The Afghans are able to obtain the documents from a Kabul judge across from the main police station. According to a statement from a worker there, any document wished can be delivered with whatever text desired.

This is a case primarily of Afghans who have come into some money and can therefore now afford a fake passport or falsified papers.

The more expensive version of the trip to a European land is the direct route, with the value rate connected with detours mostly over Greece. Others leave their country by way of Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia, then on to Australia.

In the first half of 2011, the refugee organization UNHCR made inquiries about 15,300 Afghan refugees in Western industrial countries. That was 2,500 more than in the same period in 2010.

Afghans are the largest group of asylum seekers in the world. In the first six months of the previous year, 855 Afghans sought asylum in the Netherlands alone.

(Source: Almere Vandaag on 1/20/2012 / Translation: Günther W.)

Posted by PI / Translation: Anders Denken

1. There is the legal protection of 100,000 euros per customer and institution. That will remain the same and has nothing to do with the numbers mentioned above.

2. Beyond that, every bank establishment of stature belongs to the deposit insurance fund. And the above-mentioned numbers affect this very thing. The percentage numbers are connected with your bank’s applicable liable net worth. Even when the bank of your choice would have only 10 million in net worth, your account in the year 2025 would still be insured with 875,000 euros.

The issue, however is not that, but the question of why the massive reduction of all times right now when it is valid only years from now? That is simply most suspicious! Normally you should only believe on either point 1 or point 2. The Federal Republic of Germany and are both known to be bankrupt; Merkel can stand and trumpet long in front of the press that the savings are secure. How is it then that they also don’t call one penny their own? The same thing affects the banks in number 2. The deposit insurance funds is totally empty since the Lehman bankruptcy a couple of years ago. Should a bank happen to go bankrupt, nobody will be able to withdraw anything there.

The EUSSR is currently printing and producing money from nothing. The auctions of the national debts through bonds function magnificently from Lisbon to Frankfurt because the European Central Bank is purchasing these national debts with nothing in case nobody else wants them. It appeared in the newspaper afterwards that the auction went off positively. It might also be the case with your account.

If your bank should become insolvent in the near future, Merkel will fetch a paper from her nonentity on which 100,000 euros is printed and give it to you. That way she has kept her promise, and you have 100,000 euros as long as somebody will sell something for this paper, i.e. a Maserati or a Fiat Panda or two Lego blocks. And in case there’s no more, you also have no more! This is the only newspaper report to date regarding the subject! The photo shows the bank run on an affiliate of the British Northern Rock in 2007.

Here is a long article by Otmar Issing regarding fiscal union!

Posted by kewil on PI / Translation: Anders Denken

In the Netherlands, the resolute immigration policy of Geert Wilders is becoming more and more noticeable. So that it can strongly counteract the overflowing crime and illegal immigration, the government is now installing monitoring systems at the border crossings that beginning January will record all incoming automobiles and scrutinize them by computer. The EU apparently sees their plans for islamization and mass-immigration endangered and has already stated their opposition.

Der Spiegel reports:

The Netherlands is currently installing monitoring systems at 15 border crossings according to a report in the “Financial Times Germany” (“FTD”) which are to aid in the routine recording of all entering automobiles beginning January 2012. The data of every car are to be compared by computer – should the system report an alarm, the police will swing into action and intercept the driver, the newspaper writes in its online edition. According to “FTD,” the Dutch Ministry for Immigration confirmed a corresponding report from the Dutch newspaper “NRC Handelsblad.”

The Dutch government intends with the new monitoring, according to its own reports, to wage a better battle against human trade and illegal immigration.

The Justice Minister intends to introduce a law this winter that will allow the state to save the images and data for four weeks. License plates are already photographed on domestic freeways and automobile owners checked for outstanding tickets, for example.

EU Commission Requesting Accurate Information

Back in September, the Dutch national and border police stated that cameras had been stationed at the border of Lower Saxony in the northeast part of the country. The project was prepared back in 2005, it was said. The public was to be informed only after the conclusion of the pilot phase.

There is the threat in the EU of controversy over the Dutch venture: According to “FTD,” the EU commission has requested more accurate information from The Hague. The desire is to examine the circumstances of the case for conformity with Schengen, a speaker for the commission said accordingly.

In the end, other EU countries have also temporarily monitored their borders one again – France kept watch on its border with Italy in the early part of the year after the storm of immigrants on Lampedusa, in Denmark there were once again permanent border controls for a short time. The new social democrat government, however, has again nullified the resolution.

The border controls prevent neither traffic nor the free trade zone. They filter out the criminals and illegals. Every state has the duty of protecting its citizens. And finally, this is now being put into practice under Geert Wilders in the Netherlands.

Posted by PI / Translated by Anders Denken

After the socialists around José Zapatero managed to push Spain to the edge of the abyss, his disastrous policies were met with stern, tough punishment. In the current elections, the conservative Peoples’ Party of Mariano Rajoy (photo) gained the absolute majority.

Die WELT reports:

The conservatives stand before a landslide victory in the early parliamentary elections in Spain. According to a forecast by the state televion network TVE, the conservative Peoples’ Party (PP) of Mariano Rajoy was anticipated to win around 183 of the 350 total seats in parliament. By doing so, the opposition leader up until now, Rajoy, could become the new prime minister and support himself with an absolute majority.

The socialists (PSOE) that governed the country for more than seven years suffered a debacle. According to the forecast on the basis of voter surveys, they received only around 117 seats. This would be the worst result for the PSOE since the reinstitution of democracy after the end of the Franco dictatorship (1939-1975).

The outcome of the election was significantly determined by the economic and financial crisis. Spain has the highest unemployment rate in the EU. The debt crisis brought the country to the edge of an economic abyss in the days before the election.

The socialist prime minister until now, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero had to accept criticism for not reacting properly to the crisis. The head of the government forewent a candidacy for a third term. The PSOE put the previous interior minister Alfredo Pérez-Rubalcaba in the race in his place.

Now it remains to be seen whether the new government really stops the socialist course. Or whether the Spanish conservatives will not make a shift to the left similar to the German CDU so that they can obediently submit to the EU.

Posted by PI / Translated by Anders Denken

At this point, German newspapers have reported nothing about this, and only a precious few from Switzerland and Austria:

Most of the illegal immigrants came by way of sea to Italy and Malta. This can be traced back to the revolutions in Tunisia and Libya. In addition, a good third of the illegal immigrants tried to come over the Turkish-Greek border into the EU, it said.

Frontex accused Greece of providing too few reception camps and not enough return agreements with the countries of origin. According to the organization, the way into the EU over a first stop in Turkey is especially appealing, since the country doesn’t require a visa of many foreign citizens.

Since Frontex doesn’t know the number of unrecorded cases, and the Muhammadan Spring in North Africa is still reasonably current, the numbers are sure to grow soon. The idea that the Islamic “democracies” there will accomplish something economically can be for the most part discarded. They will receive billions in developmental aid from us, and as a small thanks, they will send us their unskilled and unemployed.

(By kewil for PI. Translation by Anders Denken)

The leader of a politically insignificant state with a debt of two billion (American ‘trillion’) wants to regulate the world using the lever of the bankruptcy-threatened EUSSR? One can’t get his own little shack in order, and now he wants to rule the globe!

Every financial site means with the course of the sun, Sydney, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Frankfurt, London, New York. Every instrument? So what is that? Every revolving account? All credit? Every stock transaction? Every option? Every certificate? Every mortgage? And still yet “every actor”? By this, does she mean Ackermann, every rating agency, or you and me?

Of course, for Merkel, the other EU robber barons and the G20, everything revolves around the money. The State wants the money from the banks, the insurance, the funds, the rich, industry, the factory owners, the middle class, inheritance and most certainly the money of the working, tax-paying population. And it wants it the least expensive way, free, and most preferably all of it! Afterward it will then be divided “equitably”! To each his social aid!

In a fitting fashion, Sarkozy once again classified Switzerland under “tax oases” that need to “be ostracized“. Clear enough! These losers who are up to their necks in water want to push through large expenditures worldwide so they can ratchet up their predatory tax quotas without competition! And right next to this one nurtures the suspicion that, sooner or later, not only will everything and everyone be regulated financially, but politically as well. Citizens pay and do what we tell you, and hold your tongue! And where financial freedom gets cut off it’s usually over very quickly with political freedom as well.  Is Stalin dead? The martial cry of the press fits very well. BILD and other papers are excited:
» Merkel puts Berlusconi on a leash, too!
» Merkel and Sarkozy put Italy under oversight!
» The taming of unruly Berlusconi!
» G20 take Italy to task!
» Berlusconi comes under guardianship!

Rarely empty threats. If Italy falls, then the rest falls, first Paris, then the Republic of the Pant Suit! Heil Angela!

(By kewil  for PI. Translation: Anders Denken)

Thank you for inviting me to Berlin. It is an honour to be here in this beautiful city of Berlin. When I was here last year I emphasized how important Germany is for all of us. We all benefit from a healthy, democratic, self-confident Germany.

(By Geert Wilders)

Much has happened since my last visit. In the Netherlands we were able to achieve many amazing things. We have successfully started to roll back the process of Islamization in the Netherlands.
We have done so in a peaceful way and through the democratic process. Recently, a deranged narcissistic psychopath from Norway committed a horrible crime. In cold blood he murdered nearly eighty innocent fellow citizens. The assassin pretended to be a concerned European. He said that he had committed his atrocity because “It is meaningless to participate in the democratic process.”
But he is wrong! The mass murderer from Oslo murdered and maimed, and he justified his heinous crime by denying – I quote – “that it is remotely possible to change the system democratically.” – end of quote.
But he is wrong! The Oslo murderer falsely claims to be one of us. But he is not one of us. We abhor violence. We are democrats. We believe in peaceful solutions.
The reason why we reject Islam is exactly Islam’s violent nature. We believe in democracy. We fight with the force of our conviction, but we never use violence. Our commitment to truth, human dignity and a just and honourable defence of the West does not allow us to use violence nor to give in to cynicism and despair. We cherish the tradition of Aleksander Solzhenitsyn, Jelena Bonner, Lech Walesa and Ronald Reagan. These heroes defeated a totalitarian ideology by the power of their conviction and without firing a single shot. As the ex-Muslim and Islam-critic Ali Sina said in a reaction to the Oslo atrocity: “We don’t raise a sword against darkness; we lit a light.”
So it is. We lit the light of the truth. And the truth will set us free.
The truth is that Islam can be successfully fought with democratic means. We do so in the Netherlands. You can do so, too, in Germany! Let me tell you what we have achieved in the Netherlands since my last visit to Berlin, less than one year ago. It will encourage you. What can be done in the Netherlands can also be done in Germany.
My party, the Party for Freedom, which has 24 seats of the 150 seats in parliament, supports a minority government of Liberals and Christian-Democrats. We do this in return for measures to restrict immigration, roll back crime, counter cultural relativism, and restore our traditional Western freedoms, such as freedom of speech.
The Party for Freedom has been in this position for less than a year, but we are achieving great things.
We have achieved that the Netherlands will soon ban the face-covering Islamic burkas and the niqabs!
We will restrict immigration from non-Western countries by up to 50% in the next four years!
We are going to strip criminals who have a double nationality and who repeatedly commit serious crimes, of their Dutch nationality!

The Party for Freedom is bringing a message of hope to the Netherlands.
The new policies will place more demands on immigrants.
Integration will not be tailored to different groups anymore.
There will be a tougher approach to immigrants who disobey the law.
Those who lower their chances of employment by the way they dress, will see their access to welfare payments diminished.

We have also achieved that anti-Israeli activities will no longer be funded with Dutch taxes.
So-called humanitarian aid organizations that directly or indirectly support anti-Israel boycotts, divestments and sanctions and that deny Israel’s right to exist will no longer get government funding.

The Dutch government will boycott the United Nation’s Durban III meeting against racial discrimination because it has been transformed into a tribunal for accusations against Israel.
The government will strengthen our political and economic relations with Israel. Investment rather than divestment will be our policies towards Israel.

We stand with Israel. We love Israel. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. Israel is part of our civilization.

My friends, what the Party for Freedom has achieved, shows that it can be done. To borrow a phrase from President Obama: Yes, we can! We can stop the islamization of our societies. The Dutch example shows that we can win. David can defeat Goliath!

Last July, the Dutch government even did something which not a single nation has dared to do before. It spoke out firmly against the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. The OIC is an international organization of 57 Islamic countries, most of them barbaric tyrannies. This OIC constitutes the largest voting bloc in the United Nation. It had criticised the fact that Dutch judges had acquitted me of all charges of group insult and incitement to hatred and discrimination. But the Dutch government made it clear to the OIC that freedom of speech will not be muzzled in the Netherlands. It told the OIC very bluntly: “The Dutch government dissociates itself fully from the request to silence a politician.” – end of quote.
We will never submit to the Islamic OIC bullies!

As you probably know, for almost two years I went through the ordeal of being a suspect in a criminal case. I was dragged to court in Amsterdam on the accusation of hate speech crimes. Last June, this legal charade ended with a full acquittal.

The Dutch people learned through my acquittal that political debate has not been stifled in their country. My acquittal was a victory for freedom of speech. The Dutch people also learned that they are allowed to speak critically about Islam. They learned that resistance against Islamization is not a crime. They learned that there is hope and that liberation is near.

My acquittal marks the turning of the tide. Not only in the Netherlands, but in the whole of Europe. It is the first breach of the dyke. We have started the roll-back operation. We have sent a message to the ideologues of Islam: Don’t tread on us!

My acquittal has a significance which far surpasses the Netherlands. It has a meaning for the whole of Europe and the free world. My acquittal marks the end of an evolution whereby our civil liberties in Europe are constantly being restricted in order not to offend Islam and anger Islamic fanatics.

My acquittal legitimizes criticism of Islam. It does so also in Germany and everywhere else.

Indeed, why should you Germans not enjoy the same rights as the Dutch! If peaceful and democratic resistance to Islamization is not a crime in the Netherlands, it should not be a crime in Germany either.

So, here is my message to you: Continue your fight for freedom and freedom of speech!
Do not let your politicians and judges grant you fewer rights than the Dutch!

Do not let yourselves be intimidated by Islamic or leftist opponents who shriek and yell. Do not let yourselves be intimidated by media who claim that a murderer who has lost his belief in the democratic process has anyhow been influenced by us.

My friends, when I visited you last year, even in my wildest dreams I could not have imagined that we would have been able to influence government policies in the way we have done.
That is why I tell you: Never give in to the bullies! Never give up hope. Never despair! You can still turn the tide! One can always turn the tide!

It is true: Germany has been less fortunate than the Netherlands.

When I was here last year, Tilo Sarrazin had just published his book “Deutschland schafft sich ab.” Sarrazin’s book was a bestseller. It hit a nerve. It sold over one-and-a-half million copies. This shows that German society is ripe for change. But politically Sarrazin’s book has changed nothing yet. On the contrary, the German political elite raised the speed of Islamization in Germany. Bundespresident Wulff said “Islam is a part of Germany.” Chancellor Merkel said that multiculturalism is an absolute failure, but she continues to defend Turkey’s entry into the EU. The spread of Islam continues unabated in the German class rooms, on Germany’s streets, through the construction of new mosques, etcetera, etcetera.

Your situation has worsened because you do not have a party – yet – with enough electoral support to influence German politics for the better. Germany needs a rightwing party that is not tainted by ties to neo-Nazis and by anti-Semitism, that is decent and respectable, but also firm.
René Stadtkewitz is working very hard to make Die Freiheit as successful as the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands. René, we are here to help you! Because Germany deserves better than what it gets today!
My friends, your country is the political backbone of Europe.
Germany is the most populous country in Europe. Germany is the economic motor of Europe. If Germany is sick, we are all sick.
Last year, I urged you: Stop being ashamed of Germany. It is unfair to reduce German patriotism to national-socialism, just as it is unfair to reduce Russia to Stalinism. Be proud of your country. Only if the Germans have pride in Germany, they will be prepared to stand for Germany and to defend Germany. And you must stand for Germany, just as the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands stands for the Netherlands. We must all stand for the survival of our nation-states because our nation-station states embody the democratic liberties which we enjoy.
Without the nation-state there can be no real national political freedom. That is why we must be good patriots. Patriotism is often branded as fascism. But patriotism is no fascism. On the contrary. Every democrat and defender of freedom must by definition be a patriot. A soul needs a body. The spirit of political liberty cannot flourish outside the body of the nation-state. The nation-state is the political body in which we live. That is why we must preserve and cherish the nation-state. So that we can pass on the liberty and the democracy which we enjoy to our children.
Without a nation-state, without self-governance, without self-determination there can be no security for a people nor preservation of its identity. This was the insight which led the Zionists to re-establish the state of Israel. Theodore Herzl said that there had to be a Jewish state because – I quote – “what we want is a new blossoming of the Jewish spirit.”
Dear friends, we urgently need a new blossoming of the German spirit. For decades, the Germans have been ashamed of themselves. They preferred to be Europeans rather than Germans. And they have paid a heavy price for it. We have all paid a heavy price for it.
Europe is not a nation; it is a cluster of nations. The strength of Europe is its diversity. We are one family but we live in different bodies. Our cultures are branches of a common Judeo-Christian and humanist culture, but we have different national cultural identities. That is how it should be.
Uniformity is a characteristic of Islam, but not of Europe. Islam eradicated the national identities of the peoples it conquered. The Coptic identity of Egypt, the Indian identity of Pakistan, the Assyrian identity of Iraq, the Persian identity of Iran, they were all wiped away, cracked down upon, or discriminated against until this very day. Islam wants all nations replaced by the so-called Ummah, the common identity of the Nation of Islam to which all have to be subservient and into which all national identities have to vanish.
Islam tried to conquer Europe, but never succeeded so far. That is why we Europeans were able to develop our different identities as nation-states. If we want to hold on to these we must stand together against the forces which threaten our identities. Today we are confronted by two dangerous forces: Islamization and Europeanization.
When I was here last year, I spoke a length about the threat of Islam. Today, I want to draw your attention to the threat of Europeanization. By Europeanization I mean the ideology which posits that our sovereign nation-states have to submerge in a pan-European superstate.
The European Union’s Founding Fathers held that in order to avoid a future war in Europe, Europe’s nations, and especially Germany, had to be encapsulated in what the Rome Treaty called “an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe.” Robert Schuman said that the EU’s aim was – I quote – “to make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible.” – end of quote.
The Eurocrats think that nation states in general – and especially Germany, Europe’s largest nation-state – are the problem. They are wrong. The real cause of the Second World War had not been the German nation state – it had been Nazi totalitarianism.
There is nothing wrong with Germany. The cause of the war was the Nazi ideology. The remedy against totalitarianism is not building a superstate. The remedy is introducing more direct forms of democracy at the lowest possible levels. Instead of depriving Germany and other nation-states of their sovereignty, the post-war leaders should have introduced a Swiss-like system in our countries. Small units should have a large degree of local sovereignty. The individual citizen should be given a direct democratic say over his own fate and that of his community.
Instead, the peoples of Europe were robbed of their sovereignty, which was transferred to far-away Brussels. Decisions are now being taken behind closed doors by unelected bureaucrats. This is not the kind of government we want!
We want less bureaucracy! We want more democracy!
We want less Europe! We want to hold on to our sovereignty. We want home rule! We want to remain independent and free! We want to be the masters in our own house!
In December 1991, the Maastricht Treaty called for a single European currency. The Dutch guilder and the D-mark were sacrificed on the altar of European unification. Helmut Kohl sold this project to the German people as – I quote – “a matter of war or peace.” – end of quote. The euro was presented as “an angel of peace” which the Germans had to sponsor by giving up the mark. During the past six decades German politicians have told the Germans that the nation state, and especially Germany, was so dangerous that it had to be emasculated. The Germans had to become Europeans instead of Germans. To achieve this political project, national and monetary sovereignty was relinquished. Economic and national interests were sacrificed on the political altar of so-called Europeanization.
All the countries which joined the euro lost the power to adjust their currency to their own economic needs. They have all suffered as a consequence. The currency of some countries is undervalued, the currency of others is overvalued; they all have to share in carrying the burden of other countries, even if the latter are suffering from self-inflicted policies, corruption or fraud. The European monetary system has allowed some countries to get a free ride at the expense of others, while those who cheat are in a position to blackmail those who have to foot the bill. This charade has to stop!
The European monetary system is deeply flawed. It is also immoral. As Theodore Herzl said “The character of a people may be ruined by charity.” This applies for those at the receiving end of charity, but also for those who donate it. The so-called pan-European solidarity is literally ruining us! Germany has paid enough for Europe already!
The same applies for the Netherlands. Our citizens do not have to pay the debts of others!
My friends, your party Die Freiheit embodies the best hope for Germany. Because your party is the only party in Germany which has the courage to state loud and clear that countries which cannot pay their debts should leave the euro. I fully agree.
My friends, time is running out. We have to act for the sake of democracy and the future prosperity of our children. The former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky warns that rather than preventing war, the European project makes conflicts more likely. He draws a parallel between the EU and the former Soviet Union which also suppressed feelings of national unity. When economy reality defeated the Soviets’ political project, the suppressed feelings of national identity bounced back with a vengeance and destroyed the Union. Bukovksy fears that if we do not stop the European moloch from expanding the same thing might happen in Europe.
The European leaders state that the only way to solve the current crisis is more European governance. They advocate more powers for Brussels. They are wrong. More Europe only makes matters worse. We have to oppose their attempt of further centralization.
We do not want more Europe! The EU lacks democracy, accountability and transparency. That is why we reject it. We want less Europe! Let us hope that next Wednesday the German Constitutional Court protects national sovereignty.
As a national legislator in the Netherlands I experience day by day how little we still have to say about our own fate. We are expected to rubberstamp laws which have been made by the EU Council of Ministers. The 27 EU commissioners convene behind closed doors with their colleagues. They negotiate in secret and then emerge to announce their agreement and present it. That is how the system works.
Recently, your Chancellor, Frau Merkel, went to Paris. Together with President Sarkozy she announced plans for an economic government of the eurozone.
We oppose this. We want the national parliaments to decide about our economic policies. We do not want to spend our taxpayers’ money on eurozone countries, such as Greece. Let those who have cheated us, who have mismanaged their economy or who have foolishly lived beyond their means, take care of themselves.
Moreover, the EU treaties forbid bailouts.
The Party for Freedom opposes every bail out. The Dutch minority government will never be able to count on our support in this regard. Today its wrongheaded euro policies are supported by the europhile leftist parties. I repeat: We will never support the Dutch government’s approval of the bailouts, not even if the government would lose the support of the left.
We have voted, and we will vote, against every plan to bail out other countries. Sovereign countries have to take care of their own needs. That is what sovereignty is about: freedom and the ability to take care of oneself.
Our peoples resent the fact that they have to pay for others. Our peoples resent the permanent alienation of power from their nation-states. They care about their nation because they care about democracy and freedom and the wellbeing of their children. They see their democratic rights and their age-old liberties symbolized in their national flag.
But there is more. National identity also ties an individual to an inheritance, a tradition, a loyalty, and a culture. National identity is also an inclusive identity: It considers everyone to be equal, whatever his religion or race, who is willing to assimilate into a nation by sharing the fate and future of a people.
My friends, we need to give political power back to the nation-state, in the name of democracy, in the name of freedom, in the name of human dignity. By defending the nation-states we defend our own identity. By defending our identity we defend our liberties. By defending our liberty we defend our dignity.
I urge you: Stand up for the nation-state. Be proud of your country!
In his Farewell Address as American President, Ronald Reagan said that the thing he was most proud of in his presidency was – I quote – “the resurgence of national pride that I called, ‘The New Patriotism.’” – end of quote.
Europe needs new patriotisms. Europe needs dozens of new patriotisms. We need True Finns, and True Danes, True Frenchmen, and True Irishmen, True Dutchmen, and, my friends, we need True Germans!
Reagan said that we had to teach our children what our country is, what it stands for and what it represents in the long history of the world. He said that Americans need – I quote – “a love of country and an appreciation of its institutions.”
Reagan’s words apply to us, Europeans, too. We need a resurgence of national pride, a love of country and institutions. Our national parliaments are our democratic institutions. We must defend them.
Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends, I have said enough. It is time to act. We must make haste. Time is running out for Germany, for the Netherlands, for all the other great nations of Europe. As Ronald Reagan said: “We need to act today, to preserve tomorrow”.
Here is a short summary of five things which we need to do in order to preserve our freedoms.
First, we must defend freedom of speech. It is the most important of our liberties. Second, we must end cultural relativism. Our Western culture is far superior to other cultures. Third, we must stop Islamization. More Islam means less freedom. There is enough Islam in Europe already. Immigrants must assimilate and adapt to our values. Fourth, we must restore the right to decide about our own money. We should not pay the debts of others. The survival of the euro should not be used as an excuse to reward countries which have shown that they were not worth to belong to the eurozone. Fifth, we must restore the supremacy and sovereignty of the nation-state. Our nations are the legacy which our fathers bestowed on us and which we want to bestow on our children. We are the free men and women of the West. We are the true men and women of the West. We do not stand for a superstate. We stand for our own country.
You stand for Germany. I stand for the Netherlands. Others stand for Switzerland, Denmark, Finland, France, Spain, and all these other beautiful freedom-loving nations of Europe. Together we represent the nations of Europe. Together we stand.
We will stand firm. We will survive. We will defend our freedoms. We will remain free.
Thank you very much.

Swiss TV reported:

Former football star calls for run on banks

French football star Eric Cantona called people on the Internet to remove all of their funds at one time on Tuesday. Around 30,000 people in France alone intend to take part in the “Bank Run” action. Ministers and heads of banks are worred about a collapse of the bank system.

The one-time stormer from Manchester United called for the “Bank Run” action in a video clip from the beginning of October in which he intends to protest the corrupt financial system. “If 20 million people would withdraw their money from the bank at the same time, then the system would collapse,” he said in the video.

Finance Minister appears unsettled

The video was quickly spread around on the Internet and was copied by activists who then posted it on their Internet site bankrun2010.com. The call was also broadcast on Facebook in several languages. In France alone, around 30,000 people plan to withdraw their money on Tuesday.

Politicians and bankers are upset over the action. The French Budget Minister François Baroin and Minister of Economy Christine Legard warned that the action should be taken seriously. Left-leaning politicians as well believe that a collapse in the banking system wouldn’t solve any problems.

Even the head of the largest French bank BNP Paribas, Baudoin Prot, spoke up. He believes that the call by Cantona has no foundation and only spreads insecurity.

The call for action with English subtitles:

(Many Thanks to all Contributors)

Because burka and nikab, female genital mutilation, forced and child marriages or stoning are no issue. Faithful to the visions of George Orwell (“1984“), a newspeak above all is to be brought in:

The European Council intends to intensify the battle against the discrimination of women — and is recommending “non-sexist language” to the member states! Even the word “mother” is seen by some Europe bureaucrats as a problematic cliché!

Why it’s such a problem to become or be a mother is unfortunately not told us. Twice as good, of course, is when the mother wears an Islamic head covering!

Among others, the portrayal of “women at home,” is a traditional role image that limits the equalization of the sexes, was the statement in a resolution of the parliamentary meeting of the Council.

Originally, the socialist Swiss national representative, Doris Stump, had verbally demanded for women to be portrayed no more “as passive and inferior beings, mothers or sexual objects.”

Until now, though, we have in fact perceived being a mother in a positive way, somewhat as good luck. Thank goodness, childless women’s libbers are clearing this up for us, since the problem here seems to be some form of sickness. Something like a pest to get rid of, but of course, she is wearing an Islamic head covering.

The Council is now recommending to the 47 member countries that they advance the use of “non-sexist language” among their authorities.

The Swiss capital Bern is seen as especially progressive, as they have already changed over to the basic preferences “of gender abstract personal characteristics” like “parental portion” or (less often) “parent” instead of “father” and “mother.”

The Federal Office of the Chancellor is recommending several other neutral terms to officials in the alpine country under the outline of “gender correct language.”

- Instead of “beginning course” it will be called “basic course” or “introductory course.”
- The “visitor parking space” will become “guest parking space.”
- “Bookkeeper’s diploma”? No, “Bookkeeping diploma” is better.
- “Pedestrian zone” = “strolling zone”
- “Driver’s permit” (or “Driver’s license”) = “Driving identification”
- “Chimney sweeper service” = “Chimney sweep service”
- “Teacher’s lounge” = “Break room”
- “reader-friendly” = “conducive to reading”
- “fellowship” = “team” or “group”
- “worker interview”? Better, “evaluation interview.”
- “patient room” = “examination room”

BILD closes with the sighing individual: “As long as we don’t have any worries…” The EU will tell us which worry to have… (Translator note: Unfortunately, the gender issue gets lost in this last part as well as a number of the entries above because of the inherent lack of gender forms for most English nouns. In German, however, both masculine forms have been used for the nouns in this last sentence with slashes between, i.e. editor/editrix or he/she, etc.)

(Had tip: Freak / Translation: Anders Denken)

Der Merkur reports:

Dobrindt said via the Munich Merkur (Saturday edition), “It is unreasonable to our population that subsidies should be massively increased for Turkey in times of strict austerity in Germany and in all of Europe. The so-called EU integration aid for Turkey is supposed to double to nearly one billion Euros by 2013. From 2010 to 2011 alone, it will increase around 20 percent to 781.9 million Euros,” said the General Secretary.

A country can become a member of the EU only when it has met the so-called Copenhagen Criteria (in particular, those regarding democracy and human rights). In order to meet these requirements, EU member countries grant advisory as well as financial aid. There have been official negotiations with Turkey since 2005. Back in 2001 nearly three billion in EU funds flowed to Ankara, according to Dobrindt. A further three billion Euros is to make it there by 2013. “The German taxpayer is carrying the main burden. These payments are not justified. Turkey is not ready for accession. In such deciding factors as human rights, freedom of speech or religion, Ankara has no advances to show for it.

Many thanks to all contributors!

20 Minuten reports:

Former federal assembly and SVP vice president Christoph Blocher published his “Thoughts about August 1st” in text and video Saturday morning on his Internet page. Joining with the EU would tear down the state pillars of Switzerland, he declared. Therefore he is thinking about becoming a candidate once again in election year 2011 for the national assembly.

CVP president Christophe Darbellay called Switzerland a “model of success.” There is, though, a “but”… Switzerland is bringing to few children into the world. Children are “the foundation of our country and a promise for the future.”…

Switzerland also has a dark side: youth violence, exploding premiums for hospitalization or “problems because of a minority of foreigners who threaten our security.” As solutions, the CVP president called for fines, deterrents and more police.

So then, Happy Birthday!

(Hat Tip: Daniel G.)

(Hat Tip: John A.)

The idea of the Swiss People’s Party (SVP) of making preparations for neighboring regions to join (PI reported), seems to go back to the fact that they have their ear closer to the people than the politicians of the present country. According to the survey conducted by SwissOpion (Telconet AG), many people stated that it was because of direct democracy for Switzerland. But among the most important results in the survey were which population groups had spoken for what reasons. Thus it appears to be that the left-dominated “Nanny State” seems to be losing the young people. Now, there is hope!

In all regions, a constant majority expressed favor of a union with the Swiss Federation. Especially noticeable is the approval with young people: two-thirds of those under 35 years advocated secession and change of country. Still somewhat higher is the portion of yes votes among individuals who consider themselves to be center-right, while left-wing and older people would like to maintain the status quo.

In further questions, the causes for the surprising support were fathomable. What was considered especially attractive for Switzerland was the direct democracy, the free economic order, and the low taxes. Around 70 to 80 percent of registered voters find Switzerland economically and more attractive with regard to taxation than their home country. Even the individuals who consider themselves as left-wing remarkably hold this view. Among those who prefer the right stand, the approval quota comes to 84 percent — at a similar level with those under 35 years of age (86 percent).

A real export hit would be direct democracy — in case it would be allowed then. Between 72 percent (Savoy/Upper Savoy) and 82 percent (Como/Varese) of eligible voters in the four regions are of the opinion that the possibility of voting on question related political matters should be instituted according to Switzerland’s example.

The reserve with which the results were interpreted has some amusing appeal:

The surprising results point back to a fundamental dissatisfaction of the voters in the neighboring EU countries.

The completed survey results were published in the 28/2010 edition of July 15, 2010 that can be obtained at newsstands (but only if Young Socialists, ZEIT and Antifa have nothing against it).

Melody, what do you think of Benjamin Netanyahu?

Politicians don’t act in a vacuum. They are always under political pressure, and in the case of Israel, facing constant geopolitical threats. Netanyahu is under pressure by his right-wing coalition. He is committed to bring peace to Israel. His interview with Larry King after the meeting with Barack Obama last week, is a clear indication for this. He wants peace for Israel and stands behind the idea of a Palestinian State.

Would another government have reacted any better to the Gaza Flotilla?

A political leader unfortunately is not an avatar that can be patched together with ideal qualities and superior powers, there is no such thing as an ideal prime minister. Besides Netanyahu there are no real alternatives at the moment. The current political leadership in Israel is not ideal, but they struggle with most complicated circumstances.

What do you think of the Two-State Solution?

A Palestinian state is inevitable for both sides; most people in Israel wish the Palestinians their own country, whatever the motivation may be. Any alternative would lead to catastrophe for the Jewish State.

Fatah and Hamas fight each other. Is a solution even feasible?

That is a problem. An agreement between Abbas and Netanyahu would be possible, if Abbas would finally agree to engage in direct talks, but whatever the outcome, Hamas won’t accept it. A two-state solution would only be practical in the West Bank. But Gaza would remain unchanged — a danger for Israel and for the Palestinians there, thus not a feasible solution. In theory, an economic confederation between the West Bank, Israel and Jordan would be an option. The contrast between a legitimate, economically flourishing Palestinian state in the West bank, and a terror regime in Gaza that undermines any flourishing but misery, would be immense. In fact, it already is. The question is whether the Palestinians in Gaza would then gather the strength and determination necessary to ‘disarm’ Hamas and its terror against its own people.

The blockade on Gaza is not implemented as collective punishment as some ‘human rights’ organizations like to claim. It is meant to block the establishment of a terror base, to limit the threat against Israeli civilians. Hamas established a terror regime based on dictatorship and oppression. They have an Islamic moral police like in Iran. Christians are murdered if they don’t convert to Islam. Fatah members are lynched and thrown off roofs. But that doesn’t seem to interest the ‘human rights activists.’ The misery in Gaza is not the result of Israeli policy.

As long as Hamas functions as a proxy for Iran, doesn’t accept the existence of Israel, and demands that Sharia rules the world, a solution is unfeasible.

Even though some dubious media and NGOs like to present it otherwise, Israel’s Gaza policy is anything but ‘imperialistically’ motivated — why would Ariel Sharon have gone through the trouble of disengaging out of Gaza in 2005?

What do you think of the Israel policy of US President Barack Obama?

So far, Obama’s policy hasn’t been too effective. His strategic paradigm shift towards appeasement hasn’t been fruitful, and at the same time it had a counterproductive impact on US relations with Israel. Obama’s inaugural address in Cairo contained some problematic allusions. He – hopefully unintentionally – set equal the meaning of the Holocaust for the Jews with the meaning of the establishment of the State of Israel for the Palestinians. Taking into account this speech’s main target audience, this was as dangerous as absurd a euphemism. It legitimizes the fight against Israel by radical elements in the Arab world. The reason for this problematic stance is probably a mixture between Obama’s ‘socialization’ into the Middle East conflict via questionable ‘agents’ such as his ex-pastor and mentor Jeremiah Wright and his desire to effectively appease the Muslim world.

However, the last meeting between Obama and Netanyahu was a good one and gives reason for optimism. It looks like Obama’s positions towards Israel and his potential influence on the conflict is taking a refreshingly constructive turn.

How do you assess the Iranian threat?

The Iranian threat is serious. Israel, Europe and the US cannot afford a nuclear Ayatollah regime under Ahmadinejad. Diplomatic dialog should not become a goal in itself. If it leads to nothing — and currently, this is what it looks like despite the new sanctions — then Plan B is necessary.

Whether a military intervention by Israel is possible? Anything is possible if Israel finds itself in a situation of existential threat, which a nuclear Iran would imply. We hope this will not happen.

At least the Ayatollah regime’s ambitions are transparent. For Ahmadinejad, Hamas and the remaining fundamentalist club, the annihilation of Israel is only an intermediate goal. In the minds of these lunatics world peace is secure once Sharia rules all over the globe, then Christians and Jews may coexist in safety – as subordinates.

What do you say about the resolution by the German Bundestag that Israel must give up the Gaza blockade?

Like many others, I was perplexed. Some of the parliamentarians’ quotes surprised me too. More than anything, there was a lot of self-satisfaction about the unusually unanimous vote of all four fractions. Was this a constructive contribution to the Middle East conflict? No. It strengthens Hamas and other radical groups that instrumentalize the ‘photogenic’ situation of the Palestinians in Gaza to delegitimize Israel. This brings neither peace nor freedom to the Palestinians.

The resolution is probably the result of the usual information vacuum: Israel doesn’t perform fast or well enough when it comes to reflecting the reality. Any Bundestag member who would have sat in a helicopter above the Mavi Marmara and seen how a mob of 40 terrorists with iron rods and knives attacked the Israeli soldiers, and how the soldiers received the command to shoot only when three of them were almost lynched to death; had this same parliamentarian further seen the videos in which members of the Turkish mob declared their chief objective in this trip with broad smiles and gleaming eyes, namely to die as Shahids for Allah – then most likely this very fellow would not have voted for the resolution.

It is similar with the immediate call to end the blockade of the Gaza Strip. This is an easy thing to demand when one lives in peaceful Germany and has never been paid a visit by Qassam rockets or bloodthirsty suicide attackers. Criticism, especially by an important ally like Germany, is important — when it is constructive, fair and based on detailed, balanced facts. I doubt that all of these criteria were fulfilled in this resolution. For example, it demands an improvement of the humanitarian situation in Gaza, but not the release of Gilad Shalit, or even improvement of his ‘humanitarian situation’, through access by the Red Cross. Also, the question remains why the Bundestag, of all relevant foreign affairs events, singles out Israel’s Gaza policy.

Could Israel fill the information vacuum by documenting even more aggressively and with communicating even more evidence?

Of course. The vacuum is our deficit. Politically, too, Israel must adapt to the YouTube, Facebook and Twitter age, where information is wrapped into sound bites that travel the world at the speed of light. Consequently, the genuineness of contents is often compromised— this age is the paradise of the propagandists. But not for the only Western democracy that has been facing geopolitical threats since its existence. The priority of the Israeli governments has always been military defense, the protection of its civilian population. The fact that the media war is no less a strategic threat is now slowly catching on. This is a quite late but crucial paradigm shift.

Israel still lacks the necessary infrastructure for relevant videos, images and information to be proactively transmitted by good spokespeople. Furthermore, Israel won’t compromise its moral standards as a democratic Jewish state to score public opinion points. Israel will never ‘sell’ photos of its children that were mutilated or killed by Hamas terror, or like Hezbollah did in 2006, direct children and women to pose as ‘freshly shot’ extras in different settings. An example of the cynical use of human life for hate propaganda is the story of Mohammad al Dura. Fortunately, this will never be the case in Israel.

Reality is on Israel’s side, it just needs to be transmitted. This doesn’t imply that every political decision is the right one; however, we should keep in mind the context in which these decisions are made. I grew up in Munich and know how difficult it is to imagine within this green, pristine, peaceful safe haven how it feels to be surrounded by Islamic terror organizations. Only he who experienced a cruel terror attack in close proximity, or once had to run for his life into a bunker, can understand the insane situation Israelis have been living in and Israeli governments have been operating in for over 60 years.

Why aren’t foreign journalists even taken along to incidents like the storming of the Gaza flotilla?

Foreign journalists are often not taken along for security reasons. There were foreign journalists on the navy vessels surrounding the flotilla, but — since they needed to stay in a safe zone they could not see what was happening way up on the ship’s deck.

Other countries are not under such extreme scrutiny concerning possible ‘misbehaviors’

Yes, in Sudan hundred thousands of people are slaughtered by Islamists, but the human rights activists have nothing to say about it, same with the persecution of the Baha’i or the mutilation of women in Iran. The ‘human rights activists’ don’t say one word about it. But the naked, last resort self-defense of Israeli soldiers against a band of bloodthirsty Jihadists turns into a world-wide scandal. Is this not a perversion of reality? Israel, o Israel, how could you? Same with the UN Human Rights Council whose biased Israel obsession is so counterproductive, whereas a constructive, balanced facts-driven version of this institution would be so crucial.

Are pro-Israeli demonstrations — for example in Germany — even noticed in Israel?

Pro-Israel demonstrations still are not yet sufficiently noticed in Israel. At the Israel demo on June 13th in Berlin, I heard unbelievably touching words of support. People who proactively inform themselves, who acquire knowledge and understand the situation in depth, who support Israel with their hearts and minds as the only democracy in the Middle East. They are extremely important — for Israel and for Germany. In times like these, inspite of all strength, Israelis feel threatened – not just in terms of security, but also by public opinion. I wish every single Israeli would know what kind of important support PI, for example, grants. And I don’t say that to flatter: The moral support though the systematic exposure of crucial facts by PI is remarkable. For Israel is as threatened as misunderstood.

The greatest crime committed by obsessive and uninformed Israel critics is that they polarize only further. Instead of European student groups, for example, joining forces to make a constructive contribution, by encouraging understanding between Israeli and Palestinian students, many students fall victim to propaganda campaigns that turn peace into utopia. Here, the easiest solution simply isn’t a solution. The majority of European youth had the luxury to grow up in complete peace. With this luxury comes a moral responsibility of engaging in building bridges in conflict regions, rather than destroying them.

Is there a question you wanted to be asked for a while, but weren’t asked by me today?

Yes, there is such a question. What is Israel really like, and what do I love about it.

What is Israel like? What do you love about it?

It’s a combination of elements that make everyday life an inspiration. I grew up in a very privileged way in Munich. I had fantastic friends, a great school, lived in peace and knew no problems. Since I got to know Israel — and this has nothing to do with Zionism — I fell in love. I love the Mediterranean, in spite of the current jellyfish invasion (Paul, call back your cousins!), I love Jaffa, this Ottoman pearl, and I find living together with Israeli Arabs exciting.

I grew up with a self-created image of Israel as a small paradise. Living here, with the painful experiences of the second intifada, wars and constant threats, this paradise image crumbled, it even seems cynical. My greatest wish is to experience this Israel, already exploding of lust for live, creativity and innovation, in total peace. As the paradise I’ve been carrying in my heart since I was a child. This requires the release of Gilad Shalit.

In the meantime, support like the courageous work of PI, is like oxygen to us.

Melody Sucharewicz, we cordially thank for this interview. We wish you and Israel all the best and God’s blessings.

(Photo credit: Metin Cherasi / Translation: Anders Denken)

There their deep-seated desires for a caliphate will be satisfied.

Die Welt reports:

The negotiations started at the end of 2005 with Ankara for entry into the EU had ultimately progressed only very slugglishly. The discussions between the Turkish and Israeli government regarding the attack on the “Gaza flotilla” and the refusal by the UN Security Council to renew sanctions against Iran led to tensions between Ankara and Brussels. Therefore, ways are being sought in the EU Commission again to step up the slowing consensus in Turkey for membership.

Therefore the eleventh of 35 chapters in the negotiations for entry are being opened. The theme of this chapter is Food Safety. Whether a food is considered unsafe, if it is ‘haram (‘unclean’ in the sense of Islamic law),’ is definitely to be debated. The further negotiations for EU expansion will take place among the leadership of the council in disintegrating Belgium. Thus there is already experience for upcoming issues.

(Thanks to All Contributors / Translation: Anders Denken)

After his verbal attack on EU President Herman Van Rompuy, which has since become famous, he hasn’t eased up one bit. At the European Parliament session in Brussels on June 6, 2010, there was present one Nigel Farage, just as he has been known and appreciated all along:

(With friendly permission from BIWTV / Translation: Anders Denken)

Nigel Farage’s speech on this theme in the European parliament:

(With friendly permission from BIW-TV)

Previous PI reports about Nigel Farage:

» Farage: After Crash, Not One Bit Quieter
» Verbal Attack on Europe’s President
» Baroness für Europa – Baron für die Briten – English Link here.

» Kopp: Farage meldet sich nach Flugzeugabsturz lautstark zurück

(Many thanks to all contributors / Translation: Anders Denken)

In British Newcastle, 1500 EDL followers demonstrated this past weekend for the preservation of a tolerant and diverse society and its defense against the mono-cultural claims to government of Green Islamic Sharia that is being more and more boldly demanded by Muhammadin immigrants.

The EDL poses the following counter-questions? Why should women be second-class citizens? Why should non-Muslim citizens be third-class? Why should there not be equality in the law? Why should homosexuals be brutally oppressed? Why should we limit our constitutional right to free speech?

Muslims and communists, for whom these questions are uncomfortable, were unsuccessful in preventing the demonstration by the EDL, as the following images show:

(Many thanks to all contributors! / Translation: Anders Denken)