Pat Condell: The Gathering Storm.
Wake up, Europe, and smell the treachery.Must see, must listen to.
A dose of cold, hard truth
Pat Condell: The Gathering Storm.
Whither democracy?
In practice, however, things are not quite so idyllic. Party discipline forces many MP's (supposedly free from coercement) to vote against their principles. Flouting party discipline is a strong sign of independence and principled representation, but it will fast-track a political career to nowhere. There are not many who will ignore party discipline, if it means an end to a well-paid job.
In a healthy democracy, parties that so conspicuously neglect their mandate and ignore and belittle the voters would disappear just as soon as the next elections come around. But on a number of issues that is too big by far, Dutch political parties are in agreement on principle, even has much sound and fury is being made of the superficial differences. In too many areas voters simply have but one choice, on too many issues the Netherlands is a one-party state: Social-democrat, pro-EUnion, pro-immigration, anti-tax-reduction (yes, even the conservative liberal VVD do not lose any sleep over increasing the tax burden even more).
Then there is the matter of representation. In practice we see all to often MPs representing the party to which they belong, the policies set out by the barons and the demands made by lobbies and pressure groups. The wishes of the voters, of us citizens hardly factor, it seems. One only has to point to the dramatic result of the Dutch referendum of the EUnions Constitutional Treaty. Even has 80-85% of Second Chamber parliamentarians were for the treaty, a full 63% of the electorate voted against.
Not that this is the only instance when parliament went against the will of the people, went against election manifestos even. A majority of the Dutch did bot want to be part of the eurozone, yet I have that most dreadful currency in my wallet. Most Dutch did not want to have a blanket smoking ban in bars and restaurants, but the EUnion and various anti-smoking NGO's prevailed. A majority of the Dutch sees mass immigration as the biggest mistake in history, yet even the PVV, for all intents and purposes part of our local government, is not able to put a dent into the large numbers of ill-educated fortune-seekers crossing our borders. Neither do the Dutch want to spend any money on the financial debauchery perpetrated by the grasshopper nations within the eurozone, or the immorally risk-prone banks that supported them. Yet what started out with a 'mere' 4 billion for Greece, sees the Dutch now collectively on the hook for up to 100 billion in guarantees. And do not get me started on the
We, as citizens, have precious little say anymore about how we want our country, our lives governed. We've been made powerless by a complex of parliamentary 'democracy' that is beholden to industry, NGO's and various tranzi organisation, notably the EUnion. However, our current form of 'democracy' is not there for us. We only provide the legitimization of our government, because we vote. But our vote, the intent with which we vote, means apparently very little. Political parties take the votes and run, doing as they please, without us having the means to rectify derelict governance. There has to be an alternative.
This weekend saw a very good post by Witterings from Witney: There is a better way.... It is a thorough and systematic, yet incredibly passionate argument for the implementation of the type of direct democracy as practised in Switzerland.
It will be obvious from my 'Constitution' posts and also, to a lesser extent from the post questioning Indirect or Direct Democracy, that I favour a direct democracy such as that practised by Switzerland - one which places the people in control of their own destinies and reduces the role of politicians to one of being 'enablers'. My one addition to the form of democracy used in Switzerland would encompass the idea of 'bolting on' the idea of "Referism" as proposed by Richard North, EU Referendum, for national budgets - which is not the case in Switzerland.For an idea of how Switzerland's democracy works, see here, here and here.
The point of direct democracy, especially in combination with Referism, is to place the power firmly where it belongs in a healthy democracy: With us, the people. And not just on big issues of the day either. The core idea of Referism is to give the people power of the budget. To let us, and not our leaders, hold the purse strings. The one that pays the piper, calls the tunes. In a democracy, it is the people that are supposed the call the tunes. Presently that is not the case.
Think of Referism in this way: On or before the third Tuesday of September (for foreign readers: This is the date of the Dutch version of Budget Day: Prinsjesdag) the government publishes it's intended budget. After a period of, say, three weeks, a referendum is held, seeking the approval of the population. A simple 'Yes' or 'No' vote. If 'Yes' (maybe given a certain quorum, say a turnout of at least 30%) so much the better. If 'No' the government will be forced to redo the budget.
The idea is to implement this not only on the national level, but also (and maybe more importantly) on the local level. This give you a determined say in which services your local government provides and which it does not. It will put an end to ever rising local taxes and levies. But its effects will be more profound then mere financial and fiscal issues. Having to reckon with the public approval of the budget forces governments on all levels to rethink their policies, to hew more closely to the wishes of citizens.
With regard to this form of direct democracy there are a few caveats. Dr. North takes a critical look at WfW's proposal in Direct Democracy. The obvious counter-argument against direct democracy is of course Adolf Hitler and his abuse of the popular vote to get rid of democracy altogether. This is one of the reasons contemporary Germans are so reluctant to permit the routine use of referendums, he writes.
The point is well-taken. If any system of direct democracy is to be implemented, some thought must go into which issues lend themselves for public consultation and which bear a little more caution, some safe-guards against public sentiments riled up to dangerously irrational levels. It is not a perfect system. But... On the face of it, it is a better system then the sham-democracy we are living now, I think.
Whichever the system we chose to support, we must realize it is a means to an end. What we need is a clear definition of the end. And here I agree with Dr. North that what I want is as little government as possible. Yes, those in honest need should be able to count on community support. There are aspects of our well-fare system I think are eminently valuable and worthwhile. But government interference with ones daily life is reaching levels of intrusion that are downright obnoxious. A government that wants to force us to allow logging our energy consumption of a quarter-hourly basis is overstepping its bounds by a mile or two. As Dr. North writes (emphasis mine - KV):
What we need is restraint, a system one which makes government physically difficult, keeping externally-imposed rules to the minimum, and forcing people to deal with and settle their own problems – as far as is possible – without external interference.We must remember that our current parliamentary system was set up to curb the powers of the monarch. In this it has been spectacularly successful. The downside, however, is that with regard to the reigns of power, parliament has supplanted the monarch. Or rather: Politics, political parties have supplanted the monarch. And who will curb the power of the parties? That is supposed to be us, but we've been robbed of that power.
Dwelling on this further, what one must emphasise is that for the bulk of our daily activities, we do not need government – we do not need leadership, we do not need governors, rulers or leaders. It is one of the myths perpetrated by the ruling élites that we need them to take such an enormous part in our lives.
The first and most important requirement of any new or improved system of government, therefore, is the ability of us, the people, to reduce the amount of government. As an individual or part of a collective, I have no desire to rule my fellow man – insofar as I want power, it is the power to prevent other people telling me what to do, and then charging me for the privilege.
It is time to retake that power. The thinking on this is by no means finished. But as a starting point I think both the post by Wittering from Witney and the reply by Richard North provide sufficient food for thought. I really urge you to read them both. In full.
Sell out
Th Slog sounds the warning bell: Ever so quietly, with the acquiescence of Berlin, Brussels is planning to let the bankers off. In essence what the EUnion is planning to perpetrate is an 'instant austerity pact', possibly implemented as soon as the start of 2012. Fear are that the dreaded ESM, which will destroy any national sovereignty there still exists and deliver all of us into the hands of an untouchable clique of central bankers (see here).
But that is not all. To get the banking sector on-board the EUnion is said to offer a quid-pro-quo: Play along and you will not have to take a haircut on existing troubled sovereign debt (mainly Greece, but also Italy, Spain, Portugal and France). Since the debt of these countries needs to be serviced and reduced, since the bill has to be paid by somebody, this will mean the debt is rolled over onto the shoulders of the EUnion taxpayer and citizen. Us.
We will be told we will be bailing out the banks.
We will have to pay for those banks that squandered obscene amounts of money on ridiculously risky loans will not carry the burden of their ill-considered, even retarded decision-making. We will. And the higher taxes and falling living standards that must follow the enactment of this grubby plan will turn a depression into a slump, says the Slog.
This is not doom-laden panic mongering either. Over on Mish's we find corroboration: Latest Idiotic Plan: No Losses for Banks or Bondholders because "Losses Undermine Confidence"
What is worse: Our own government is said to have been convinced by Germany's slithering financial minster Wolfgang Schäuble to agree to this abomination. PM Mark Rutte and FM Jan Kees de Jager will once again sell out our wealth, our savings and our hard work to rescue multi-million euro bonus earning bank rats. It is immoral, it is supremely unjust and it is a complete betrayal of the oath of office both of them took when they were sworn into their current position.
This cannot stand. Spread this around as much as you can. Contact the Tweede Kamer member of your choice and ask them, for once, to represent you and yours and oppose this travesty. Tell others about it. Let us try to make sure that when our governments officials come back from the ESM summit later this week they'll notice a determined lack of consent by the people and a significant part of parliament.
But that is not all. To get the banking sector on-board the EUnion is said to offer a quid-pro-quo: Play along and you will not have to take a haircut on existing troubled sovereign debt (mainly Greece, but also Italy, Spain, Portugal and France). Since the debt of these countries needs to be serviced and reduced, since the bill has to be paid by somebody, this will mean the debt is rolled over onto the shoulders of the EUnion taxpayer and citizen. Us.
We will be told we will be bailing out the banks.
We will have to pay for those banks that squandered obscene amounts of money on ridiculously risky loans will not carry the burden of their ill-considered, even retarded decision-making. We will. And the higher taxes and falling living standards that must follow the enactment of this grubby plan will turn a depression into a slump, says the Slog.
This is not doom-laden panic mongering either. Over on Mish's we find corroboration: Latest Idiotic Plan: No Losses for Banks or Bondholders because "Losses Undermine Confidence"
That's right folks, we are going to bail out the banks and no one has to take any losses (except taxpayers of course who will "share" 100% of the risk). Otherwise there will be a "loss of confidence" in the same banks that plowed into Greek, Spanish, Irish, and Portuguese debt because supposedly there would be no losses on sovereign debt.The only true way to restore confidence is to punish banks that make stupid lending decisions, Mish writes. It is 100% of the losses should go to the bondholders, not zero percent.
Now they have taken a no-loss idea that has already blown sky high, and want to expand it to the next level: "no losses on bailouts".
This plan is so stupid only government bureaucrats could dream it up.
What is worse: Our own government is said to have been convinced by Germany's slithering financial minster Wolfgang Schäuble to agree to this abomination. PM Mark Rutte and FM Jan Kees de Jager will once again sell out our wealth, our savings and our hard work to rescue multi-million euro bonus earning bank rats. It is immoral, it is supremely unjust and it is a complete betrayal of the oath of office both of them took when they were sworn into their current position.
This cannot stand. Spread this around as much as you can. Contact the Tweede Kamer member of your choice and ask them, for once, to represent you and yours and oppose this travesty. Tell others about it. Let us try to make sure that when our governments officials come back from the ESM summit later this week they'll notice a determined lack of consent by the people and a significant part of parliament.
The End?
Jeremy Warner (again... Yes, I know) explains in two short paragraph why the euro is a doomed currency.
But perhaps the biggest sin of the lot was effectively to render all credit default swaps (a form of insurance against default) on sovereign debt essentially worthless, or void, by making the Greek default "voluntary".It was inevitable, I guess. The Truth will set you free, Our Father told us. And 'You have to lie' will eventually come and bite you in the rear.
This has made it impossible to hedge against eurozone sovereign debt purchases, and thereby destroyed the market. Worse, it's made investors believe that the euro cannot be trusted, that it'll repeatedly find ways of reneging on contract. That's the point of no return. This is no longer a serious currency.
Worse then Lysenkoism
Over on WUWT one Gail Combs pulled a thread that is fast unravelling the veil and revealing the 'invisible hand' behind the AGW scam: World Bank, Global Warming, Journals, and CRU.
At http://foia2011.org I searched for worldbank.org and found 32 e-mails going back as far as 1998. I have only looked at three so far. Looks like the good old World Bank may be something of a puppet master.One of the emails dug up by Gail is one by Robert Watson (World Bank, formerly IPCC) apparently telling Rajendra Pachauri what to in the AR4 put Summary for Policymakers. Then there's a second email, by a Kenneth M. Chomitz of the World Bank, interfering with how a peer reviewed journal is run.
In itself this is a remarkable find. The contra-AGW camp is often accused of having access to the deep pockets of Big Oil. From these finds it seems that the pro-AGW camp has access to even deeper, more influential pockets! Oh, the hypocrisy...
In the comments there are several people reporting what they find as they pick up the trail sniffed out by Gail. And it is in the comments where things start to get really interesting. What it lays bare is quite concerning (and food for no end of conspiracy theories). At the very least it provides strong circumstantial evidence that the whole AGW scare is indeed a push for One World government. And not one of the freedom loving kind, either.
There's too much in the entire threat to replicate here. To summarize: It shows possible connections between the UN, various NGO's, the World Bank, Big Wall Street (Goldman-Sachs is cropping up here as well) and Big Industry, Big Oil even. Head on over and take it all in. Commenter 'Robert from Ottawa' says it is worse then Lysenkoism. That is exactly the impression one is left with after reading it all. It is worse then mere, blinkered Lysenkoism. Much, much worse, in fact.
Quote of the day
[T]he single currency is proving a more profoundly destabilising force in Europe – economically, financially and politically – than anything that has occurred since the Second World War.
Swine and sows
Today the European Commission presented its ‘green paper’ on plans of the EUnion to stem the escalating debt crisis. Jeremy Warner of the Telegraph is not impressed. Those plans can be summarized in two items:
1) Eurobonds... excuse me: Stability bonds
2) More EUnion control over nation states.
Item (2) goes all the way, up to and including EUnion veto power(!) over national budgets. Yes, the EUnion will be able to veto a budget drawn up by a hapless minister of Finance even before the equally hapless national parliament has had a chance to vote on it.
Here we have yet another instance where the EUnion takes democracy and throttles it. Parliament is an expression of the will of the people (whether actual MP’s honour that mandate is another discussion entirely). In a democracy it is parliament, as the expression of the vox populi, that principally and correctly has the last word. It is the defining character of a democracy.
If then we live in a system where parliament can be overruled, is overruled and will, according to plans, be further overruled by some other entity (in this case the EUnion) it follows we are not a democracy, the EUnion actively opposes and works to destroy democracy. For that alone the EUnion MUST DIE!
Right… Sorry…
The plans presented today by the EUnion do nothing to address the debt crisis in any urgent sense. For the implementation of eurobonds a change to theLisbon treaties Turnip is needed. This will require negotiations among all 27 member states. In other words, it will take forever. The same is true for the suggested measures to enforce austerity and fiscal and budgetary discipline (which, by a regime, whose parliament just increased its own budget in the midst of this crisis, my be viewed with the sardonic mirth it deserves).
No, what these useless swine are trying to do, once again, is to take a bad situation and abuse it for their own ends: Increased centralization of power into the hands of the EUnion. What it does not do, is address the current crisis. The Commissions plans do not even rate as ‘lame duck’. That thing you see floating is a dead duck. An ex-duck. A duck that has ceased to be.
The EUnion opting for its own egotistical, sociopathic agenda allows the crisis to rage on unresolved, bringing more and more EU member states to the brink, showing more and more EU member states the abyss the EUnion really is.
The EUnion has taken on a pathological dynamic of its own. Peace and prosperity are no longer the aim, even if these lofty ideals are paid lip-service at regular intervals. The EUnions main aim is itself. It has become a collection of useless swine and sows whose only raison d’etre is to serve the EUnion beast, feed it and grow it. Other considerations only factor in to the extent of their ability to promote or threaten the growth of the beast. That also explains the shocking ease with which democratic principles of just government are swept aside. Democracy, more particularly a growing part of the demos, has become a threat to the growth of the beast. Hence it must be side-lined, taken out of the equation. It doesn’t matter how, just as long as the beast can keep on feeding and growing.
You are justified in being angry about this, but there is a saving grace. By misdirecting their efforts in this way, the eurocracy are making virtually sure that the crisis will hit full force. Give it a day (if that) and the markets will realize the complete and utter eurocrat integrationist toss these plans really are. Interests will go up again all over the eurozone, leading to renewed stresses and panic among eurocrats and bankers. And more of it too. Chances are we’ll see the first bank fall before the year is over. And when that happens, you will know: The crisis is now barrelling down on us at full speed.
And when it finally does, it will not be just a few who will realize their predicament is a direct result of the unwillingness and incompetence of eurocrats all over Europe to deal effectively, in a manner that protects and serves the citizens, with this crisis. The peoples of Europe will finally understand how alone and abandoned they really are.
And when at long last that realization sets in, there will once again be blood in the streets, history teaches us. Real blood, eurocrat blood.
1) Eurobonds... excuse me: Stability bonds
2) More EUnion control over nation states.
Item (2) goes all the way, up to and including EUnion veto power(!) over national budgets. Yes, the EUnion will be able to veto a budget drawn up by a hapless minister of Finance even before the equally hapless national parliament has had a chance to vote on it.
Here we have yet another instance where the EUnion takes democracy and throttles it. Parliament is an expression of the will of the people (whether actual MP’s honour that mandate is another discussion entirely). In a democracy it is parliament, as the expression of the vox populi, that principally and correctly has the last word. It is the defining character of a democracy.
If then we live in a system where parliament can be overruled, is overruled and will, according to plans, be further overruled by some other entity (in this case the EUnion) it follows we are not a democracy, the EUnion actively opposes and works to destroy democracy. For that alone the EUnion MUST DIE!
Right… Sorry…
The plans presented today by the EUnion do nothing to address the debt crisis in any urgent sense. For the implementation of eurobonds a change to the
No, what these useless swine are trying to do, once again, is to take a bad situation and abuse it for their own ends: Increased centralization of power into the hands of the EUnion. What it does not do, is address the current crisis. The Commissions plans do not even rate as ‘lame duck’. That thing you see floating is a dead duck. An ex-duck. A duck that has ceased to be.
The EUnion opting for its own egotistical, sociopathic agenda allows the crisis to rage on unresolved, bringing more and more EU member states to the brink, showing more and more EU member states the abyss the EUnion really is.
The EUnion has taken on a pathological dynamic of its own. Peace and prosperity are no longer the aim, even if these lofty ideals are paid lip-service at regular intervals. The EUnions main aim is itself. It has become a collection of useless swine and sows whose only raison d’etre is to serve the EUnion beast, feed it and grow it. Other considerations only factor in to the extent of their ability to promote or threaten the growth of the beast. That also explains the shocking ease with which democratic principles of just government are swept aside. Democracy, more particularly a growing part of the demos, has become a threat to the growth of the beast. Hence it must be side-lined, taken out of the equation. It doesn’t matter how, just as long as the beast can keep on feeding and growing.
You are justified in being angry about this, but there is a saving grace. By misdirecting their efforts in this way, the eurocracy are making virtually sure that the crisis will hit full force. Give it a day (if that) and the markets will realize the complete and utter eurocrat integrationist toss these plans really are. Interests will go up again all over the eurozone, leading to renewed stresses and panic among eurocrats and bankers. And more of it too. Chances are we’ll see the first bank fall before the year is over. And when that happens, you will know: The crisis is now barrelling down on us at full speed.
And when it finally does, it will not be just a few who will realize their predicament is a direct result of the unwillingness and incompetence of eurocrats all over Europe to deal effectively, in a manner that protects and serves the citizens, with this crisis. The peoples of Europe will finally understand how alone and abandoned they really are.
And when at long last that realization sets in, there will once again be blood in the streets, history teaches us. Real blood, eurocrat blood.
Climategate - The Sequel
The newly released emails seem to span the same time frame as the original release. Possibly they were part of the same Freedom Of Information request. There isn't anything shockingly new in them, but it puts a little more colour on the context of the original release. And it certainly provides more evidence of conduct unbecoming a scientist.
A few choice quotes can be read in the README accompanying this new release. The README is reproduced in it's entirety here and here. James Delingpole is having the time of his life with this.
For me, the juiciest bit is the email by a climatologist who reproduced McIntyre experiment and found hockey-stick curves even when he fed the analysis random sequences.
[4241] Wilson:The 'hockey team' actually knew that Michael Manns infamous curve was a fake. There is even the odd voice of dissent:
I thought I’d play around with some randomly generated time-series and see if I
could ‘reconstruct’ northern hemisphere temperatures.
[...] The reconstructions clearly show a ‘hockey-stick’ trend. I guess this is
precisely the phenomenon that Macintyre has been going on about.
[3373] Bradley:They knew, yet they chose not to come out and expose the fraud, this hideously expensive falsehood. And in so doing they have destroyed the credibility of climate science, and hurt the credibility of science in general. I hope that Nobel prize was worth it.
I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should
never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year
“reconstruction”.
But there's a bright side to all this. In a few weeks we will have the Durban conference on climate. The MSM in Holland and around Europe are gearing up to make as big a hoola-hoop of it as they can get away with (which isn't that big compared to, oh, two years ago). But indications are that Durban will be a bit of a non-starter to begin with. Hopefully this new release will make Durban the farce it ought to be.
Plus, as of today we get to laugh at anyone who still maintains we should do something about the changing climate, because 'we' caused it. That is good news, you'll all agree.
Via WUWT and EURef, who both have a thought or two of their own. Plus additional links.
And the Dutch MSM? They are studiously looking away.
[UPDATE001] Thanks to Dr. North for the kind linkage. MSM reaction in the low countries is still muted, with exactly two mentions of Climategate II, one Belgian and one Dutch. There is, however, also an official reaction from the Vereniging voor Weerkunde en Klimatologie (Association for Weather Study and Climatology). It does not disappoint in that it is relentlessly disappointing. Dismissing the published emails as 'a distraction from the real problems', the VWK goes on to state:
The facts are and continue to be: World temperature is rising, the amount of sea-ice is declining, land-ice on Greenland and Antarctica decreases, glaciers become smaller, the sea-level is rising. Not evenly from year on year, but in the long term. The climate is changing and humanity has an important contribution to it.How is that for denialist fervour? Points for tenacity. But I still LOL-ed. Who are they trying to kid anymore?
The Dutch blogosphere is not exactly lighting up either. But there are some useful contributions. Most notably by DDS' Hans Labohm and Climategate.nl (both NL).
But that's about it. We said it two years ago, we're still saying it now: Where the HELL is our media?
Wilders trial: On to the UN
Today it emerged (NL) that three of the co-plaintiffs in the previous iterations of the Wilders trial, under the tutelage of that eminently scholarly lawyer Ties Prakken, will file a complaint against the state of the Netherlands with the UN.
For the moment there is nothing to get too worked up about, as the whole procedure may take years and the outcome will not be binding, legally or otherwise. It'll cost a few dollars and euros, of course. Money that will not be coughed up by Rabbae, Prakken or any of the other plaintiffs participating in this sad farce. And it'll waste the time of all involved.
This is so tiresome...
[UPDATE001] EN reporting via DutchNews.nl here. The full text of the filing (in English) can be read here (pdf).
Three Dutch of Moroccan descent have filed a complaint against the state of the Netherlands with the Human Rights Commission of the United Nations (UN).The basis for the complaint was found by Prakken in art. 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Among the plaintiffs is ex-GreenLeft politician Mohamed Rabbae.
Their lawyer, Ties Prakken, told NRC Handelblad that the state had shown dereliction in its duty to protects its citizens against the 'hate-mongering' of PVV leader Geert Wilders.
Article 17I guess Prakken is pointing to the bit about 'attacks on his honour and reputation', a vague bit legislative language that could mean just about anything. Which is all the proof you need that legislating positive rights by these numpties leads to insanity and injustice and is generally a very bad idea. A bad idea, coincidentally, that is almost always proposed by persons of an ideological bent not conducive to individual freedoms or natural rights. Something to keep in mind.
1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
For the moment there is nothing to get too worked up about, as the whole procedure may take years and the outcome will not be binding, legally or otherwise. It'll cost a few dollars and euros, of course. Money that will not be coughed up by Rabbae, Prakken or any of the other plaintiffs participating in this sad farce. And it'll waste the time of all involved.
This is so tiresome...
[UPDATE001] EN reporting via DutchNews.nl here. The full text of the filing (in English) can be read here (pdf).
Quote of the Day
On the on-going soap-opera that is EUnion crisis politics:
Reader Chris Loughrey in the comments of the Slog
I’m very tired of the pre-show “entertainment”. Can we just get to the lynch mobs hanging politicians in every capital city in the
western world?
Reader Chris Loughrey in the comments of the Slog
The noisy assassin
For your entertainment and enlightenment: Nigel Farage letting it rip in the EP plenary session this morning. To van Rompuy:
I said you'd be the quiet assassin of nation-state democracy. But you're not anymore. You're rather noisy about it, aren't you?Whatever his faults, Mr Farage does speak eloquently what so many of us think and feel.
Should we? Or should we not?
In Britain the patience with the political class is running dangerously low. So low, in fact, that he Albion Alliance has started an initiative to inventory the enemy within the gates.
Truth be told, I have toyed with an idea along similar lines. I would love the idea of bringing to account those in Dutch recent political history that were complicit in selling out our country, subverting the consent of the people in the process. On occasion, I like to day-dream about a parliamentary inquiry, followed by indictments and judicial trials. And if the odd trial ends with an execution at dawn, I will not shed a tear. The betrayal of all that we once were is just too great.
This is not an easy task. There are many, MANY of them. On all levels of government. For a lonely part-time blog such as KV the task is a daunting one. However, exposing them may serve a purpose in educating the people whom to trust, or not.
As WfW notes: The thing that they fear most is publicity, to have the bright light of public exposure shone upon their actions. It is time to expose this evil at every level. At the supranational, national, regional and local levels for all to see and act against. So shun them, exclude them from your community, eject them from your pub or club, turn your back on them, give them no space and keep shining the light on them, and let everyone know who the traitors are.
So I am throwing the question out there: Should we, or shouldn't we start a process of documentation? If so, how? In what form? And if you, dear reader, think we should, would you be willing to help out?
As the EU enters its final death throes and resorts to intimidation, deception, alarmist and anti democratic power grabs, including the installation of non elected prime ministers, and as the Government of the United Kingdom continually deny the people their voice regarding the EU, those responsible for the demise of the United Kingdom as a free and sovereign state are to be named and shamed.Witterings from Witney asked us if this isn't something to try in our damp corner of the world.
A new database of United Kingdom collaborators with the EU is to be established, to collect information on those individuals, groups and corporations that have aided and abetted the demise of the UK, who have worked on establishing a supranational State over and above our own sovereign United Kingdom, who have conspired to impose authoritarianism upon the people of the United Kingdom and who have conspired to give away the sovereignty of the people which is on loan to our parliament.
We will also be seeking their prosecution and accountability under the laws of THIS land, following due process of law.
Truth be told, I have toyed with an idea along similar lines. I would love the idea of bringing to account those in Dutch recent political history that were complicit in selling out our country, subverting the consent of the people in the process. On occasion, I like to day-dream about a parliamentary inquiry, followed by indictments and judicial trials. And if the odd trial ends with an execution at dawn, I will not shed a tear. The betrayal of all that we once were is just too great.
This is not an easy task. There are many, MANY of them. On all levels of government. For a lonely part-time blog such as KV the task is a daunting one. However, exposing them may serve a purpose in educating the people whom to trust, or not.
As WfW notes: The thing that they fear most is publicity, to have the bright light of public exposure shone upon their actions. It is time to expose this evil at every level. At the supranational, national, regional and local levels for all to see and act against. So shun them, exclude them from your community, eject them from your pub or club, turn your back on them, give them no space and keep shining the light on them, and let everyone know who the traitors are.
So I am throwing the question out there: Should we, or shouldn't we start a process of documentation? If so, how? In what form? And if you, dear reader, think we should, would you be willing to help out?
Guilders for euros
Quite suddenly this weekend saw an intense and unusually grown-up debate about the return of the Dutch guilder. The spark that lit this debate came from Geert Wilders when he announced a new project: PVV investigates return of guilder, may call for referendum
Wilders seemed to link the extra budget cuts to the extra deficit taken on by the Dutch in the various bail-out schemes (NL).
Any expectations that an outcome not in favour of the euro will be seriously considered by this government were dashed immediately by Finance minister Jan Kees de Jager, when he stated (NL):
And neither is our intrepid PM, Mark Rutte. In a speech to the German FDP (the party that is causing Frau Merkel grief over her ambitions to have Germany pay for the euro-zone periphery) Mark Rutte re-asserted his europhile credentials by saying that the extension of the EFSF (and that infernal ESM) are needed to 'restore confidence in the euro' (NL)
On Saturday conservative stalwart of the VVD Patrick van Schie, also director of the party's policy think-tank stated in De Volkskrant (NL) he was growing increasingly tired of the 'propaganda talk' about the wealth that euro is supposed to have brought. From this report in EN:
Economist Arjo Klamer is even more outspoken: The euro has become a religion (NL)
I don't expect the outcome of the investigation proposed by the PVV will be definitive. I am convinced that on the current trajectory a return to the guilder will prove to be the cheaper solution. But the long term involves some serious forecasting of events, which is fraught with all sorts of errors and biases. And especially in a highly volatile situation as we are experiencing now, the unforeseen, the 'unknown unknowns' are as many as they are unpredictable.
One opponent of a return to the guilder ridiculed it by predicting mass riots if the guilder was introduced with its historic exchange rate (fl 2,20 to the euro) because the population would then realize the extent to which they've been shafted by... just about everybody, leading to mass revolt and general mayhem. That, of course is a nonsensical argument. There is, to my knowledge, no reason why a 'new Dutch guilder' could not be introduced at parity with the euro, initially (1 euro = fl 1,-). This would greatly simplify the operation.
Nevertheless, squabbling over the initial exchange rate is squabbling over the colour of paint for the bicycle shed. First we have to decide a shed is necessary. And we have to drum up the will and pressure our 'leaders' the shed in is desperate necessity.
Equally nonsensical is the question, posed by D66-leader Alexander Pechtold, why we should not consider a return to the Dutch ducat, used between 1586 and 1808, before the French, under Napoleon, put a forcible stop to it. Call it a ducat, call it the guilder, call it the flimflam-dollar and have an exchange rate of 1,000.- flmflm$ to the euro.
Whatever form, name or exchange rate is not the point. These are side issue. The big point is a return to an own currency, one we Dutch manage ourselves. One that suits our economy, while not mortally wounding economies of countries where they're used to do business in a different way from ours.
Respect diversity! Isn't that a euro mantra? Yet the EUnion now seems bent to subjugating the economies of all 27 member states to the same Teutonic regime. Whether it fits (which it would in our case) or not (Greece and Italy, clearly. Spain and France as well).
The main issue about this crisis is that us being locked into the same currency as Greece and Italy does both sides a huge disservice. It renders 'Club Med' woefully uncompetitive, while demanding of us (and the Germans, and Fins, the British and whoever else has a SOLID AAA-rating) to hand over ever more of our hard-earned cash to relieve the banks that got into problems over the financial debauchery perpetrated by the less responsible elements in the euro-zone.
Taking the euro to the vet for its final shot and going our separate currencies will in one fell swoop repatriate the powers to set monetary policy according to the needs of each nations economy. European states will once again be able to really compete. This is not a drawback, this is a benefit. The great successes of Europe in history were because of, not despite, competition between nations.
Moreover, it will consign to irrelevancy the EUnion, the Groupe de Francfort and all those other scum-bags seeking to rule over us without a popular mandate. And it will moot the dreaded ESM. It will be a victory of freedom over tyranny. What is not to like about that?
The anti-Islam PVV is paying a 'renowned international bureau' to investigate whether bringing back the guilder would benefit the Dutch economy.This announcement came in the wake of the news that the government is looking for extra budget cuts to the tune of up to 4 billion euros, in complete opposition to the promise made by the 'Danish' cabinet, made after budget week last September, that the current batch of budget cuts, totalling 18 billion euros, would be all. Another promise broken, indeed.
If the report is positive, the party will press for a referendum on leaving the euro, party leader Geert Wilders says in Friday's Telegraaf.
'The cabinet is frightening us by telling us the lights will go out if we leave the euro. Of course it will cost money, but I want to know if going back to the guilder will deliver more in the long term,' Wilders told the paper.
Wilders seemed to link the extra budget cuts to the extra deficit taken on by the Dutch in the various bail-out schemes (NL).
The euro is a failed project costing wagon loads of money. It started with a 2 billion loan and now we're already giving guarantees for 100 billion.According to a poll by De Telegraaf, 43% of the Dutch want out of the euro, with 22% even willing to accept a reduction in income to make it happen. In a poll on the Algemeen Dagblad (NL) as many as 54% of readers wants a return to real money.
Any expectations that an outcome not in favour of the euro will be seriously considered by this government were dashed immediately by Finance minister Jan Kees de Jager, when he stated (NL):
Back to the guilders we shouldn't do. That is not an option.One would think that a minister in times of crisis, deep crisis even, would want to keep all his options open. But of course that assumes a minister with the well-being of the people he serves at heart. Minister de Jager, clearly, is not that man.
And neither is our intrepid PM, Mark Rutte. In a speech to the German FDP (the party that is causing Frau Merkel grief over her ambitions to have Germany pay for the euro-zone periphery) Mark Rutte re-asserted his europhile credentials by saying that the extension of the EFSF (and that infernal ESM) are needed to 'restore confidence in the euro' (NL)
If we allow the whole thing to crash, the consequences for the euro and political cooperation in Europe are unfathomable.However, not everyone agrees with our intrepid PM, not even within his own party, the VVD.
On Saturday conservative stalwart of the VVD Patrick van Schie, also director of the party's policy think-tank stated in De Volkskrant (NL) he was growing increasingly tired of the 'propaganda talk' about the wealth that euro is supposed to have brought. From this report in EN:
The Netherlands should begin a serious discussion about introducing the 'neuro', a single currency for the northern European countries, Patrick van Schie, director of the VVD's policy think-tank, says in Saturday's AD.De Volkskrant cites van Schie as saying that any wealth brought by the euro has never been conclusively shown and is in fact impossible to prove. He further states his fear that the Netherlands will suffer 'a heavy blow' if the eurocrisis continues as it does.
Van Schie told the paper he has difficulty with the 'propaganda' about the euro, such as the statement that the euro has brought the Netherlands prosperity. This is a fact which has never been proved, Van Schie is quoted as saying.
Instead, the Netherlands could think about an alternative currency zone which would not include weaker euro countries such as Italy and Greece. France may also be ineligible to join a northern currency bloc, he said.
Economist Arjo Klamer is even more outspoken: The euro has become a religion (NL)
"Everyone is always talking about the trade benefits the euro has brought within the European Union", Klamer sighs: "But what has it benefited us that our exports to Greece have increased, when that country cannot pay its bills? The euro has become a religion. And the price we must pay gets steeper all the time."What interesting times we live in. What was considered anathema as short as three months ago is now all of a sudden openly, and rather cogently, discussed. As the rather recent cliché goes: Under pressure everything becomes fluid.
A return to the guilder is the best solution according to Klamer: "The sooner the better. Our incomes have decreased, our houses less valuable, stocks have dropped and of our pensions nothing will remain. Those problems are not exclusively, but nevertheless in part, caused by the euro."
"A return to the euro will be painful, but we'll survive. The Netherlands has a strong economy, the guilders is a strong currency. The euro will disappears, that's a given, the only question is when. It is better to end it now, than it is to muddle on."
I don't expect the outcome of the investigation proposed by the PVV will be definitive. I am convinced that on the current trajectory a return to the guilder will prove to be the cheaper solution. But the long term involves some serious forecasting of events, which is fraught with all sorts of errors and biases. And especially in a highly volatile situation as we are experiencing now, the unforeseen, the 'unknown unknowns' are as many as they are unpredictable.
One opponent of a return to the guilder ridiculed it by predicting mass riots if the guilder was introduced with its historic exchange rate (fl 2,20 to the euro) because the population would then realize the extent to which they've been shafted by... just about everybody, leading to mass revolt and general mayhem. That, of course is a nonsensical argument. There is, to my knowledge, no reason why a 'new Dutch guilder' could not be introduced at parity with the euro, initially (1 euro = fl 1,-). This would greatly simplify the operation.
Nevertheless, squabbling over the initial exchange rate is squabbling over the colour of paint for the bicycle shed. First we have to decide a shed is necessary. And we have to drum up the will and pressure our 'leaders' the shed in is desperate necessity.
Equally nonsensical is the question, posed by D66-leader Alexander Pechtold, why we should not consider a return to the Dutch ducat, used between 1586 and 1808, before the French, under Napoleon, put a forcible stop to it. Call it a ducat, call it the guilder, call it the flimflam-dollar and have an exchange rate of 1,000.- flmflm$ to the euro.
Whatever form, name or exchange rate is not the point. These are side issue. The big point is a return to an own currency, one we Dutch manage ourselves. One that suits our economy, while not mortally wounding economies of countries where they're used to do business in a different way from ours.
Respect diversity! Isn't that a euro mantra? Yet the EUnion now seems bent to subjugating the economies of all 27 member states to the same Teutonic regime. Whether it fits (which it would in our case) or not (Greece and Italy, clearly. Spain and France as well).
The main issue about this crisis is that us being locked into the same currency as Greece and Italy does both sides a huge disservice. It renders 'Club Med' woefully uncompetitive, while demanding of us (and the Germans, and Fins, the British and whoever else has a SOLID AAA-rating) to hand over ever more of our hard-earned cash to relieve the banks that got into problems over the financial debauchery perpetrated by the less responsible elements in the euro-zone.
Taking the euro to the vet for its final shot and going our separate currencies will in one fell swoop repatriate the powers to set monetary policy according to the needs of each nations economy. European states will once again be able to really compete. This is not a drawback, this is a benefit. The great successes of Europe in history were because of, not despite, competition between nations.
Moreover, it will consign to irrelevancy the EUnion, the Groupe de Francfort and all those other scum-bags seeking to rule over us without a popular mandate. And it will moot the dreaded ESM. It will be a victory of freedom over tyranny. What is not to like about that?
Democracy never was part of the EUnion
Christopher Booker, in his column in the Sunday Telegraph exposes the fatuousness ingorance of all those who are now, only now, starting to wonder about the extent to which the EUnion is a democratic institution.
The short version: It was never intended to be a democracy.
What European leaders (intentionally?) failed to notice then, and now, is that Monnets concept was modelled on exactly that failed institution: a commission, a council of ministers, a parliament and a court. Since the 50's, in gradual steps, this technocratic beast was nursed to its adult form, as we see it today.
The EUnion does not do democracy. Just remember how the results of the French, Dutch and Irish referenda were swept under the carpet by the élites. These last few days we saw the EUnion, in the form of that self-appointed arrogance, the Groupe de Francfort, bring down two elected heads of government in Greece and Italy.
And not only that. Having got rid of these two, they managed to install two leaders from their own circle: Papademos in Greece and Monti (it looks like) in Italy. Both of then have strong ties to the EUnion, the ECB and (the conspirasists are going to have a field day with this) Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission.
In other words: They are EUnion stooges, gophers for van Rompuy c.s. The EUnion managed in one week to install puppet regimes in two former democracies. And they did so without any, ANY, consultation of the populace.
When the leader of Italy's Lega Nord objected to an appointed PM, saying that was was needed were general elections, van Rompuy declared:
The short version: It was never intended to be a democracy.
The idea first conceived back in the 1920s by two senior officials of the League of Nations – Jean Monnet and Arthur Salter, a British civil servant – was a United States of Europe, ruled by a government of unelected technocrats like themselves. Two things were anathema to them: nation states with the power of veto (which they had seen destroy the League of Nations) and any need to consult the wishes of the people in elections.Monnet, unable to learn lessons from the miserable failure that was the League of Nations, pitched his pet project amidst the ruins of World War II to a Europe that was exhausted and weary.
What European leaders (intentionally?) failed to notice then, and now, is that Monnets concept was modelled on exactly that failed institution: a commission, a council of ministers, a parliament and a court. Since the 50's, in gradual steps, this technocratic beast was nursed to its adult form, as we see it today.
The EUnion does not do democracy. Just remember how the results of the French, Dutch and Irish referenda were swept under the carpet by the élites. These last few days we saw the EUnion, in the form of that self-appointed arrogance, the Groupe de Francfort, bring down two elected heads of government in Greece and Italy.
And not only that. Having got rid of these two, they managed to install two leaders from their own circle: Papademos in Greece and Monti (it looks like) in Italy. Both of then have strong ties to the EUnion, the ECB and (the conspirasists are going to have a field day with this) Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission.
In other words: They are EUnion stooges, gophers for van Rompuy c.s. The EUnion managed in one week to install puppet regimes in two former democracies. And they did so without any, ANY, consultation of the populace.
When the leader of Italy's Lega Nord objected to an appointed PM, saying that was was needed were general elections, van Rompuy declared:
“This country [Italy] needs reforms, not elections”Earlier, GdF big potato Merkel indicated she is opposed to 'let the people vote' on the permanent European Stability Mechanism. Not even the German people she supposedly represents. Draw your own conclusions.
Best come back ever
A follow-up to this story. Charlie Hebdo strikes back!
That is how one does it. Don't fear, just mock.
Love is much stronger than hate
That is how one does it. Don't fear, just mock.
Brazen
The Italian crisis is looming large in the news today. For all the panic it seems to be spreading in 'the market', you would think that our EUrocrats would be a little... defensive about the way they've let contagion spread to this point.
But you'd be wrong.
From various sources we learn that our top EUrocrats, distinguished members of the Group de Francfort are using a tone of voice that indicates renewed confidence. From Reuters we learn that Ms. Merkel thinks "It is time for a breakthrough to a new Europe"
Related reading:
The emergence of the Frankfurt Group has turned back the democratic clock
But you'd be wrong.
From various sources we learn that our top EUrocrats, distinguished members of the Group de Francfort are using a tone of voice that indicates renewed confidence. From Reuters we learn that Ms. Merkel thinks "It is time for a breakthrough to a new Europe"
Merkel said Europe's plight was now so "unpleasant" that deep structural reforms were needed quickly, warning the rest of the world would not wait. "That will mean more Europe, not less Europe," she told a conference in Berlin.From the same source we have Christine Lagarde telling us
She called for changes in EU treaties after French President Nicolas Sarkozy advocated a two-speed Europe in which euro zone countries accelerate and deepen integration while an expanding group outside the currency bloc stays more loosely connected -- a signal that some members may have to quit the euro.
"It is time for a breakthrough to a new Europe," Merkel said. "A community that says, regardless of what happens in the rest of the world, that it can never again change its ground rules, that community simply can't survive."
"If we do not act boldly and if we do not act together, the economy around the world runs the risk of downward spiral of uncertainty, financial instability and potential collapse of global demand."And via the BBC we have El Presidente proclaiming that the Euro is the norm.
If the eurozone nations are to become a much more tightly aligned fiscal and political unit - and that is what most economists think has to happen for the Euro to survive - then what happens to those on the outside, like the UK?A thought occurs: Is the whole of the EUrocracy really so dedicated to their project they would hold the economy of the entire world hostage to their misbegotten ideal? Are they really willing to risk plunging the whole world into a depression, just to get their way? Are they really this brazen?
In principle, all member states of the EU should be members of the euro
Related reading:
The emergence of the Frankfurt Group has turned back the democratic clock
Chosing another prince
On matters EUnion it's very hard to come up with a decent post these days. One reason is the fluidity of it all. Another reason is the sheer tempo in which various political leaders are falling over each other in an apparent contest to see who can make the biggest ass of him- or herself. The squabbling, the will-he/won't-he leave in Italy and Greece is fast becoming very tedious indeed. The bog plans, both from the EUnion and the those solemn promises from the G20 all appear to be dead even before anyone has answered the question: Yes, but how are we going to implement this? It all smells a bit like incompetent people, running around like headless chickens, waiting for the inevitable hammer to fall. It sort of feels like we're approaching the end of the end.
But then I read a couple of posts that hint at the bigger picture, the drama (for that is what it is) behind the drama play-acted for our delectation. It may just be that waiting in the wings is the monster we've been dreading all along. The monster which we hope will die, as we hope the euro will.
The first is Ian Parker-Joseph: The Politburo shows its face. In it he cites a Telegraph comment, mentioning in passing that various EUrocrats sporting a curious new pin on their lapels:
This development is all the more troubling because of the name they have chosen: The Frankfurter Group. That jives a little too comfortable with Die Frankfurter Schule, doesn't it? Parker-Joseph is understandably upset:
And if you should think Parker-Joseph is exaggerating, I refer you to Mary-Ellen Synon, who noticed a sinister pattern in choice of incumbents in both Italy and Greece: It stinks: EU to install puppet governments in Athens and Rome
And before you (my fellow compatriots) say 'Yes, Merkozy and van Rompuy and Barrosso are very nasty people. We won't have anything to do with them', remember this: It is not just them. Mark Rutte, Jan-Kees de Jager, Nout Wellink, our entire political and social leadership is consciously leading our small, damp corner of the world down this path. There is not a single credible political or philosophical school of thought that is serious about taking NL out of the EUnion. Not even the PVV. (of late). It is the very same people we vote for that are leading us down this treacherous path.
I whole-heartedly agree with Parker-Joseph, this is evil. And it must be stopped. But I sometimes despair at the disinterested shrugs with which this sort of news it received. For all the 'festering rage' against matters EU, there seems to be no desire whatsoever among the Dutch to stand up and say: "NO. Here's where it ends!". Maybe because the threatening shadow looming over us is of something so great and evil that it is unthinkable it ever could be real.
But just in case, shouldn't we make clear what we find beyond the pale, what we will not stand for? Shouldn't we start thinking about setting up our defences? Shouldn't we start thinking about what it means to be free, and what it is worth to us? It is evident that we have nothing to expect from those that presume to lead us. So it will have to be up to us to withdraw consent, to register our grievances and to "legally proceed to the choice of another prince for [our] defense". Isn't that exactly what we should do?
(h/t WfW)
[UPDATE001] And to hammer the point home: Mrs. Synons latest: Butchery of the little people in pursuit of ideology.
But then I read a couple of posts that hint at the bigger picture, the drama (for that is what it is) behind the drama play-acted for our delectation. It may just be that waiting in the wings is the monster we've been dreading all along. The monster which we hope will die, as we hope the euro will.
The first is Ian Parker-Joseph: The Politburo shows its face. In it he cites a Telegraph comment, mentioning in passing that various EUrocrats sporting a curious new pin on their lapels:
At the G20 summit in Cannes at the weekend, a small number of delegates could be seen sporting lapel badges announcing their membership of the Groupe de Francfort (GdF). This has become the informal leadership body of the eurozone, the A-team set up to deal with the crisis – or rather to continue dithering over what to do about it. Members of the GdF include Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, and Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president. The group also comprises the chiefs of the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the EU Council. It has been called Europe’s Politburo – and the nickname is particularly apposite. For if the European Union has exhibited one defining characteristic over its lifetime, it has been a profound dislike of democratic decision-making.As the Telegraph observes, the GdF is something that would have been familiar in the old Soviet Union – a self-appointed body of powerful individuals prepared to topple national governments if they fail to toe the line. It wan't so much the happy couple Merkozy, but the entity calling itself the GdF, who were issuing ultimatums to Greece and Italy, leading to the fall of governments in both countries.
This development is all the more troubling because of the name they have chosen: The Frankfurter Group. That jives a little too comfortable with Die Frankfurter Schule, doesn't it? Parker-Joseph is understandably upset:
With such leaps in the openness of undemocratic takeover it cannot be long before the tyranny begins. The use of the plethora of draconian laws pre-prepared by Blair & Brown, the rounding up of dissenters, camps for re-education, disposal of the patriots.
This is an evil that must be stopped now, before this continent finds itself in the grip of war yet again. It is an evil that already infests our shores, our political body, our institutions and the plethora of ‘agencies’ and fake charities.
And if you should think Parker-Joseph is exaggerating, I refer you to Mary-Ellen Synon, who noticed a sinister pattern in choice of incumbents in both Italy and Greece: It stinks: EU to install puppet governments in Athens and Rome
As feared, the EU and its collaborators have pulled off a coup in Athens. Now what can only be called the occupying powers are preparing to install their own man as the new Greek prime minister.All of a sudden it doesn't look like the end of the EUnion after all. It isn't the end of the end. It is starting to look frighteningly like the end of the beginning. The beginning of a dark era in our benighted continent. The beast we thought slain in the late eighties/early nineties of the previous century is being nursed back to health by people who abuse their democratic mandate to end democracy and the rule of the people.
You doubt it? Just look at the two names that have 'emerged' to lead the new government: Lucas Papademos, who was until last year the vice-president of the European Central Bank, and Stavros Dimas, a former European Commissioner.
Over in Rome, where the EU is manoeuvring to bring down Berlusconi, the name 'emerging' to be the next prime minister is Mario Monti. Monti is not only a former European Commissioner, but he is also the author of a report commissioned by José Manuel Barroso on the future of the single market --which was a report meant to plan ways the powers of Brussels could be further extended into every part of the member states economic and fiscal lives, including taking control of corporation tax rates.
More, Monti is a member of the Spinelli set, a euro-fanatic group set up by members of the European Parliament and Brussels heavies such as Jacques Delors to press the construction of a final, centralised government in a country called Europe.
And before you (my fellow compatriots) say 'Yes, Merkozy and van Rompuy and Barrosso are very nasty people. We won't have anything to do with them', remember this: It is not just them. Mark Rutte, Jan-Kees de Jager, Nout Wellink, our entire political and social leadership is consciously leading our small, damp corner of the world down this path. There is not a single credible political or philosophical school of thought that is serious about taking NL out of the EUnion. Not even the PVV. (of late). It is the very same people we vote for that are leading us down this treacherous path.
I whole-heartedly agree with Parker-Joseph, this is evil. And it must be stopped. But I sometimes despair at the disinterested shrugs with which this sort of news it received. For all the 'festering rage' against matters EU, there seems to be no desire whatsoever among the Dutch to stand up and say: "NO. Here's where it ends!". Maybe because the threatening shadow looming over us is of something so great and evil that it is unthinkable it ever could be real.
But just in case, shouldn't we make clear what we find beyond the pale, what we will not stand for? Shouldn't we start thinking about setting up our defences? Shouldn't we start thinking about what it means to be free, and what it is worth to us? It is evident that we have nothing to expect from those that presume to lead us. So it will have to be up to us to withdraw consent, to register our grievances and to "legally proceed to the choice of another prince for [our] defense". Isn't that exactly what we should do?
(h/t WfW)
[UPDATE001] And to hammer the point home: Mrs. Synons latest: Butchery of the little people in pursuit of ideology.
Now hear this
From EURef:
What a delight it is to listen to actual grown-ups, rather then the puerile class of politicians we're stuck with, discussing the weighty matters of our times.
Via Witterings from Witney, we have Radio Free Delingpole, starring the Booker North duo or, as Dellers says, "two of the greatest living experts" on the European Union.Richard North, Christopher Booker and James Delingpole discussing that vilest of four-letter words: Euro.
It was recorded earlier this week for a US audience, but the podcast is available on the link above.
What a delight it is to listen to actual grown-ups, rather then the puerile class of politicians we're stuck with, discussing the weighty matters of our times.
Applauding wildly - updated
Crisis all over again.
Daniel Hannan: I wish I could convey the sheer writhing horror that George Papanderou's referendum proposal has provoked in Brussels. The Slog has a whiff of e German conspiracy. Autonomous Mind thinks: This could be the start of a turning point in European history. EURef has more links and updates.
An me? I am echoing the sentiment expressed by Der Spiegel (p. above): I am wildly applauding the Greeks for their audacity.
[UPDATE001] The Slog has dug a little into the Greek referendum issue and turned up some interesting details: Revealed – How Papandreou Planned It Well In Advance.
Three weeks ago, I was picking up strong hints from well-placed Paris sources about rogue French diplomatic lines having been laid with Athens. But that move, if it was real, has seriously backfired in some way or another; perhaps the Greeks saw through the French self-interest. Their country is, after all, being sacrificed to the eurobanks’ survival. (...) It’s possible that, last summer, the Greek Prime Minister decided he had eaten enough sh*t for one lifetime, and made a principled decision to stuff the banking community.
[UPDATE002] The day democracy died in Europe... Some headlines from Underdog News:
Greece – The collapse of Democracy
Another triumph for the political elite
The EU's democracy deficit widens
A Greek tragedy?
In support
100 lashes of the whip if you don't die with laughter
This is a post in support of Charlie Hebdo, whose offices fell victim to the Religion of Perpetual Outrage today. In an awkward twist of fate this happened on the exact day, when seven years ago the ROPO struck at Vincent van Gogh. Not much has changed in seven years, it seems.
[UPDATE001] Of course, other people think totally different about this issue. Head on over to Brussels Journal to read how Time Magazine's Paris Bureau Chief Bruce Crumley exposes himself, and his employers magazine, as full-blown, late-stage and terminal dhimmi's.
The wrong answer to an irrelevant question
Even (or should I say: Especially) our cousins across the Big Pond are realizing that in member states of the EUnion democracy, in the sense of rule by popular consent, is dead. To wit:
American Thinker: Back in EUSSR
Vox Day: R.I.P. European democracy, 1945-2011
Read it all.
It isn't that surprising, because from its inception the EUnion was the wrong answer, following from hopelessly outmoded thinking, to a question ceased to be relevant long ago.
So, we are finally arriving at the full realization of what the EUnion is. The question is now: What are we going to do about it? What are we going to do?
American Thinker: Back in EUSSR
Vox Day: R.I.P. European democracy, 1945-2011
Read it all.
It isn't that surprising, because from its inception the EUnion was the wrong answer, following from hopelessly outmoded thinking, to a question ceased to be relevant long ago.
The birth of what is now the EU is put in the immediate aftermath of the Second World War but, as we know, the intellectual genesis – at the hands of Jean Monnet and Arthur Salter – was established in the 1920s, in the aftermath of the First World War.It being the wrong solution to a mooted question, the EUnion has become itself a threat to peace on our benighted continent. But its adherents do not, cannot recognize this truth. And thus they reach for ever more extreme measures to circumvent the will of an increasingly disenchanted population.
As a construct intended to prevent a European War, it was therefore, intended to prevent the Second World War. It failed the moment Hitler came to power yet, despite that failure, in the post-Hitlerian wreckage of Europe, Monnet dusted off the same plans and applied them to preventing a war that was never going to happen.
So, we are finally arriving at the full realization of what the EUnion is. The question is now: What are we going to do about it? What are we going to do?
Abonneren op:
Berichten (Atom)
LinkWithin
