The best thing for being sad is to learn something.
That is the only thing that never fails.
You may grow old and trembling in your anatomies,
you may lie awake at night listening to the disorder of your veins,
you may miss your only love,
you may see the world about you devastated by evil lunatics,
or know your honor trampled in the sewers of baser minds.

There is only one thing for it then — to learn.
Learn why the world wags and what wags it.
That is the only thing which the mind can never exhaust,
never alienate,
never be tortured by,
never fear or distrust, and
never dream of regretting.

— T.H. White, “The Once and Future King.”

One of the advantages of writing an occasional historical rumination is that I receive emails from interested readers who also pursue history as their avocation. Often they supply me with links to new information and tidbits of lore, while pointing me to historical topics that I have neglected.

And so it was after my weekend essay about the Civil War. Last night I received this email from a reader in Canada:

Hello Baron.,

I quite enjoyed your post, particularly those elements that involved your personal history and the histories of those in the comments section. They serve to bring not just one’s own history to life but aids those unfamiliar with the events in coming to better understand the historical events of others. The insights we gain through this sharing in turn serve us all when we seek to understand the events unfolding in the present. I fear that although this may seem self-evident to you and me, much of present discourse suggests otherwise.

Nevertheless, I wish you to know that having read your post and the comments that followed, I have learned things of which I was not aware, and can apply in future instances where knowing of them will aid me in putting into context elements of American history I am exposed to in future. Thank you.

In this regard, I feel I should reciprocate in some way, and as the Civil War is to you personal, I hope that I may provide you with an aspect of the war that if it is new to you, will have that element of exploration and discovery that new directions in history can provide.

Just as I rarely see any mention of the over forty thousand Canadians who volunteered and fought in Vietnam between 1959 and 1975, I believe it little known (I would appreciate being corrected in this regard) that thousands of Canadians fought on both sides of the American Civil War and that Canada served as a refuge for many working for the ultimate victory of the South while still others, whose view of the South would be considered diametrically opposed, found sanctuary after fleeing from the South. Its simultaneous many-sided role within its boundaries and within the armies of both the Union and Confederacy makes for interesting history for us both.

Several Highland Regiments, such as the Nova Scotia Highlanders, pipers and all, marched across the line and signed up en masse.

If your curiosity is piqued…

– – – – – – – – –

…may I recommend the book and website by author Claire Hoy (Cdn.), Canadians in the Civil War as its one I have read. I believe he has a website related to the book that may allow you to explore further before deciding whether to obtain it.

It is, of course, an outsider’s perspective of events central to the core of America’s understanding of itself and while I read it several years ago, I can think of nothing that would serve to offend. You may disagree with points, but I recollect no malice in its treatment.

I would hope it may provide you with an enjoyable distraction from both recent and current events of the day-to-day.

Regards,

Davyd Bowen

I had read of Canadians who volunteered on one side or the other in the U.S. Civil War, but I had no idea that there were so many.

I tracked down the Amazon site for the book without any problem, but I wasn’t able to find Claire Hoy’s website. However, I did find the following brief review in an issue of Maclean’s from a couple of years ago:

The tangled common history of Canada and the United States was never more so than during the American Civil War, which lasted from 1861 to 1865. In Canadians in the Civil War, journalist Claire Hoy offers a fine historical survey of its effects on Canada. More than 30,000 Canadians fought in the war, mostly for the North, enticed by $200 enlistment bonuses or shanghaied by American recruiters who didn’t shy at kidnapping. Some 5,000 died. U.S. draft dodgers — known as skedaddlers — fled northward, a century before Vietnam. The North’s blockade of Atlantic ports and Confederate refugees — Montreal’s St. Lawrence Hall hotel housed so many that its menu featured mint juleps — made for rising cross-border tension. The fear that victorious Union forces might march northwards was a key to bringing about Confederation in 1867.

This is fascinating material. There seem to be only a few copies of the book listed as available on Amazon, so maybe if enough Gates of Vienna readers click through and try to buy it, it will go into a second printing…

History is full of surprises.

The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.
For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.

First of all I would like to say that I am at least as tired of this public spat as I suspect many of my readers are. I had no intention of writing a post about this topic today, and was in the process of reading Ibn Warraq’s excellent book Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said’s Orientalism and preparing a positive review of Robert Spencer’s latest book Religion of Peace?: Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn’t. I guess that’s one thing Charles Johnson and I have in common. However, Mr. Johnson of Little Green Footballs apparently wants to keep this story going. It is tempting to ignore LGF completely, but since a few readers will probably believe some of the nonsense posted there about me and others, I guess I have to respond, however reluctant that may be.

In his post entitled Fjordman’s Obsession, Johnson claims that Fjordman “continues posting his melodramatic ‘Farewell to Little Green Footballs’ at every web site that will let him. This seems like the fifth or sixth site it’s appeared at, and it’s even been translated into German. It’s bizarre and obsessive behavior, bordering on character assassination, but it’s what I’ve come to expect; it’s how Fjordman and his fellow travelers obfuscate and divert attention from the real issues.”

I have several objections to this. When I checked the Global Politician website today, November 19th, there were no less than three articles of mine posted at the front page. One was my post about LGF, which had been published at the Gates of Vienna blog. Another was an essay where I warn against the erosion of political liberty and free speech caused by excessive government interference, a typically Fascist viewpoint if you believe my critics. Finally, there was the essay The Truth About “Islamic Science,” which was first published at Jihad Watch . If you look at the sidebar, you will also see the category “More by this author,” which contains links to other articles republished at the GP, for instance my essay entitled The Fatherless Civilization , originally published at The Brussels Journal.

The most interesting fact, however, is that not one of the above mentioned texts, nor the many, many other of my essays that have been republished at the Global Politician website, were sent to them by me. They republished the essay about Little Green Footballs on their own initiative and without consulting me, which is fine. They can continue doing so because I have repeatedly stated, I believe even at the comments section of LGF, that all of my essays can be republished online for free, or translated to other languages, by anybody who wants to. A few of my essays, for instance the one about Islam and science which was posted in stages at Jihad Watch and expanded into the booklet Islam, Christian Europe, and the Greek Heritage at Gates of Vienna, can also be republished in print.

Because of this, most of my articles are published at several websites. I occasionally come across some of my essays during web searches reposted as websites I haven’t even heard of before. I harbor no illusions that this is going to change the world, but as long as somebody likes my work, and as long as the impact of my essays is more than zero, I will continue doing this. I hardly ever communicate with the Global Politician and have to check my archives to see if I even have their email address. They republished that post because they liked it. I had nothing to do with it, which means that my supposed “obsession” in this case was nonexistent.

Regarding the German translation mentioned by Mr. Johnson: Some of my essays have been translated to Spanish, Italian, Bulgarian, Croatian, Polish, the Czech language etc. By far the most prolific translator, however, is the German blogger calling herself Eisvogel. A quick look at her website will reveal that she has translated literally dozens of my essays. She started out with this before I was familiar with her website. Unlike the GP, I do have email contact with her, but no, I didn’t ask her to translate the particular article about LGF. She translates whatever she finds interesting or relevant among my essays, which means that my supposed obsession in this case is, again, entirely nonexistent. The only website I have asked to publish that essay was Gates of Vienna where it was originally published.
– – – – – – – – –
Some of Eisvogel’s translations have been republished at the major anti-Jihad blog Politically Incorrect, perhaps the most pro-Israeli and pro-American German language blog in existence. They are in the process of establishing an English version of their excellent website. Their front page displays a photo of the late Italian writer Oriana Fallaci, just as Mr. Johnson does at his website. There is also an Israeli flag next to the text: “This blog supports a strong and secure Israel and appreciates its virtues.” They even link to LGF. Their editor Stefan Herre was supposed to represent Germany at the Counterjihad Brussels 2007 conference, which Charles Johnson and his Little Green Footballs crowd have spent the past month trying to discredit as a Nazi-infested meeting. Sadly, Herre was unable to attend, but his presentation can be read here, along with other national presentations.

According to Eisvogel, some of the most mentally exhausting problems facing anti-Jihadists are not caused by Muslims or the political Left, but by the constant infighting among those supposed to be Islam-critics. Even so-called conservatives call others racists, Fascists and Nazis if they disagree with them, which sounds an awful lot like what LGF has been doing for weeks now. Johnson still hasn’t answered whether it is OK to compare me, one of the most pro-Israeli bloggers in Europe, to Nazi apologists, nor does he link to most of the information carefully collected by Christine at the Center for Vigilant Freedom.

I would hereby like to make a challenge to Charles Johnson: You claimed in your latest post that I continue posting my farewell to LGF at every website that will let me. However, the truth is that I have never asked a single website apart from Gates of Vienna to post that essay. I like Global Politician and have no desire to swamp them with unwanted emails, but if you doubt the accuracy of what I just wrote, why don’t you send them an email and ask them whether I was “obsessive” about posting the article about LGF at their website. If you find that the answer is no, and believe me, you will, that means that you just made a post with the sole purpose of discrediting me and my character which was 100% flat-out false, totally invented and without any factual basis whatsoever.

On top of that, Mr. Johnson goes on to accuse me, on the basis of this fraudulent information, of “bizarre and obsessive behavior, bordering on character assassination, but it’s what I’ve come to expect.” I could say something about the pot calling the kettle black in this case.

The way I see it, there are now only two choices left for Charles Johnson: He can either admit that his latest post about me was based on false premises, post a retraction and perhaps issue an apology to me. Or, he can continue as if nothing has happened. If he chooses to do the latter, it will undermine his credibility in the long run since he presents his website as an alternative to dishonest reporting in the mainstream media, but fails to live up to his own ideals. If Little Green Footballs does not issue a retraction in this case, will “fake, but accurate” be the blog’s new motto?

Finally, before I get back to doing real work, I would like to say one more thing: Yes, I write under a pseudonym, not my real name. No, it’s not an ideal situation, but so far I have calculated that I can do more good by using a pseudonym than my real name. I have considered using my real name several times, and maybe I will some day. However, the treatment several people, including Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs, but especially Paul Belien of The Brussels Journal, have received is not encouraging. I do not agree with Belien on everything, especially since he is a deeply religious man and I am not. But he is not a Fascist, he is a good man and he does not deserve to be subject to the cyberspace witch-hunt orchestrated by the supporters of Little Green Footballs over the past few weeks. An anti-Semitic Fascist regime already controls Europe: it’s called the European Union.

Belien has been subject to death threats from Muslims, attacks from Leftists and police harassment by the Eurabian authorities in his country. The fact that he is now also attacked by so-called conservative Islam-critics speaks volumes about how totalitarian the political atmosphere in Europe is now becoming.

I received an email this morning from a reader:

Baron,

I insist that you publish a correction.

The Falklands are disputed, for sure, but not by a country which had previously “owned” them. The Spanish landed there once and left them. The British occupied an empty space and made them productive. All this before Argentina even existed.

WR
Ottawa, Canada

WR was referring to my post about Ceuta and Melilla, which contained this paragraph:
– – – – – – – – –

Remember, Ceuta and Melilla are “disputed” in the same way that the Falkland Islands are “disputed”: that is, they once belonged to another country, but are now in the possession of a different country, and the majority of their inhabitants are citizens of the country that owns them.

Instead of “belonged to”, I should have written “were claimed by”, since Argentina has never in any sense owned the islands in question. The original post has been modified accordingly.

The history of claims, counterclaims, and settlements in the Falklands is fascinating. The Dutch made the original discovery; the French, the British, and the Spanish all played parts in the drama, with the Argentines being relative latecomers. The Wikipedia entry on the topic is recommended reading.

I’m happy to set the record straight.

On the night of April 2nd, 1865, My great-great aunt stood on the southern bank of the James River with her sisters and watched the city of Richmond burn. After staring in rapt silence for a time, the little girl turned to her big sister and asked, “What do we do now?”

I know about this because as an old woman she told the story to my cousin Mary, who in turn told it to me when she became an old woman. Our family has long generations, so there is only a single degree of separation between me and a personal experience of the Civil War.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

When the defenses of Richmond could no longer hold, in order to deny the Union valuable supplies the warehouse district in Shockoe Bottom was set ablaze by the Confederates before they retreated southwards. The fire spread from there to residential districts and left much of the city in ruins.

My great-great grandfather, who was also my cousin Mary’s grandfather, was Daniel Weisiger. He owned a small plantation between Richmond and Petersburg. After the war Daniel liked to say that he had been wounded at Second Manassas, but everybody in the family knew he had in fact fallen off his horse and broken his leg. He had to be strapped across the saddle of the same horse, which was then led home by his servant (i.e. his slave).

His brother David had a more illustrious career. Uncle David rose to the rank of general in the Confederate Army and was acclaimed a hero for leading the charge at the Crater during the siege of Petersburg.

There wasn’t much for Daniel to return home to when he came back to Chesterfield County: his plantation had been burned out by the Yankees. He and his family recovered what possessions they could and moved into Richmond. Daniel went to work for the railroad, and his wife turned their home into a boardinghouse in order to make ends meet.

One of their boarders was a war veteran, a colonel in the Army of Northern Virginia. When he was unable to muster the rent, before he departed he paid my great-great grandmother with a set of sturdy dining room chairs in lieu of cash. Those chairs, now rather disreputable, have come down to me, along with all these family tales.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

I’m telling these stories to illustrate the fact that the Civil War is still very much a living presence to many Virginians. It’s not about evil slaveholders who resisted the righteous armies of the North that came to free the bondsmen; it’s about our ancestors, people whose stained daguerreotypes still stand on our mantelpieces, men who took up arms to defend their homeland.
– – – – – – – – –
Most of the battles of the Civil War were fought on the soil of Virginia. The place names cut a wide swath across the Commonwealth, starting at the Port of Norfolk, sweeping up the Peninsula to pick up Seven Pines, Cold Harbor, City Point, and Richmond, and then branching to the north to take in Spotsylvania, the Wilderness, Chancellorsville, Fredericksburg, Manassas, and Brandy Station. The southern half veers off across the Appomattox River to Petersburg, Cross Keys, Saylers Creek, and ends at Appomattox. A separate procession moves up the Valley of Virginia through Winchester, Strasburg, Front Royal, Harrisonburg, and Port Republic.

And these are just the names that I can rattle off without cracking a book; there are hundreds of others. Some are no more than a Virginia Historical Society road sign mentioning a skirmish or an encampment, while others are full-fledged battlefield parks complete with parking lots, visitors’ centers, restored buildings, costumed guides, and crowds of tourists.

When I was a kid it seemed that the red clay of the Virginia Piedmont must have gotten its color from the blood of all the fallen soldiers that was shed into it.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

In an earlier post, one of our commenters said this:

An outsider or a fanatic might assume that the people who fly the “stars and bars” want to bring back slavery and leave the Union. But nothing of the kind. The flag means, at least to those who display it, the willingness to defend one’s home, one’s kith and kin, one’s native region and its manners and customs against meddlesome outsiders.

What he says is true, but it’s only partially true. That’s what the Confederate Battle Flag means to me, and to many other people who are descendants of Confederate veterans and respect the traditions and valor of their ancestors.

But there are other people — and I know some of them personally — who mean something quite different when they fly the Confederate Battle Flag. To them it’s all about keeping the descendants of slaves in a subordinate position. The people who hold this attitude may be a small minority, but they exist. This is an unpleasant and unhappy truth, but it’s one that any honest Southerner has to face.

Were I were to fly the battle flag, my black neighbors would take it to have that second meaning. As Dymphna often notes, “communication is the act of the recipient.” So I won’t do it.

And, yes, the war was fought because of slavery, in the sense that the powerful men of the South, the movers and shakers, were the great landowners whose livelihoods and station in society depended on slavery. The end of slavery would have destroyed their wealth and privilege. States’ rights and the tariff and all the other issues were real, too, but slavery was the important one to the people who controlled public policy within the states that seceded from the Union.

However, that doesn’t mean that the men who actually fought the war were fighting to preserve slavery. Stonewall Jackson, the greatest Confederate hero of the war, was a devout Presbyterian who owned no slaves and detested slavery. Most of the infantrymen who bled and died for the South owned no slaves.

Men left their families and took up arms to defend their homeland. Virginia, after all, had been invaded by foreigners.

Yes, that’s right: foreigners. Until 1865 we were the “Sovereign Commonwealth of Virginia”, and recognized our participation in the United States as a voluntary arrangement, one which could be terminated at any time by the consent of the people of Virginia.

The new post-war federal government — in 1865 only in its infancy, and not the bloated and illiberal behemoth it has become in recent decades — changed all that. But not everyone in Virginia has forgotten.

The armies of the North pushed up the Shenandoah Valley in 1862, burning crops, stealing livestock, and taking civilian hostages. What could a God-fearing man do in the face of such an invasion except pick up his musket, saddle his horse, and head down to the courthouse square to join the regiment that was mustering there?

Like most wars, the Civil War in the South was fought by men who were defending the people and places that they held dear.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

I’m a Southern partisan who is glad the South lost the Civil War.

Slavery was an unmitigated evil. It stood in opposition to the very principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence, and would have had to end anyway, sooner or later. Without the war the South would have fallen further and further behind the rest of the country, and would have eventually faced an impoverishment that was even worse than the one brought on by Reconstruction.

No one can understand America without understanding the Civil War. Yet it is almost impossible to understand the Civil War fully. To paraphrase what John Von Neumann said about mathematics: You don’t understand the Civil War. You just get used to it.

The Sovereign Commonwealth of Virginia is the Grail King, and the Civil War is the wound that will not heal.

Every morning the Fisher King awakens, and his wound is still there, causing him unceasing pain. The pain is always there to remind him.

Yet somehow he still lives. Somehow he keeps going.

What the left is describing as racist is very often culturalist. For example, is it cultural or racial to perform genital mutilation on infant females? Is it cultural or racial to celebrate Thanksgiving? Is it cultural or racial to honor the dead in some form?

You won’t agree with all of these statements or the questions that appear below the fold. But some of them may seem to you to have sensible answers.

Here is the book.

Here are the questions:
– – – – – – – – –
1. Do you believe that defining, protecting and promoting majority cultures should be a legitimate policy consideration?

2. Do you believe that cultures are so diverse that some people make more desirable immigrants than others?

3. Do you believe that some behaviors, such as polygamy and female genital mutilation, may be lauded in other countries but run against the grain of our culture?

4. Do you believe that people who get no guidance from society might not turn out to be angels?

5. Do you believe that our cultural ideals are not the default of humanity and need promotion in our schools and laws?

6. Do you think that it would be good for our citizens to learn about our history and culturist traditions?

7. Do you believe that a culture’s beliefs might be so influential that profiling people of some cultures could be rational?

8. Do you believe that self-government includes the right to collectively guide the direction of society?

9. Do you believe diversity means that not all cultures hold the same truths to be self-evident?

10. Do you believe that Western ideals are in competition with other ideals and could lose?

11. Do you believe that private space is sacrosanct, but public airwaves and spaces should be somewhat managed in order to promote positive values?

12. Do you believe that sometimes the desire of the majority concerning the culture should be considered when the absolute rights of individuals are asserted to protect anti-social behavior?

So…did you answer three or more affirmatively? Oh dear, you might be a culturalist…

Since the anti-Islamization demonstration on 9-11 in Brussels, ProFlandria has been an invaluable contributor to Gates of Vienna. He was born and raised in Flanders, but is now an American citizen, and has an excellent understanding of both cultures.

I have been relying on him for translations from the Dutch, information on the cultural background of Flanders, and help with understanding the Flemish political situation.

In my post about Belgium on Thursday, ProFlandria left a comment that is worth reproducing here in its entirety. He was responding to another commenter, eatyourbeans:

“An outsider or a fanatic might assume that the people who fly the ‘stars and bars’ want to bring back slavery and leave the Union. But nothing of the kind. The flag means, at least to those who display it, the willingness to defend one’s home, one’s kith and kin, one’s native region and its manners and customs against meddlesome outsiders.”

That’s as good a comparison as I’ve seen. I have tried not to wade too deeply into this discussion because I’m still coming to terms with my own experiences in that regard. But let me throw caution to the wind…

As a teenager I joined the Sea Cadets in my hometown, Oostende. We started up our chapter with one officer and four pimply friends, if memory serves. One of my friends invited his girlfriend’s brother to join, and he brought his friends. We soon realized that at a stroke, half of our chapter were “those” people — like the ones we saw on TV (late 70’s — early 80’s) roaming the streets of Flemish “border” municipalities to prevent their Walloon counterparts from taking over.

My “new” friends were fond of crewcuts, boots, and all things military. I learned to like crewcuts too, but my friends also had an open admiration for German martial prowess which bordered on the infuriating. Considering my family history, that didn’t sit so well. They were also members of organizations which espoused (mix and match to taste): idolizing WW1 Flemish veterans (great), memorializing “martyrs” to the cause of Flemish equality (uh…), supporting amnesty for Flemish WW2 SS veterans (hmmm…), and musing over the glories of Germanic/Nordic history and myth (cool, but what’s with all the runes?).

My initial reaction was one of caution — the guys seemed okay, but are they serious!? Inevitably we would have our discussions, and over time my friends’ stance on many things softened, or disappeared — I think the Wehrmacht idolatry was the first to dim (they did swap it for a healthy appreciation of Israeli military prowess).

On the other hand, I also learned. At age twelve I knew superficially about the unequal treatment we had received as a people, but I wasn’t worried about it. Later it dawned on me that Walloons were not only contemptuous of my “uncultured” language for its own sake, but because it was mine. They would come to my hometown on vacation (it’s a beach), rent an apartment from my grandparents, and be quite affable. But every now and then the mask would slip.

– – – – – – – – –

The most memorable occasion was when a little boy ran up to me on the sidewalk when I was about fourteen and yelled: “Sale Boche!” [dirty Kraut]. I don’t remember exactly what happened, but when the red left my eyes I saw myself backing the boy’s dad up to a wall and hitting him over and over. I quickly walked away and left him stunned, and I have tried to rationalize that event ever since — “I must have realized the boy was too little to know what he was saying, I wouldn’t have hit the mother anyway, so that just left the other parent who had taught the kid to say that…”

No matter. It definitely wasn’t my finest hour because I don’t actually remember thinking any of that when it happened. The whole thing could easily have gone very, very wrong. So I decided to learn all I could about my “environment” — not from my friends’ propaganda leaflets, but from the library. Most sources I found would airily admit that there might have been problems in the past, but that was mostly over.

I joined the Navy at 18. It was pretty much inevitable: my dad and uncle were both Navy men, and during WW2 their dad had crewed on a fishing boat out of Swansea (Wales) doing his part for the war effort. By that time I was an ardent royalist, I kid you not. Two reasons: the near-mythological stature of King Albert who defied the Kaiser’s Army in the Big One, and a book on Leopold III’s Shakespearean tribulations during WW2. For anyone familiar with the pomp and pageantry of military ritual, once you add that in the mix you actually get guys who tear up when they’re in a parade (mea culpa…).

Slowly, however, my symbols started to tarnish. For one, the obvious over-representation of Walloons among officers was impossible to ignore. I found out that Albert’s treatment of his mostly Flemish enlisted personnel was less than edifying. I think the last straw was finding out about the Royal House’s decidedly “swastikarian” tendencies — especially with respect to Jews. I forget the name of the book, but I remember the shock at having one of my icons, whose latest scion was now my Commander-In-Chief, brought so low. As an object lesson in the danger of symbol worship, this one can count. Basically, if you want to find real-life Nazis in Belgium go to the Palace at Laeken.

By that time, however, I was stationed in the US on “temporary assignment” — for seven years. Things happen, you marry, you build a house… then they send a replacement. And a funny thing happened: I didn’t want to return home. Lots of practical reasons, but they were excuses — I could feel a different resistance, as well.

I didn’t realize until several years later that my country could no longer stand a comparison to the one I now lived in. True, we had all the artifacts of civilizational greatness — but this country had the practice of it. Imperfectly, to be sure, but also passionately. Discovering how this new country came to be was a revelation. Things I had known to be true suddenly proved flawed, or false. And without consciously looking, I had found my new symbols. If you’ve recited the pledge, you know what they are.

The last time I looked, my old friends are still culturally Flemish, but also Belgian soldiers. I haven’t spoken with any of them in over fourteen years, so I don’t know how they feel about current developments. It’s too risky to ask — the (Walloon Socialist) Minister of Defense deputized selected personnel to “evaluate” the troops’ possibly subversive sentiments.

My point, if I can even find it in all these ramblings, is this: as you said, symbols mean different things to different people. Changing your allegiance to them after having their validity challenged is a very long, and sometimes painful process. It is the kind of growth that leaves scars, but good ones. If certain people in Vlaams Belang are traveling this road — and I’m reasonably confident they are — they have my respect, and I’ll say no more about it.

A scandal is brewing in Germany, although there’s not much about it to be found in the English-language media. News stories concerning the incident have appeared — for example, this one in The Daily Telegraph — but they only give a bare-bones description of the event. It’s an official press-release version, describing a feel-good Multicultural occasion when the German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Bernard Kouchner, his French counterpart, did a little off-key musical number in a recording studio with a Turkish-German pop singer.

Nice moment. “We are the World”. Music will bring us together. Etc., etc.

What these MSM stories won’t tell you is the background of the pop singer these two political bozos joined up with for their Terpsichorean moment. Muhabbet — he seems to have only a single name, like Cher, Sting, or Madonna — is not your average Turkish-German rap singer: he has this nasty little habit of promoting violent jihad in his songs.

I first became aware of this story a few days ago through the German blog Politically Incorrect:

“He met the right sound” rejoices the German governmental youth-magazine on the “integration song interpreted by German minister of foreign affairs Steinmeier together with his French colleague Kouchner and the Turkish singer Muhabbet accompanied by some young musicians — a song to promote an open and tolerant Germany. Fair enough, but subsequently it occurred that of all people Muhabbet has some other views about cultural openness and tolerance than intended by Steinmeier.

It should have been a public relations action during the talks between Germany and France about integration issues. Quite awkward though, the German TV midnight-news “Tagesschau” presented the film-maker Esther Schapira (…), who had produced an award winning documentation about the murder of Theo van Gogh by an Islamist. She said in front of the TV-cameras, Muhabbet had come towards her and a colleague of hers after the award winning ceremony and told them van Gogh would have been “lucky, he died so fast”. Muhabbet explained he would have imprisoned and tortured him in the basement first and added: “Ayaan Hirsi Ali has earned death too.”

You can see the Muhabbet video at Politically Incorrect.

This morning I received an email from LP, who had additional information on the Muhabbet-Steinmeier affair:

This is a massive scandal brewing in Germany, which has so far gone unnoticed in the Anglophone press and blogs.

On Nov. 12, German foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and his French equivalent Bernard Kouchner joined Turkish-German ethno-rap artist Muhabbet (23) in his studio to record a cheesy song about “Integration” and “Tolerance” and “Respect” and such. It’s silly enough, but not a big deal.

LP included another video clip of the event:

– – – – – – – – –
And he goes on to say:

Muhabbet apparently is touted as some sort of integration wunderkind: He’s a UNICEF-representative for education, and a frontman for the anti-violence campaigns of the ministry for family and education. He flies on the minister’s plane and was dined by the chancellor, Angela Merkel

When Steinmeier’s publicity stunt made the news, the respected and recently decorated ARD-journalist Esther Schapira (ARD is the German BBC) and her co-producer Kamil Taylan remembered Muhabbet: They had met on Oct 20, when Schapira’s film “The day Theo von Gogh died” received the “Prix Europa”. After the ceremony, Muhabbet opined to Schapira and Taylan that he, Muhabbet, would tortured van Gogh in an cellar for days, before killing him. He also volunteered that he would do the same to Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Taylan (57) was about to strangle Muhabbet, when the latter’s manager intervened and tried to de-escalate. An email exchange, now on record, followed.

Esther Schapira went onto primetime TV news and told her story. First, Muhabbet denied the whole incident. Then he said he was misunderstood. Finally he floated a third version: I’ll translate some highlights:

Muhabbet:		“… I said to her, that if some people would see that film they would torture and kill the man who made it.”
Newspaper:		“So, you never heard about that film, Submission, and that Theo von Gogh was murdered?”
Muhabbet:		“No, never. I was in the studio… but upon request by management I’ll soon start to read newspapers…”
		[…]
Newspaper:		“Well, that’s kind of what actually happened, isn’t it?”
Muhabbet:		“Maybe I had a vision, […] or I can see into the past […] When I saw these pictures, the nudity and religion, I asked myself: aren’t the people who check on things? Why isn’t there censorship?…”
Newspaper:		“This is legal in Holland and Germany.”
Muhabbet:		“I didn’t know that.”

Their interest piqued, the press looked into Muhabbet’s musical offerings. I’ll translate:

a coffin I’ve reserved for you
the streets are mine, God has favored me
fear for your belongings
you’ll all pay dearly
fear for your belongings
you’ll burn in the fire
the end is nigh, you run naked across the meadow
you feel death touching your neck, you are an infidel
pact of wolves, run with the wolf pack
bloody horizon, death is peaceful

…and so on and so on. Tons of it. And this is recent stuff. A YouTube search will quickly yield all sorts of world-dominatin’ heathen-killin’ fag-and-c**t-killin’ wolves, who also have a thing for God. The audience in the videos appears to interpret this as songs about the religio-nationalist Türkish organization “the Grey Wolves”, as they make clear by their hand signs.

Remember: This man is a UNICEF-representative for education, and a frontman for the anti-violence campaigns of the ministry for family and education. He flies on the minister’s plane and was dined by the chancellor.

Oh, and what does the Foreign Minister say now, he who sang with the guy? He asks the media for “more restraint and due care in investigation”, because Muhabbet “has always spoken out in favor of integration and against violence”.

And Muhabbet says: “I’m not violent or fundamentalist… where do these fears come from? My fans are totally relaxed… the single and video will be out next week.”

PI reports that Steinmeier is currently being evasive about the issue. Presumably he will move soon to angry denunciation of his detractors, followed by a long period of “no comment”. Then perhaps he will blame the incident on “insufficient research by my overworked staff” or something similar. Then more of the weaving and bobbing, calls for resignation, and so on…

Or maybe not. We’ll see.

The Religion of Peace is one of the most important websites of the Counterjihad. It gathers data and maintains a comprehensive database on terrorist attacks committed by Islam, and posts articles, photos, and links on the same topic.

Now TROP is being targeted by “the Rev.” Jim Sutter, just as Jihad Watch and other sites have been. I was recently sent the following email appealing for help, and I’m passing it on to readers. The more of us who email these companies to demand that the Religion of Peace be unblocked, the more quickly they will act.

Dear Fellow Bloggers:

The Religion of Peace Needs Our Help!

An individual by the name of (Rev.) Jim Sutter targeted our good friends at The Religion of Peace in an effort to shut down the site. The results of Sutter’s actions provoked a number of internet companies to incorrectly categorize The Religion of Peace. These incorrect categories have caused the site to be listed as a hate site, and consequently blocked by some servers. We know that the accusations made by Sutter, and the various companies are untrue. The Religion of Peace provides accurate facts about Islam — not lies. Nor can the site be accused of being racist. First of all Islam is not a race, it is a political religious ideology. Secondly, The Religion of Peace speaks out against all violence that is directed towards Non-Muslims and Muslims.

Anyone who has a blog that attempts to defend the west from radical Islam or Marxists knows that they are constantly at risk of being labeled racist, and shut down by individuals and organizations who do not want the truth to be known. The efforts to silence our voices will increase. We are all in this fight together. Therefore, it would be greatly appreciated if all of you would post a notice on your blogs, urging your readers to support The Religion of Peace by sending protest e-mails to the offending companies. Islam and the thought police are coming after all of us. Free speech is in jeopardy. We need to pull together into a strong and united force to combat those who intend to crush us.

Out of respect for others The Religion of Peace has avoided asking for assistance. They did not want to impose their problems onto anyone else. I have permission to make this appeal on their behalf.

Please ask your readers to contact the following companies with a short polite e-mail clearly stating that The Religion of Peace — http://www.thereligionofpeace.com (include the url in the e-mails) is against violence, not racist and should be categorized appropriately under labels such as General News, Politics and Religion.

To the best of our knowledge the e-mail addresses are correct. If anyone encounters problems please contact either myself or The Religion of Peace:

Secure Computing sites@securecomputing.com

SonicWall cfssupport@sonicwall.com

SurfControl customerservice@surfcontrol.com

Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

For more information visit this site.

[Nothing follows]

I’m a little weary of all the uproar, as I’m sure you are, so… for no particular reason…

We finally got some rain, and the colors came out a little bit. This is what our side yard looked like a couple of days ago, before the wind came in and plucked all the leaves off the trees.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The Lack of Repose
by Wallace Stevens

A young man seated at his table
Holds in his hand a book you have never written
Staring at the secretions of the words as
They reveal themselves.

It is not midnight. It is mid-day,
The young man is well-disclosed, one of the gang,
Andrew Jackson Something. But this book
Is a cloud in which a voice mumbles.

It is a ghost that inhabits a cloud,
But a ghost for Andrew, not lean, catarrhal
And pallid. It is the grandfather he liked,
With an understanding compounded by death

And the associations beyond death, even if only
Time. What a thing it is to believe that
One understands, in the intense disclosures
Of a parent in the French sense.

And not yet to have written a book in which
One is already a grandfather and to have put there
A few sounds of meaning, a momentary end
To the complication, is good, is a good.

[Nothing follows]

As most readers already know, ever since the Counterjihad conference in Brussels ended last month, there has been a non-stop Whac-a-Mole game of accusations against the Flemish separatist party Vlaams Belang. Every time a new “neo-Nazi” mole of allegation pops up, it gets whacked back down. But instantly another one takes its place, and the old one is forgotten.

One of the remaining unwhacked moles has been a photo taken in 1992 showing a current EU Parliament MEP from Vlaams Belang named Koenraad Dillen with the 84-year-old ex-Nazi officer Léon Degrelle. Christine of CVF was able to locate Mr. Dillen today and ask him about the photo. Here is his response:

Yes I met LD on 11th of July 1992. I was 27 years old at the time.

I finished my studies in 1987 with a paper on the French writer Robert Brasillach. The director of my thesis was a left wing professor of literature, named George Adé. He died in 1992. I got “maxima cum laude” with my thesis.

Before the war, Robert Brasillach published a book on “Léon Degrelle et l’avenir de Rex”. Since my paper deals a lot with Brasillach and Belgium, I took a genuine interest in Degrelle and wrote about him. He was an important figure in prewar politics and played a major role during the war years. After the war, in exile, he continued his life in Spain as a writer.

Soldier on the eastern front, Degrelle was convicted, in absentia, for high treason. But he was never charged with war crimes.

I had neither sympathy, nor animosity for Degrelle in 1992. He was 84 years old at the time. He interested me as a person who played a historical role. No more, no less. I had no political functions at the time.

In May 1992, I started a weekly column on French intellectual life and politics in the newspaper ‘t’ Pallieterke. I still write my article every week. So I have a partly job as a journalist.

Degrelle talked to me. He explained me for example, why Franco did extradite Pierre Laval, the prime minister of collaborating France who was executed by De Gaulle and not him, the SS-general. (“Because I was Catholic, and Laval not”.) It was an interesting testimony, never published in any book. Why should I be blamed? I had a few drinks on his terrace. Fifty years after the war, it was not up to me to act as an attorney general ! He signed some books and photos. Did I have to refuse? I met the former Bolshevik commissar Lew Kopelev in 1987. He signed his memories for me. Does it make me a communist?

– – – – – – – – –

I published a book on [corrected] European Commissioner Louis Michel and on the accession to European Union of Turkey. A major book on François Mitterrand — on which I work since three years — will follow in some months. I had interviewed and toasted with many French socialists — e.g. the former minister of Foreign Affairs Roland Dumas. It doesn’t make me a socialist.

As we all know, Mr. Dillen could claim to be a Communist and wear Lenin pins and hammer-and-sickle insignia as much as he liked, and no one would mind except for a few fascists like us. A taint of Bolshevism does no harm to a politician or a journalist; in fact, it confers upon him that cachet of self-righteous and high-minded social justice that is so dear to the Left. Never mind the hundred million corpses left behind by Communism: if you want to make an omelet, you have to etc blah yak.

But don’t get within a mile of anyone who even knew a Nazi — then you’re dead meat.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

It’s unfortunate that we have to endure all this folderol about VB, because it’s heartening to read about what they’re doing in the European Parliament. Christine has collected some recent examples of Mr. Dillen’s speeches as an MEP; some excerpts are included below:

In terms of human rights, democracy and good governance, this forum is a faithful reflection of official EU policy and utterly fails to send out a powerful signal. A signal that demonstrates to the relevant countries that a refusal to respect human rights and apply democratic principles should be reciprocated with a reduction, or even scrapping, of all forms of development aid.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

In recent years, we have seen some striking examples of the deliberate deafness of official Europe. In France and the Netherlands, in democratic referendums, the people said ‘no’ to the European super state. Despite this, the German Presidency simply carries on down the path already chosen. For Angela Merkel, and I am afraid for you as a Member of the European Council, the will of the people does not count. All opinion polls show that whilst the Europeans want to be on friendly terms with the Turks, they do not want a non-European and Islamic country to join our Union. Again, the pre-determined path is simply followed.

I should like to finish off by saying to Mr Prodi that the government of my country brought itself into disrepute last week by refusing, for commercial reasons, to allow the Dalai Lama to visit Belgium. Nobody wants to offend China. It is very unfortunate that the rule in these situations seems to be that of Erst das Fressen und dann die Moral . I therefore hope that, within the European Council, you will speak up to focus on the attitude of your government which, although it likes to wax lyrical about human rights, when the chips are down, lets its own economic interests prevail, and also to denounce Belgium in this matter. If Europe is serious about defending human rights, it should also have the courage to denounce the hypocrisy of some Member States.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The sanctimonious line is that a mutually acceptable solution must be found for Tibet’s future. To say that is to make victim and executioner equal partners in dialogue. It became once again evident on whose side the EU is when in November 2005, the Chinese President, Hu Jintao, was received with much pomp and circumstance across Europe, yet it had, in fact, been he who perpetrated serious human rights violations when he was Secretary of Tibet’s Communist Party between December 1988 and March 1992.

The Tibet issue once again demonstrates that European rhetoric all too often amounts to nothing but moral wrapping paper and that in reality, only economic interests matter. We must continue to have the courage to denounce the cowardice and sanctimoniousness of this Europe, of this mercantile Europe that chooses to side with the oppressors to the detriment of innocent peoples.

Does this sound like someone we should shun? An unreconstructed neo-Nazi racist white supremacist?

Christine has more quotes over at the CVF blog.

Judge for yourself.

Tuesday was election day in Denmark.

Since Denmark is the de facto leader of the Counterjihad in the West, we are fortunate that the good guys won. Anders Fogh Rasmussen will remain prime minister, heading the VKO (Venstre-Konservativ) coalition. Dansk Folkeparti (the Danish People’s Party) gained in strength, and the Social Democrats hit a historic new low. The New Alliance did not live up to expectations, despite being puffed up to the maximum by the Danish MSM.

So here’s to the Vikings — Skol!

According to my Danish contacts, the parties in Copenhagen went until the wee hours on Wednesday. The next afternoon CG emailed me and said, “I have a headache. But it is a happy one!”

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The latest news, from today’s Jyllands-Posten, is the announcement by Rikke Hvilshøj that she will be stepping down as the minister of refugee, integration and immigration affairs. It’s not clear whether her departure is connected with the election — after all, Ms. Hvilshøj has been on the receiving end of leftist ire for several years, and could have other compelling reasons for resigning:

Hvilshøj herself got caught in the crossfire when activists firebombed her home shortly after she became minister in 2005 to protest the government’s tightened immigration policies. And since then, she has been one of the few ministers followed by bodyguards.

The Danish blogger Mikael left a succinct summary of the election results in the comments to my post:

The fat lady has finished the song. We made it! VKO got the magical 90 seats that make a majority.

Here’s the most important numbers:

– – – – – – – – –

New Alliance, the new joker in the game, polled at around 12 seats and ended at 5, after running a campaign hell-bent of keeping Danish Peoples Party (DPP) from any influence (A point pretty much every other party repeatedly made during the campaign). Instead the party is in reality without influence themselves!

Far from being kept from influence, the DPP gained a seat with 13.8% of the votes.

Social Democrats got a lousy result, but it is nevertheless celebrated as a great victory. Party members are full of moxy and optimism. They are still a force to be reckoned with.

The far-left Unity List clung on with their fingernails and made the 2 percent that is required to get representation in the Parliament. Asmaa Abdol-Hamid was not elected. Ha!

The biggest winner was the Socialist Party which nearly doubled its number of seats (13 percent). However, the party is irrelevant. It’s what we in Denmark call a “Hammock Party”, a safe place for bleeding hearts and artists to place their votes, as everybody knows the party’s influence will be minimal.

The real winner in my opinion is the DPP. Despite all the demonization from the left side, eagerly supported by the MSM, they stood their ground.

And here are some excerpts from Flemming Rose’s report at PJM on the night of the election:

Denmark’s Prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen scored a historic victory in today’s national elections. In spite of opinion polls speaking to the contrary the coalition that has governed Denmark for the last six years will be able to continue at the helm of power.

Mr. Rasmussen is the fist European head of government who has been reelected twice after having supported the war in Iraq and supplying Danish troops to the coalition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mr. Rasmussen is also the first leader of his conservative party (this isn’t a conservative party in the American sense. Mr. Rasmussen’s party is supporting a welfare state that Bill Clinton never would have signed on for) to be reelected twice as Prime minister, and his conservative party has turned out to be the biggest party in three national elections in a row, i.e. 2001, 2005 and now in 2007. This is also a historical achievement. It never happened before.

[…]

The Danish People’s party that over the last ten years has been demonized as racist by the left once again improved its standing, and they did so against all odds. They insist on keeping strict immigration policies, and have been reluctant to support lower taxes, and it is now up to the Prime minister to find out if the Danish People’s party and New Alliance can be part of the same coalition.

Another big winner was the Socialist party that almost doubled their number of seats in parliament. They did so due to the successful economy, one of the best performing in Europe with growth rates around 3-4 pct. The good economy has increased political pressure for social benefits and welfare, and the socialists have gone all the way. Almost any demand from any group has elicited support from the Socialists, so it is fair to say that they have been cashing in on the success of a conservative government.

The Social Democrats, the founding fathers of the welfare state, have definitively lost their monopoly as the sole guardian of the welfare. In the nineties the Social Democrats usually would get around 35 pct. of the votes, but now they have been permanently reduced, and I doubt that they ever again will cross the limit of 30 pct. Today they received 25 pct., which is a historical low figure. Ten years ago the party leader would have been forced out of office after an election result like this, but today the Social Democrats leader Helle Thorning-Schmidt is being perceived as successful.

Finally, it seems that the Islamist Asmaa Abdol-Hamid didn’t receive enough votes to get a seat in parliament, though her party of the extreme left did pass the threshold of 2 pct., but they lost 2 seats. She may, though, get a seat if she receives more than 10.000 personal votes. On election night Asmaa Abdol-Hamid indicated that she may leave politics, if this doesn’t materialize, so this time around it looks like Denmark will not have to deal with a Muslim member of parliament wearing the veil while addressing the nation.

And now to add some local (Virginia) color to this story. The day after the election, Dymphna and I received an email from an acquaintance in an adjacent state:

I have been meaning to tell you of the recent appearances and relationships Prime Minister Rasmussen has with denizens of your fair Commonwealth. When my older son matriculated at Hampden-Sydney College [located just outside of Farmville, in the heart of Southside Virginia], one of his classmates was a young man with the surname of Rasmussen. Young Rasmussen was involved with the Army ROTC, as well, which is where my son met him.

It turned out that subsequent developments caused Rasmussen to have to leave the ROTC program — something concerned with his being a citizen of Denmark. Of course, his father is the then and current Danish PM, Anders Fogh Rasmussen. In May 2005, PM Rasmussen was the keynote speaker at H-SC graduation.

Belgium is a multi-ethnic state, divided into Dutch-, French- and German-speaking areas. The ethnic German section of Belgium is relatively small; the main division of the country is between French-speaking Wallonia and Dutch-speaking Flanders.

The country is an artificial construct. Superficially it resembles Switzerland, in that it is a federated state of different ethnicities. Unlike Switzerland, however, Belgium was not federated consensually; it was established after the revolution of 1830 under military pressure from France.

Since the creation of Belgium the Flemish have felt themselves discriminated against by the Walloons, and have been treated as second-class citizens even when in the majority. Especially since the advent of the modern welfare state — in which the wealth of Flanders has been siphoned off to pay for benefits awarded to the less productive Walloons — the Flemish have resented the French-speaking minority. The massive influx of unwanted Third World immigrants over the last decade has only intensified that resentment.

Flanders has long aspired to independence, and the popular separatist political party Vlaams Belang is the latest expression of that aspiration.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

One of my Flemish contacts discovered a recent official document that lays a proposal for the independence of Flanders before the Belgian House of Representatives. With the help of ProFlandria he has supplied us with the following translated excerpts along with an introduction and a summary:

This pdf document is posted on the official website for the Belgian (federal) House of Representatives, and is dated November 6th, 2007. The title page explains that the document is a proposed resolution “for the complete dissolution of the Belgian state with a view to granting independence to the sovereign Flemish and Walloon peoples”. The proposal was addressed to the Belgian House of Representatives and submitted by Bart Laeremans, Gerolf Annemans, Filip De Man, and Linda Vissers.

Pages 3-35 provide an overview of Belgian history and from the perspective of Flemish-Walloon relations.

The document starts with the historical background to the creation of Belgium. Specifically, it rejects as myth the accepted narrative that Belgium was created in an act of revolt against Dutch oppression, and instead charges that the revolt was organized by Walloons and French agitators, and necessitated not only armed conflict with Dutch troops, but also with Flemish towns who had to be forcefully “convinced” (sometimes with French troops) to join the revolt. That section is actually entitled “The Conquest of Flanders by Belgium” (Professional historians don’t dispute this perspective, but it is not taught in school). In this manner, the document then charts the history of the two communities’ interaction through current times. It is largely a chronicle of the Flemish struggle to achieve equal treatment with their Walloon counterparts.

– – – – – – – – –

This narrative provides the grounds for the actual proposed resolution:

Proposal of Resolution

The [Belgian Federal] Chamber of People’s Representatives [House of Representatives],

A.		Considering that the Belgian revolution was a tragic event that put a premature end to the 1815 restoration of the union of the Netherlands under the house of Oranje-Nassau [the Netherlands’s union referred to ended in 1579, when territory which is now Belgium was conquered by Spain during the end of the Eighty Years’ War 1568-1648];
B.		Considering that Flanders never intended to separate from the Northern Netherlands, and that the Belgian revolution was mainly a revolt of Walloons and French-speaking foreigners;
C.		Considering that Belgian administration inaugurated a period of linguistic and cultural suppression as well as economic decline and that this period lasted more than one hundred years;
D.		Considering there exists neither a Belgian people nor a Belgian nation, but that the territory Belgium is inhabited by the Flemish and Walloon peoples, as well as a portion of the German people;
E.		Considering that Flanders and Wallonia are two completely different societies with different sensitivities, opinions, and preferences, and that interaction between these societies is ever diminishing;
F.		Considering that the Belgian fact lead to the change of Brussels [historically Flemish] into a majority French-speaking city and that Flanders and Brussels are drifting ever farther apart;
G.		Considering that Belgium is no longer a democratic state because the Walloon minority has the same power as the Flemish majority;
H.		Considering that Belgian federalism has provided the Flemish with only the appearance of autonomy and that the Belgian-Francophone establishment uses federalism as a weapon to neutralize the Flemish majority;
I.		Considering that Flanders has had time and again to pay a price for acquiring more autonomy, which is a breach of the principle of self- determination of peoples;
J.		Considering that Flanders doesn’t have any interest in the continued existence of the Belgian state and that its continued existence means a annual financial drain for the Flemish;
K.		Considering that there is no general Belgian common interest, because of which Belgium can not be a democracy;
L.		Considering that Belgium is an artificial state and the moment has arrived to grant the Flemish and Walloon people each their independence;

Ask the Federal government:

Without hesitation to prepare the complete dissolution of the Belgian state, so that the three communities — Flemish, Walloon and German — may go their separate ways.

As far as I know this is the first time a document proposing the dissolution of Belgium has ever been submitted for consideration by the legislature. Considering the visibility of the impasse the Belgian government finds itself in, I would have thought this document would have caught someone’s attention. However, a quick scan across headlines for De Standaard, Het Laatste Nieuws, Nieuwsblad, Le Soir, and La Libre Belgique comes up blank.

It’s tempting to consider the resolution a mere political placeholder, but submitting this to a forum that is half Walloon is not as crazy (or useless) as it sounds. Representatives from the major Walloon party PS (Parti Socialiste) such as Philippe Moureaux, Maria Arena and Jose Happart have recently made statements that indicate they see Flemish-Walloon separation as a real possibility. On the other hand, it’s hard to imagine that the resolution could be formalized without changes. As the proposal is written, it squarely puts the blame for its necessity with the Belgian government and (various representatives of) the Walloon community. Accepting this position by ratifying the resolution as it stands would severely cripple the Walloon community’s ability to negotiate a favorable separation; it would be tantamount to one spouse admitting to abusing the other, and then trying to walk away with the bank account.

In the meantime there’s some media analysis going on regarding the King’s involvement in the negotiation process. Stay tuned…

The significance of an independent Flanders extends far beyond the borders of Belgium, even beyond France and the Netherlands. The Flemings are demanding a just sovereignty over their own affairs, just as other nations in Europe have achieved sovereignty. If Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Kosovo deserve independence, why not Flanders? The argument is compelling.

Given the Flemish antipathy towards the EU, and the status of Brussels as the capital of the European Union, a successful bid for Flemish independence will shake the monstrous and tyrannical hybrid known as “Europe” to its very foundations.

It’s all but certain that the EU will resist such an event by any available means. Pay attention to the unfolding events in Belgium: for the next few years we’ll be in for an interesting ride.

Note: the above translation has been corrected slightly , as specified by Luc Van Braekel in a comment below.

Who knows why she did it?

One thing is certain, though: a seemingly suicidal Louisiana politician, Carla Blanchard Dartez, shot off her mouth and probably killed her chances in a local election runoff — it is a deserved death, an unmercy killing.

From the local media reports:

A Democrat who serves in the Louisiana legislature called a black supporter “Buckwheat” just days before the runoff election that will determine whether or not she returns to Baton Rouge.

[For our European readers, Buckwheat was a movie character from the 1930’s. Definitely a racial slur, as you’d know if you heard him talk. No Eton vowels for Buckwheat. There was also Aunt Jemima, Uncle Ben, and Step ‘n’ Fetch It, just to recall a few icons from those days. Our American readers of a certain age can add their own remembered names]

The sheer stupidity of this woman’s behavior can be seen in the details:
– – – – – – – – –

• The woman she slurred, Hazel Boykin, is 75 years old. She’s been a civil rights worker for a long time and is highly respected in her community for her pioneering work for equality.
• Mrs. Boykin’s son is president of the local NAACP. Thus, he has a lot of foot soldiers who can be called upon to urge voters to — *gasp* — vote for Dartez’ Republican rival. Which he has done, via his radio program.
• Mrs. Dartez’ husband is a member of the Democrat Party’s State Central Committee.
• Mrs. Dartez herself has additional image issues — e.g., her September citation for improper lane usage after hitting a pedestrian with her vehicle. She failed a field sobriety test but passed a later breathalyzer test.
• Her husband, mentioned above, has been indicted for allegedly harboring illegal aliens through his construction business.

Initially this insensitive idiot politician proclaimed contrition for her little linguistic slip, but no one is buying it:

I made an insensitive comment, and I regret my choice of words,” Dartez said in a statement reported by The (Houma) Courier newspaper. “I have apologized to both Hazel and Jerome Boykin. The Boykin family has been a huge help in my campaign for re-election, and I did not mean to offend them.”

But Hazel Boykin disagreed and said Dartez still has not personally apologized to her.

I love it when (at least some) Democrats are held to the same standard as Republicans, even in Loosiana. It gives you renewed faith in the electoral process.

How you want them buckwheat pancakes, Miz Carla? With syrup, or sackcloth and ashes?