workers’ day, but also a holiday: “Der 1. Mai ist der Feiertag der nationalen Arbeit; signed: Adolf Hitler; Frick; Dr. Goebbels” [The first of May is the feast day of the national workers; Berlin, April 10, 1933]|
|||Already in 1933 the National Socialists had organized the welfare state through the “family welfare security,” the NS-Volkswohlfahrt. In their advertising they showed the wealthy capitalists with their private security on one side and on the other a happy National Socialist family looking down upon them.|
|||Appeal by The Reich Leader of the German Labor Front, published in the Völkischer Beobachter (November 20, 1939)|
In the following excerpt from the [National Socialist] party newspaper Völkischer Beobachter, Dr. Robert Ley, the leader of the German Labor Front [Deutsche Arbeitsfront or DAF], addresses the German workforce, highlighting the regime’s success in prosecuting the war and emphasizing that conditions for workers had improved since the first weeks of hostilities. […] Ley interpreted the forced improvements as proof of the socialist character of the German Reich, which had to assert itself in the face of threats by capitalist England.
|||It is not well known that the Turks tried an in-between strategy during WWII with the Wealth Tax. After the death of Kemal Atatürk in 1938, the ruling elite slowly fell back into usual Islamic behavior. After an agreement with Nazi Germany in 1941, the Turks rounded up Jewish, Armenian and Greek males between the ages of 18 and 35. They were sent to labor camps. But to displace later fears onto the minorities, the Turkish government placed the blame for he financial crisis on the non-Muslim businessmen and implemented the “Varlik” tax (1942). A wealth tax of sometimes far over 100% of the total value of property and savings. Those who were unable to pay within two weeks lost everything to the State and were sent to labor camps. This included family members and even children. Tax “assessment” was estimated and in three categories: M for Muslims (ca 0%-15%), G for non-Muslims (Gayrimüslim), E for foreigners (Ecnebi) and D for Dönmde, members of the Jewish clan who chose to convert in stead of being murdered. Category G for instance (Greek Christians and Jews), was taxed from 50%-100%+. This led not only to a horrible persecution of non-Muslims but also a continuing crisis in the economy till long after the war.|
Dutch Nazi party (NSB) posters from How leftist was the National Socialist Alliance (NSB)?: “Our Socialism, Your future”
and “Together with Germany AGAINST Capitalism”:
A German NSDAP poster form 1932: “Work and Bread, through list 1”:
Posted by Rolf Krake at Wednesday, May 27, 2009