► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Europe’

Gates of Vienna: Statement to the European Press

by 1389AD ( 11 Comments › )
Filed under Europe, Headlines, Media at July 28th, 2011 - 1:12 pm

Baron Bodissey: Statement Issued to the Media

Now that Fjordman is no longer giving interviews to the media, some of the European outlets have written wanting to interview me.

I will give no interviews to the European media, for the reasons given in the statement below, which is being sent out in reply to all reporters who request such interviews.

If you read anything in the European press purporting to be my words, and it differs in any way from the text below (with the exception of the alternate words in square brackets), then it has been edited before publication by someone other than myself.


I have access to translated summaries of every European news story on Breivik and the Oslo murders, and of course I can read the English-language articles myself. I am well aware of what is being said in the newspapers and on television about me, Fjordman, and many other colleagues.

It is astonishing how much bad information, innuendo, rumor published as fact, unsourced articles, character assassination, and outright lies are being published in Europe today. The lack of ethical behavior among professional journalists is absolutely appalling.

Because I attended some of the events described, and know many of the people involved, I can see how bad the reporting is. The slanders and the smears are obvious. Unlike your [readers] [viewers], I am cognizant of the truth.

Given these conditions, there is no way that I will consent to be interviewed by anyone in the European press.

However, you have my permission to publish this email, provided that you publish it in its entirety, with no omissions or alterations, in the original English.

Posted by Baron Bodissey at 7/27/2011 12:40:00 PM


Nordic Fools or Dhimmis… Same Thing

by coldwarrior ( 59 Comments › )
Filed under Crime, Dhimmitude, Europe, Islamic Invasion, Kosovo, Sweden at January 1st, 2010 - 11:00 am

Yes, the title is less than erudite, yes, it is a generalization, but here’s why:

An Albanian immigrant went on a shooting rampage in Finland on Thursday, killing his ex-girlfriend and opening fire in a crowded shopping centre and killing four before committing suicide.

All right Netizens….what religion was this clown? No fair peeking.

The Gunman is named Ibrahim Shkupolli, a Muslim from Kosovo. He murdered 5 people. Its illegal to defame the Muslim moon-god Allah or the so called religion in Finland, so I’ll do it for them.

Finland has pretty liberal gun laws too and has had two big shootings in 2008, one was a copycat of a Columbine murder spree. So what do the Finns decide to go after… you know it! Its time for gun control! The two school killings happened in no firearm zones.

From the article:

While Finland has a population of just 5.3 million, there are around 1.6 million firearms in private hands. The country’s long tradition of hunting puts it among the top five nations in the world for civilian gun ownership. Politicians and religious leaders have called for tighter gun laws in a country which is known for heavy drinking and domestic violence and high rates of suicide.

And lets throw in a boatload of rapes of Swedish women by Muslims immigrants (from Fjordman, thanx!), a simple google search returns enough crime in Nordicland to prove that maybe instead of gun control and accepting immigrants that do not want to be part of your civilization, maybe stop the immigration and try to get some safety training for your people. Take away the Finns guns and allow the muslim jihadis into your country is not the answer. The people need to protect themselves or your civilization will perish.

I’m gone for a week or so, Happy New Year!

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Broadband

by tqcincinnatus ( 182 Comments › )
Filed under Europe, Socialism at October 17th, 2009 - 5:07 am

I think the interwebs are a great thing, but this is ridiculous,

Finland has become the first country in the world to declare broadband Internet access a legal right.

Starting in July, telecommunication companies in the northern European nation will be required to provide all 5.2 million citizens with Internet connection that runs at speeds of at least 1 megabit per second.

The one-megabit mandate, however, is simply an intermediary step, said Laura Vilkkonen, the legislative counselor for the Ministry of Transport and Communications.

The country is aiming for speeds that are 100 times faster — 100 megabit per second — for all by 2015.

“We think it’s something you cannot live without in modern society. Like banking services or water or electricity, you need Internet connection,” Vilkkonen said.

Finland is one of the most wired in the world; about 95 percent of the population have some sort of Internet access, she said. But the law is designed to bring the Web to rural areas, where geographic challenges have limited access until now.

“Universal service is every citizen’s subjective right,” Vilkkonen said.

This strikes me as a great opportunity for the Blogmocracy to extend its growing empire into the previously untapped rural Finnish market. 

All joking aside, this is a perfect example of that perversion of the rights concept, known as “positive rights.”  See, American constitutional liberty rests on the basis of “negative rights” – you are free to do what you want, for yourself, without being hindered by the government, so long as you are not harming someone else.  “Positive” rights turn this on its head, and obligate citizens to provide things to other citizens, thereby placing a burden via the government onto those forced to provide (usually the productive classes).   Yet another bad idea for which we can thank Rousseau. 

America’s European President

by tqcincinnatus ( 21 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Politics at July 15th, 2009 - 6:04 am

You can often tell a lot about a man by looking at those who approve of him. This was shown last week during Obama’s whirlwind tour of Russia, Italy, and Ghana. He practically gave away the whole house when he was in Moscow, agreeing to limit America’s nuclear arsenal, while also putting an effective halt to the missile defense program that would protect our erstwhile allies in Europe from Russian extortion – so we can be pretty sure the Russians like him now. In Italy, we were treated to the spectacle of Old Europe’s socialist leaders (and remember, even “right-wingers” like Italy’s Berlesconi and Germany’s Merkel would be moderately-left Democrats here in America) praising Obama for “doing everything right so far” with respect to his foreign policy. Then, in Ghana, we see him acclaimed as the Messiah while he gives a tear-jerker of a speech about the slavery his ancestors never endured, while at an historic slaver’s fort through which his ancestors were never processed.

Yes, even as his approval ratings continue to slump among the people whose country he is in the process of weakening overseas and impoverishing at home, it would seem that our President continues to maintain his popularity in the Old World.

We shouldn’t be surprised by this, especially as it relates to the conduct of his foreign policy to date. Obama’s approach, while making no sense whatsoever to Americans who operate from a starting point of common sense, is the fulfillment of all the hopes and dreams entertained by the radical Left on both sides of the Atlantic. In their world, support for Israel – the only country with a truly open, free, and democratic society in the Middle East that doesn’t have to be constantly maintained by the threat of intervention from its own military (thus ruling out Turkey) – is absolutely indefensible. On the other hand, support for the Palestinians – whose whole existence is predicated on the need to commit genocide against the Jews – is noble and righteous. Among the Leftists, strengthening ties with free and capitalistic nations in Latin America is bad, but pandering to Marxist thugs like Chavez and Ortega is good. Pursuing a policy of building relationships and defense ties with Eastern European nations that escaped the yoke of Soviet Russian domination is “imperialism”, but tossing these nations like sacrificial lambs to Russian neo-imperialists is simply good form. As in every other area, Obama is a solid Leftist in his approach to foreign policy.

What this means is that, regardless of what might be said about his Kenyan origins and birth certificate, or lack thereof, Obama is America’s first European President.

Obama’s foreign policy approach seems to operate from fundamentally European assumptions. Even the “Right” in Old Europe holds to these, just as much as the Left. These assumptions are often diametrically opposed to American approaches – not just from the perspective of realpolitik and the pursuit of disparate national interests, but also from the very basic and foundational presuppositions under which each side operates.

Here in America, we understand that diplomacy needs to be backed by something distinctly non-diplomatic. “Walk softly, and carry a big stick,” and all that. Reagan knew this – which is why he would deal with the Soviets diplomatically, but at the same time was strengthening our military preparedness that the feckless Carter had allowed to languish. This is why the Soviet’s felt not the least bit inhibited in trying to advance world Communism militarily in Afghanistan in 1979. Carter, unlike his successor, was a weak leader who lacked the will to back up American interests with the threat of military action.

The Europeans, on the other hand, existed for so long under America’s military umbrella that they forgot what it means to operate an independent foreign policy that can’t afford to rely on “soft power” alone. Western Europeans grew complacent, softening and feminizing their societies through the building of expensive cradle-to-grave welfare states that didn’t allow any room for substantial military power to be built. As they moved Left en masse, they accepted the suppositions implanted by democratic socialism (as well as Soviet agents in the West) that there is nothing worth fighting for, that every problem can be solved by sitting down in a committee and talking it over until a mutually agreeable compromise is achieved. While this may work well when one soft, complacent society negotiates with another, it doesn’t work so well when one of the “partners” is an Iran or a North Korea who couldn’t care less about civilized sensibilities. Unfortunately, this seems to be exactly what Obama, like Old Europe, doesn’t understand – if you aren’t willing to use “hard power”, then “soft power” is “no power.”

Also, Obama’s foreign policy appears to fundamentally assume that advancing American national interests, as opposed to “world” interests, is wrong. In his mind, like that of “progressive” Europeans, nationalism is bad, while globalism is good. He seems to think that it is more important for the rest of the world to be happy with us, than it is for America to be safe, strong, and prosperous. Much of it is his typically socialist predilection for working through the UN and other globalist agencies, as opposed to the traditional and constitutional reliance upon home-grown American policy-making. Part of it may also be Obama’s own personal narcissism – being President allows him to “big up” his own popularity not just in Illinois, but the world over. Unfortunately, because most of the rest of the world (including Old Europe) has a fundamental interest in strengthening their own positions at the expense of the United States, the way in which Obama can accrue this popularity from the rest of the world is largely by selling out traditional American interests and cutting the legs out from under our nation’s moral and military leadership.

This is why Obama has largely spent his overseas travel time to date apologizing to anyone and everyone who will listen for the “sins” of America. The world is his father confessor, so to speak. Instead of focusing on what America has done right, he has sought expiation for what we’ve done wrong – both real and imagined. And to make it up to the world, he’s going to reverse the course that his predecessors followed that kept America and her allies strong and safe. Missile defense in Poland and the Czech Republic to protect our friends from Russian domination? Sure, Vlad, we’ll scrap that. Supporting our staunch ally Israel? We’ll scale that back, and vastly expand the money we send to the Palestinians. He goes to Africa and apologizes for America’s part in slavery. Yet, he fails to point out that the slave trade was started by Muslims from North Africa long before any European had set foot on the Slave Coast.

Obama also seems to hold to the European doctrine of multipolarity. To the European policy-makers, having a quasi-unipolar system in which peace is maintained by the military and economic power of a hyperpower is bad (especially when Europe isn’t the hyperpower). To the socialist mind, the fact that the hyperpower is (or at least was) based upon a relatively capitalistic and free-market system is abominable. Combine these in the thinking of Leftists like Obama and the Old Europeans, and you have the present drive to create a multipolar world in which American influence and power is reduced at the expense of advancing rivals to American “hegemony”, the more antagonistic these rivals, the better. The problem is, the reason these rivals are especially antagonistic to America is because they embody political and philosophical systems that are diametrically opposed to our – they are totalitarians, dictatorships, theocracies, imperialists, and so forth. It even goes so far as looking the other way while regimes like Iran develop nuclear weapons capabilities, and turning a weak knee to North Korea when it fires missiles over our allies in Japan. The Left in Europe and its emulators in America end up having to lie in bed with a whole lot of nasty characters in their push to bring America down to size.

In summation, we see that President Obama is taking our nation on a course that will reduce American moral authority, American power, and American influence generally. He does so because he operates from a mindset not unlike that held by socialists in Old Europe – countries like France and Germany where inordinate governmental power is held by an array of Communists, Greens, and other far Left groups. Unfortunately, the real world results from this will be neither happy nor prosperous for our planet, as we can expect North Korean dictators and Iranian theocrats to grow bolder and bolder. The post-Obama world will be much more nasty, brutish, and Hobbesian than it would have been otherwise.