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!

Return to the Mobile Edition.

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!

Return to the Mobile Edition.

(Hat Tip: Daniel G.)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

(Hat Tip: John A.)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

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).

Return to the Mobile Edition.

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)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

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)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

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)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

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)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

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)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

(By Ivan Denes)

Absolutely: With the “stretching out” of the great, highly lauded, 720 billion Euro “Euro-Protection Umbrella,” State and Government heads of the Euro countries have now secured a portion amounting to 220 million Euros with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Dominique Strauss-Kahn, head of the IMF, has indeed stretched his Kohanite hand of blessing over the decision of the summit, however it must be made clear here that the tab was produced with the absence of the host.

For in the extension of the “Rescue Umbrella,” the fact remained unnoticed that the greatest single contributor to the IMF was the United States who has veto power in the awarding of IMF credits (however, which they still have never used).

Now the Senate of the United States has unanimously (!) decided to obligate the US representative for the International Monetary Fund to make a veto if the payback of an IMF credit appears “improbable.” It is clearly evident, in the Greece’s case, that it is far more than improbable, it’s out of the question.

The 100 senators showed good common sense with their bipartisan consensus, particularly where the survival of the Euro is not “a question of fate” for America, as Chancellor Angela Merkel announced in the Bundestag.

The Chancellor has manifested of late an inclination in her rhetoric for dramatic or dramatizing ideas. It started with the “reasons of state” before the Knesset and the Congress, now it follows with the “question of fate” in the Bundestag.

Conclusion:

If the Americans block the foreseen IMF portion, then the whole “Rescue Umbrella” could very well collapse…

About the Author: Ivan Denes (81), residing in Berlin, is a Jew and was persecuted by the Nazis as well as by the Communists. On August 10, his new book “Politically Incorrect” appeared at WPR Verlag (9.80 Euros, 128 pages). Contact: ivan.denes@t-online.de.

Return to the Mobile Edition.

Europenews reports:

With four weeks to go before the general elections in the Netherlands, Geert Wilders and the Party for Freedom are now engaged in a life-and-death struggle against the forces of jihad. In the last couple of years Geert Wilders has emerged as the international symbol of the struggle against Islam.

The Party for Freedom (PVV) refuses government subsidy in order to remain independent. All other Dutch parties receive government money. Therefore, the PVV is facing a serious challenge in order to survive this election season. Dutch state television is engaged in a massive campaign to smear the PVV.

The Party for Freedom needs your help urgently. Every donation is welcome.

ING bank account of the Stichting Vrienden van de PVV in The Hague: 67.04.72.344

IBAN: NL98 INGB 0670 4723 44
BIC: INGBNL2A

Postal address:
Postbus 20018
2500 EA Den Haag

There is also a Paypal application on the English-language website:

www.geertwilders.nl

The implications or a good election result for Geert Wilders in the Netherlands for Europe’s comprehensive battle against Islamization very clearly cannot be overestimated. Please help Geert Wilders with a generous donation within your means.

Return to the Mobile Edition.

Nigel Farage (photo left) of the British Independent Party (UKIP) started the verbal attacks that the German media naturally considered as “right-wing populist.” SpOn was happy that the evil Farage had to pay a fine of 3,000 Euros for his harsh words. The attacks hit their mark anyway, and Farage isn’t necessarily wrong. Hear for yourself:

(Video found on steinhoefel.de, translation of German PI-article by Anders Denken)

Return to the Mobile Edition.

(Translation of German PI-article by Anders Denken)