Viktor Orbán: “The Soros network is the greatest threat faced by the states of the European Union”

The renowned Hungarian-American “philanthropist” George Soros has aimed another angry salvo at Hungary and Poland, which have so far resisted the diktats of the European Union and thwarted the plans of Mr. Soros and his minions to achieve full political, monetary, social, and cultural uniformity among the former nation-states of Europe.

The great philanthropist has made Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán a particular target in his latest article. Our Hungarian correspondent CrossWare sends these notes about Mr. Soros’ intervention:

I know you are busy with the sham so-called election over there, but in the meantime the globalist George Soros network launched another attack against Poland and Hungary. The latest article by Soros, who is demanding that EU leaders punish Hungary and Poland for not accepting the undefined “rule of law” conditions attached to the next EU budget, was published by a group called “Project Syndicate”.

When Viktor Orbán wrote a response, the same publication refused to publish it (in the name of tolerance and liberal principles, obviously). For now the Hungarian government official site is hosting the letter, which was published in Hungarian, German and English.

Let’s review what is going on: The EU wants to define the budget for the next seven years. They also want to get a huge loan to “help” the southern nations, which are always in financial trouble, but now with the COVID are even more down than usual.

It also does not help that all southern states — Greece, Spain, Portugal, France and Italy — are under the rule of leftist governments, who are busy pampering illegal Muslim migrants instead of helping their own economy. They are desperate for more money, obviously for more migrants.

Just like the Democrats with their rabid leftists in their ranks, the EU is also having the same ideological trouble. They call it the “respect for the rule of law”, which is somehow lacking in two countries that do not want to accept those nice military-age Muslim rocket scientists. The real term has never been defined, and it is always used as a political bludgeon.

Last summer the European Commission decided not to get into a discussion on this highly political topic, and wanted to discuss it separately. However, the European Parliament, where Soros has a comfortable majority, overruled that decision.

Now they are once again attaching conditions to the EU budget. One must understand that the money in the budget does not provide gifts for Hungary and the other member countries. That is the price for opening their market and adjusting regulations. The best analogy would be that Hungary is a landlord that rents out his apartment. The tenant is the EU, which is using the apartment and its facilities. One day the tenant decides that he will not pay any more rent until the landlord proves he is “cool”.

What does coolness mean? Nobody knows, but it is whatever the tenant wants at that moment. One day it means the landlord must hop on one leg, or perhaps he has to let in more people into the apartment for free; perhaps he should let the tenant to grope the landlord’s children…

Actually, the real problems are as follows:

  • The northern countries do not want to finance the loser southern states. But they do not want to deny them openly; thus they force the arch-enemy states Hungary and Poland into a situation that they know they will never accept.
  • They want both countries to open their borders and accept Muslim migrants. Primarily Germany wants to dump their useless migrant population they have collected over the last few years.
  • The leftists also want migrants imported into those countries to increase their voter base and eliminate alternative ideas against their Liberal-Bolshevik Caliphate.
  • And of course the LGBTQ… XYZ (soon P for pedophilia) mob wants to enter the kindergartens and prepare the next generation of fresh meat for themselves with sensitivity training.

Below are excerpts from Mr. Soros’ article (the complete original is here):

Europe Must Stand Up to Hungary and Poland

by George Soros

The European Union cannot afford to compromise on the rule-of-law provisions it applies to the funds it allocates to member states. How the EU responds to the challenge to those provisions now posed by Hungary and Poland will determine whether it survives as an open society true to the values upon which it was founded.

NEW YORK — Hungary and Poland have vetoed the European Union’s proposed €1.15 trillion ($1.4 trillion) seven-year budget and the €750 billion European recovery fund. Although the two countries are the budget’s biggest beneficiaries, their governments are adamantly opposed to the rule-of-law conditionality that the EU has adopted at the behest of the European Parliament. They know that they are violating the rule of law in egregious ways, and do not want to pay the consequences.

It is not so much an abstract concept like the rule of law that Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and, to a lesser extent, Poland’s de facto ruler, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, oppose. For them, the rule of law represents a practical limit on personal and political corruption. The veto is a desperate gamble by two serial violators.

It was also an unprecedented step, coming at a moment when Europe is suffering from a dangerous surge of COVID-19 cases, and it threw the other EU countries’ representatives into confusion. But when the shock wore off, closer analysis revealed that there is a way around the veto.

The rule-of-law regulations have been adopted. In case there is no agreement on a new budget, the old budget, which expires at the end of 2020, is extended on a yearly basis. Hungary and Poland would not receive any payments under this budget, because their governments are violating the rule of law.

Likewise, the recovery fund, called Next Generation EU, could be implemented by using an enhanced cooperation procedure, as Guy Verhofstadt has proposed. If the EU went down this road, the Orbán-Kaczynski veto could be circumvented. The question is whether the EU, with German Chancellor Angela Merkel perhaps leading the way, can muster the political will.

I am a committed supporter of the EU as a model of an open society built on the rule of law. Being of Hungarian Jewish origin, I am particularly concerned with the situation in Hungary, where I have been active as a philanthropist for more than 30 years.


Hungary’s opposition parties are bravely trying to challenge Orbán by forming a common list of candidates for the 2022 general election. But their chances of success are limited because Orbán can change the rules at short notice, as he has already done several times before. Conveniently, Orbán is planning to introduce the latest changes to the electoral law while the pandemic is raging, Budapest is under curfew, and soldiers are patrolling the streets.

Moreover, Orbán exercises almost total control over the countryside, where the majority of the population lives. He controls the information they receive, and voting in many villages is not secret. There is practically no way the opposition can prevail.

Only the EU can help. EU funds, for example, should be directed to local authorities, where there is still a functioning democracy in Hungary, unlike at the national level.

The EU can’t afford to compromise on the rule-of-law provisions. How it responds to the challenge posed by Orbán and Kaczynski will determine whether it survives as an open society true to the values upon which it was founded.

This is the full text of Viktor Orbán’s response, which Project Syndicate refused to publish:

Europe must not succumb to the Soros network

November 25, 2020

Reply to the article by George Soros

Many believe that the prime minister of a country should not enter into an argument with George Soros. Their reasoning is that Soros is an economic criminal, because he made his money through speculation, ruining the lives of millions of people, and even blackmailing entire national economies. Just as governments must not negotiate with terrorists, they say, prime ministers must likewise not debate with economic criminals.

Yet now I am compelled to do so, because in an article appearing on the Project Syndicate website on 18 November, the Hungarian-born speculator and billionaire George Soros issued open commands to the leaders of the European Union. In his article he instructs them to severely punish those Member States that do not want to become part of a unifying European empire under the banner of a global “open society”.

Continue reading

Do They Really Mean It?

Last night’s post about French President Emmanuel “Toy Boy” Macron started a conversation in the comments about whether or not Mr. Macron sincerely wants to stop (or slow) the encroachment of Islam in France. The translated article concerned the French President’s requirement that the French Council of Muslim Worship come up with a plan for regulating the training of imams in France and removing foreign influences from the process.

The consensus seems to be that Mr. Macron is trying to poach some support from Marine Le Pen of National Rally, who would probably win the next presidential election if it were held today. With every incident of deadly violence that escapes the banlieues and impacts the lives of ordinary native French people, the more voters turn to Ms. Le Pen.

Emmanuel Macron may have a vestigial sense of French identity and culture, but he is clearly an opportunist. In his lofty position as head of state, he can hardly be unaware of the dire peril that Islamization poses to the French state. In my opinion — which is not based on statistics, since the French government has for many years prohibited the collecting of statistics on ethnicity and religion in France — the country has already passed the point of no return. France will become an Islamic republic within a generation at most.

If Mr. Macron and his handlers are aware of these facts — and one must assume they are — then they are simply maneuvering to give themselves the best possible positions of advantage during the rapidly dwindling time in which non-Muslims retain control of the French government. And, as someone pointed out in the comments, the president may well be keeping an eye on the military, which has its own agenda concerning Islamic violence.

I’ve been watching the careers of Emmanuel Macron, Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, and British Prime Minister Boris “BoJo” Johnson since long before they achieved daily prominence in the news headlines. Despite their widely differing personalities and styles, they seemed to be cut from the same political cloth: ambitious, unprincipled, unscrupulous men who would do whatever it took to achieve and maintain their positions of power.

Continue reading

Geert Wilders: “A Monster Called Islam”

Geert Wilders, the leader of the Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid, PVV) in the Netherlands, recently spoke at a debate in the Tweede Kamer (lower house of the Dutch parliament) about freedom of speech, in the wake of the beheading of Samuel Paty in France. The video below shows excerpts from Mr. Wilders’ remarks.

Many thanks to C for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:

The accompanying article from the RAIR Foundation:

Geert Wilders Slams Dutch PM: ‘You Have Imported a Monster Called Islam Into Our Country’

The Dutch House of Representatives held a debate on freedom of speech at the request of Party for Freedom (PVV) leader, Geert Wilders after the beheading of the French teacher Samuel Paty. Wilders slammed the open-borders policies of the Dutch Prime Minister, Mark Rutte for “importing a monster called Islam into our country, which has put our country in danger.”

Geert Wilders, who is thought of as, “The Donald Trump of The Netherlands”, opened the parliamentary debate with a summary of the islamic attacks and threats in recent weeks. He also addressed the call by Amsterdam’s imam, Yassin Elforkani, who just two weeks after the murder of Samuel Paty, began demanding the criminalization of insulting Mohammed. A petition was even launched by his fellow Imam, Ismail Abou Soumayyah insisting the government to adopt sharia blasphemy laws. The petition has currently been signed more than 125,000 times.

Once again, Wilders told the Dutch legislatures to enact his five point plan to tackle what he deems the biggest danger to their society,

“Islam is the poison of our society. We imported a sample. I’ve been warning about it for twenty years. How many more victims have to fall before the penny falls until we realize that this terrible Islam does not belong in the Netherlands?”

Wilders’ plan asks the government to; “recognize that Islam is a violent ideology”, close the borders, “dismantle institutions of Islam”, lock up and deport all muslims threatening violence — along with their sympathizers, and have schools and media “show Muhammad cartoons”.

The PVV leader sent a clear warning to sharia-adherent Muslims who refuse to assimilate into the Netherlands, leave he demanded — go to an Islamic country,

“for all the Muslims in the Netherlands who do not respect our freedom, our democracy, and our core values, who find the rules of the Quran more important than our secular laws….get out! Leave for an Islamic country. This is our country. Not your country, but our country. This is the Netherlands.”

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Philippe de Villiers: “It is the Islamic Virus That We Must Make War Against”

Philippe de Villiers is a French author, historian, and former MEP. He is an anomaly in today’s France: an intellectual who is also a conservative Catholic. He’s been featured here a number of times in the past.

Many thanks to Gary Fouse for translating this article from Le Figaro:

Philippe de Villiers: “It is the Islamic virus that we must make war against”

FigaroVox/Tribune— Philippe de Villiers deplores the differential treatment between the coronavirus and the Islamic virus. To fight against the first, the government does not hesitate to put in place questionable exceptional measures, while concerning the second, which according to him is an actual invasive aggression, it refuses to take measures of war on the grounds it might kill liberty.

Both are out of control: The Covid and terrorism. Emmanuel Macron is lagging behind. He runs after the words, after the deaths, martial, powerless. The lexical field used since spring, “We are at war,” today seems like an utterance and an inappropriate term: The epidemic is still operating, and the terrorists as well. The idea that the country is not being governed and that the State is in the hands of a bunch of amateurs emerges in the heads of the distraught French people.

Failing to secure the national borders, we reinstitute the domestic border

The ineptitude of the authorities, forced to conduct two wars at the same time, emerges in the differential treatment of the two viruses. There is one that raises health security. To protect the population from this viral enemy, we have chosen to lock ourselves up, to make ourselves stay home. Failing to secure the national borders, we reinstitute the domestic border. We take freedom-killing measures, we flatten the economy, we tear away the connective tissue of industrial France, because we think that health protection is more important than all freedoms: Then we announce, in 15 days, by using the same war-like panoply, first the curfew— which is a nighttime confinement — then the confinement which is a daytime curfew, never used even in the 1940s.

Faced with the other virus, which for once, is a true invasive aggression, we refuse to implement measures of war on the grounds that they might be freedom-killing, and so, to the legal maniacs, subject to legal censure. Thus, we refrain from touching family reunification or the 500 Islamist mosques. We don’t recognize the fatal chain: Immigration is the breeding ground of terrorism. We refuse to respond to war with war, and allow the population to have their throats slit. In other words, on the one hand, without being encumbered by scruples, we take away our freedoms, in the name of health security. On the other hand, we dare not give ourselves the means of guaranteeing ourselves physical safety.

France has become the planetary crossroads of the assassins of civilization

The audacity of the government, when it is a matter of silencing us in the streets and inflicting boundaries on our daily lives, contrasts with the laxity practiced concerning the Islamists. We don’t touch our borders; we safeguard the right of asylum: France has become the planetary crossroads of the assassins of civilization.

Where does this differential treatment come from? Having had serious conversations with Emmanuel Macron on this subject, I can answer this question: The globalist culture of our elites — which permeates Macronia — has blossomed into a hedonism and individualism that have destroyed our immune defenses.

Continue reading

Stéphane Ravier: “Anarchic Immigration Has Killed Once Again”

Stéphane Ravier is a senator for the party National Rally (Rassemblement National, formerly Front National) in France. In the following video Mr. Ravier talks about the jihad terror attack in Nice on October 29, when three people were killed at a church by an illegal immigrant from Tunisia.

Many thanks to WillowPear for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

The Case for Affirming the Independence of the Armenian Republic of Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabagh

David Boyajian sends this update to his earlier reports on the ongoing conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia.

The Case for Affirming the Independence of the Armenian Republic of Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabagh

by David Boyajian

In recent years, many territories’ declarations of independence have been justifiably affirmed through international agreements. The Republic of Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabagh’s declaration of independence from Azerbaijan three decades ago is as legitimate as any of those. Artsakh is the republic’s ancient Armenian name.

Artsakh and Christian Armenia have been under attack by Azerbaijan, Turkey, jihadist terrorists, and ISIS since September 27. Turkey is using its army, American-built F-16 jets, drones, and other weapons against Armenians. Azerbaijan’s arsenal comes mostly from Israel, including illegal cluster bombs being targeted against civilians. Israel is currently resupplying Azerbaijan.

Artsakh, like Armenia, is thousands of years old. In contrast, no country named Azerbaijan existed before 1918. It was cobbled together out of a diverse population of what were called Muslims or Tartars, as well as Armenians, Persians, Russians, and others. No such identity as ‘Azeri’ had ever existed.

We’ll show that Artsakh justifiably and legitimately voted for self-determination as it separated from Azerbaijan, its previous temporary but brutish overlord.

The Stalinist Giveaway

Turkey and Azerbaijan speak Turkic dialects. Therefore, Soviet dictator Josef Stalin fantasized (incorrectly, as it turned out) that Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) and his incipient Turkish Republic could be lured into the USSR’s web. So in the early 1920s, Stalin transferred Artsakh — then 96% Armenian — and the Armenian territory of Nakhichevan to Azerbaijan. Stalin’s blunder is the root cause of the present impasse over Artsakh.

Shortly before the transfer, Azerbaijan massacred Armenians in Artsakh, Baku (Azerbaijan), and elsewhere. These crimes were part of the Armenian Genocide that Turkey had already been committing from 1915 on.

Stalin also transferred Armenian land to Azerbaijan such that Artsakh became geographically cut off from Armenia. Many majority Armenian areas were also excluded from Artsakh. The latter became a nominally “autonomous” region within Soviet Azerbaijan but, in reality, under the latter’s heavy jackboot.

Artsakh voted for self-determination in accordance with Soviet law in 1988 and international law in 1991. Self-determination and territorial integrity have equal standing under international law. In response, Azerbaijan massacred Armenians in its own cities of Baku, Kirovabad/Ganja, and Sumgait. A war ensued which the outnumbered and outgunned Armenians won in 1994.

Artsakh’s long nightmare through seven decades of Azerbaijani rule was due not to Communism but rather to raw Azeri ethno-racial fanaticism.

Artsakh’s Long Nightmare

Under Azeri rule, Artsakh’s Armenians dropped from 95% to 76% of the population — the product of deportations, exile, murder, theft, oppression, and Azerbaijan’s calculating importation of Azeris to replace the Armenian majority.

The KGB’s Heydar Aliyev — father of current Azeri dictator Ilham Aliyev — admitted to exiling Artsakh’s Armenians and bringing in Azeris. Reported Russia’s REGNUM news agency: “I tried to increase the number of Azeris and to reduce the number of Armenians.”

Armenian historical figures’ titles were crudely Islamized to “Pasha” or “Bey.” The fifth-century Armenian historian Movses Khorenatsi became Muhammed al-Khojayi.

References to Armenian history in textbooks were excised. Even the written word Artsakh was banned.

Continue reading

Religiously-Motivated Attacks on Armenia and Artsakh

David Boyajian, writing for Armenian Americans for Human Rights (AAHR), has issued another press release about the war between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabagh). In a prefatory note, he says:

AAHR respectfully encourages readers — wherever they live — to ask the USCIRF to condemn aggression against Armenia and Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabagh) by Azerbaijan, Turkey, and terrorists, and to ask all countries to cease supplying weapons to Turkey and Azerbaijan.

Please also ask USCIRF to relay its statement to U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

You may use the two USCIRF email addresses below (and request that your message be forwarded to all USCIRF Commissioners and Staff): (Ms. Erin D. Singshinsuk, Executive Director)

October 12, 2020

Armenian Americans for Human Rights (AAHR) Asks the Official United States Commission for International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) in Washington, DC to Condemn Azerbaijan’s Aggression Against Armenians

AAHR sent the following letter on October 9, 2020 to the USCIRF’s Commissioners and Staff.

Dear USCIRF Chair Manchin, Vice-Chairs Perkins and Bhargava, Honorable Commissioners, and Staff:

I am the Chair of the Armenian Americans for Human Rights (AAHR).

Armenian Americans, Armenia, and the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabagh) have not characterized the ongoing conflict with Azerbaijan as religious in nature.

However, given the deliberate attack (September 27, 2020) by Azerbaijan, Turkey (using Turkish military personnel and American-supplied F-16s), and their explicitly anti-Christian jihadi/terrorist allies, those parties clearly intend religion to be a major factor in their war against Armenians.

  • Jihadis/terrorists have come from Syria and elsewhere specifically to attack Christian Armenians. ISIS is also present.

    This is no surprise. Azerbaijan used mujahedin and similar jihadists against Armenians in the early 1990s.

  • On October 8, 2020, Azerbaijan deliberately targeted and severely damaged the well-known Ghazanchetsots Cathedral in Shushi, Artsakh.
  • Over the years, Azerbaijan’s army used pickaxes and dump trucks to destroy the 9th century Armenian Christian cemetery in the Azerbaijani territory of Nakhichevan (formerly Armenian, but cleansed of Armenians over the course of the 20th century). Please see this live video, “New Tears of the Araxes”.

Given the above, AAHR finds it perplexing that USCIRF has apparently issued no statement condemning the current religiously-motivated attacks on Armenia and Artsakh.

Continue reading

Eric Zemmour: Pope Francis and the De-Christianizing of Europe

In the following excerpt from a French TV talk show, the popular commentator Eric Zemmour discusses Pope Francis with his fellow panelists. The main topic is His Holiness’ recent encyclical “Fratelli Tutti”, in which he called for open borders, the suppression of nationalism, and granting more power to the United Nations. Most notably, he said that every country belongs to foreigners as well as the natives.

Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Breitbart reports about “Fratelli Tutti”:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Marine Le Pen Backs Tomio Okamura

Tomio Okamura is the founder and leader of the Czech political party Freedom and Direct Democracy, and has been Deputy Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies since 2017. In the following video Marine Le Pen, the leader of Rassemblement National (formerly Front National) endorses Mr. Okamura and his party in the upcoming elections in Czechia.

The video is in French, but has been translated from the Czech subtitles. Many thanks to Xanthippa for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Viktor Orbán: The Rebellion Against Liberal Spiritual Oppression

For the last few years, in the late summer Gates of Vienna readers could expect to see a subtitled video of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s annual “state of the nation” speech. Mr. Orbán customarily makes his remarks each year at the Bálványos Summer Open University and Student Camp in Tusnádfürdő (Băile Tuşnad), in the ethnic Hungarian region of western Romania. However, this year COVID-19 reared its ugly head, forcing the prime minister to write an essay instead.

Many thanks to CrossWare for translating this piece from Magyar Nemzet.

Together we will succeed again!

by Viktor Orbán

There is no Tusnádfürdo [site of the annual workshop of the Bálványos Free Summer University]. There is no Kötcse [site of annual Civic Picnic]. There is no transit (traffic). There is an epidemic. The virus has also decimated summer meetings of workshops on political thinking. And there would be something to think about and discuss. Something and in some manner which would be impossible in the parliamentarian jostle and inside the frames of modern communication. So what remains is writing instead of speaking, an essay instead of a lecture.

Illiberal, conservative, Christian Democrat, liberal. Our struggle for intellectual sovereignty and intellectual freedom, which was launched years ago in Tusnád(fürdo), is slowly coming to fruition. Political correctness, that is, the rebellion against the classical liberal doctrines — ways of speaking, and dictates on style — is expanding. More and more people courageously step out of the stall of the already stiflingly narrow single correct way of speaking, the only correct concept of democracy, the only correct interpretation of Europe and the West. The attempt to escape is not easy in itself; the risk of punishment is significant. Expulsion from academic life, job loss, stigma, running the university gauntlet — examples are slowly becoming commonplace. But even if we manage to get over the well-paid and round-the-clock watching knee-jerk liberal* border guards, we also have to deal with the deep-seated reflexes of any well-meaning audience. Despite the sophistication of reasoning, the praise of nationalism shakes the German stomach, even if it was written by Professor Hazony from Jerusalem. And no matter what velvety tone we use to talk about illiberal democracy, it sounds awful to German and Anglo-Saxon ears. Even today.

The rebellion against liberal spiritual oppression is not only widening, but also deepening. There are more and more compelling essays; thorough studies and inevitable monographs come to light. Even if they don’t confess it in the Brussels bubble, we can already see that the emperor is naked. The doctrine of ‘democracy can only be liberal’, the untouchable idol, the big fetish has fallen, we just have to wait for the stirred-up cloud of dust to settle, and then we will not only know, but see. It seems that conservative and Christian Democratic parties, political movements can escape the life-threatening embrace of liberals. “There’s no such thing as an illiberal democracy,” and similar sentences are now being recorded in the book of political nonsense, no matter where they come from. Conservative political thinkers have finally summoned up the courage to justify, by outlining with the elegance of mathematical proofs, that liberalism and conservatism represent two opposing positions in political theory. They have shown that the arguments of those who want to shove conservatism under the big umbrella of liberalism are wrong. Those who argue that the separation of powers, civil and political freedoms, the protection of private property and constrained governance — that is, the rule of law — can only be conceived within the spiritual framework of liberalism and only through the means of liberal democracy, they are wrong to stick to this benevolent explanation. Of course, we also know Hungarians who have solved this task in the past, but have realized, how much more pleasant it is to collect appreciative shrugs in Brussels, accompanied by the gentle smiles of lukewarm liberal salons, than to squeal like a black lamb at home in Budapest. That little nauseating bad feeling there in the region of the stomach doesn’t even seem like such a big price. Although today the temperature, furniture and elegance of Central European salons are less and less behind the Western ones, not to mention the cuisine. Crawling back will soon begin. As happened from Moscow once upon a time.

Today’s confusion of conservatism and liberalism can be traced back to the fact that in the great battles against totalitarianism, conservatives and liberals set aside their essential and then still obvious differences. They set them aside and made an alliance against the common enemy. An alliance against Nazism and Communism, Nazis and Communists. It was a long, centuries-long struggle, and the severity of the Allies’ thoughts, arguments, and fundamentals became apparent only when the Alliance lost its meaning with the fall of the Berlin Wall in the West and the withdrawal of the Soviets in the East.

Politicians, journalists, and even scholars easily alternate between conservative and liberal ideas and concepts. For a long time — too long, about two decades — it seemed that there was nothing wrong with that; even if it was intellectually inaccurate and remiss, no serious damage came from it. This was also thought by the Anglo-Saxon conservatives and the European Christian Democrats. However, the situation has now changed. Things have gotten serious. What used to seem like a slight mental defect, poor posture, a tolerable disorder, now prevents us from seeing clearly on important issues. It obscures the fact that the biggest challenge and opponent for conservatives and Christian Democrats today and again is liberalism and liberals. The principles of Christian Democrat and Liberal thinking are in stark contrast, and in the crosshairs of Liberal attacks are all that is most important to us: the cornerstones of the desired political order, the center of the Conservative-Christian Democratic tradition, religion, family.

The recognition that, if it goes on like this, Christian-Conservative forces will assist in weakening nations, eradicating religious traditions, and downgrading, mocking the family, here in Central Europe, has risen to the level of public and state politics. Here the red light came on, here we applied the emergency brake, and here, mainly in Poland and Hungary, we sounded the alarm bells. There was enough force here to pull back the European political home of the Christian Democrats and Conservatives, the European People’s Party, from the edge of the abyss. There was enough instinct and volume here to say that we could not risk the future of European Christian democracy for the sake of an understandable German demand for the Brussels coalition party to have its pattern to coincide with Berlin’s, as this is the easiest way to create harmony between the two centers of power.

So if the Christian Democrats enter the coalition with the left in Berlin, so should the EPP in the European Parliament. If we follow this trail, after the German elections, we can also get to know the beauties of the EPP and the coalition with the Greens, as it has already been already “tasted” in the laboratory in Vienna.

In Central Europe, however, not only good taste is rebelling against the idea of such perversion, but also common sense. The differences between liberal and Christian Democratic political theory are important not only in the world of university departments. They also have serious practical political consequences.

Liberals, for philosophical reasons going back to Kant — which I will not detail here — believe that every country, even those that are governed today as a non-liberal democracy, should be forced to accept this form of government. Christian Democrats, on the other hand, reject such a foreign policy because they believe that societies are held together in different ways and in peace. As the Arab Spring recently proved, liberal democracy can bring collapse and chaos, causing more harm than good. That is why we also support Donald Trump’s victory, because we are well aware of the foreign policy of American democratic governments based on moral imperialism. We were forced to taste it, but it didn’t taste good, so we don’t ask for a repeat.

Our policies are also intertwined on that topic, which is commonly referred to as “subsidiarity” in Brussels. Liberals say it is good to transfer as many national governmental powers as possible to international organizations. That is why they clap their hands politely; that is why vision is veiled and the heart beats faster when any international organization is given a new competence, a task and, of course, a horse and a weapon, as this gives universal ideas — European values, universal human rights — more encouragement and recognition.

However, the enthusiasm of Christian Democrats is less bubbly, because they see that such organizations are inevitably prone to arbitrariness, which those organizations tend to call the “rule of law”, which is merely a rule of blackmail, vulnerable to Soros’ network-like intrusion attempts, and if choices have to be made between the citizens of national communities and the big dogs of global capitals, in the end they always choose the latter. The citizens of European nations soon realized that today’s European institutions did not serve them, but the interests of George Soros and his ilk. They refuse to swallow the BS of Brussels, that a financial speculator, enriched by the destruction of others, is lurking in the corridors of Brussels to offer his selfless help to Europe.

Continue reading

Never Forget the Charge Down the Kahlenberg

We recently passed the 337th anniversary of the Other September 11th — the lifting of the Second Siege of Vienna by a Christian army commanded by Jan III Sobieski, the king of Poland, on September 11-12, 1683. Early in the morning on September 12 the king led the charge down the slope of the Kahlenberg to confront the Ottoman Army at the Gates of Vienna under the command of the Grand Vizier, Pasha Kara Mustafa. The Ottomans were routed, and fled back into Hungary. Kara Mustafa was later garroted for humiliating the Sultan with his defeat.

Despite the accelerating Islamization of Europe in the 21st century, the victory in 1683 has not been forgotten. Many thanks to JLH for translating this article from Politically Incorrect:

Welcoming comments by Petr Bystron on the occasion of the torchlight parade on Vienna’s Kahlenberg

“Remembrance of September 12, 1683 is more topical now than ever.”

September 15, 2020

Again this year, there was a solemn commemorative ceremony recalling defeat of the Turks and the saving of Europe in 1683. Approximately 300 people attended the event organized by the Kahlenberg Alliance. The Wiener Akademikerbund, the organization Okzident, ProVita and the Plattform Gedenken 1683 assembled notable speakers from neighboring lands.

From Slovakia came former Prime Minister Jan Carnogursky—the jurist who was arrested in 1989 as a communist dissident and later rose to become the conservative Minister of the Interior of Slovakia. As a devout Catholic, he is part of the Habsburg Order of St. George. His speech emphasized the Christian roots of Europe.

The Islam expert Irfan Peci — a welcome guest on TV talk shows until 2015 — represented academe. After he had discussed the Islamizing potential of the waves of immigration, the MSM began to avoid him. Presently he inspires the patriots’ camp with his expertise on Islam in Europe.

The foreign policy expert Petr Bystron sent a video message insisting that September 12 be made an all-Europe holiday. Bystron consistently battles against the Islamization of Europe, as well as the broadening of Europe to include Turkey. In his first Bundestag speech addressing Turkey, he said: “Dear Friends from Turkey, Turkey has never belonged to Europe, Europe ends at the Bosporus. And Turkey does not belong to the EU.”

The battle on the Kahlenberg decisively influenced Europe’s fate. This day in church was celebrated for centuries in the Catholic Church in Mary’s Name, specifically in reference to THE VICTORIOUS REPULSE OF THE TURKISH MUSLIMS, who cried “Allahu Akhbar” before Vienna’s walls.

On September 12 every year, especially in the former lands of the Habsburg monarchy, people celebrate the turning back of the Turks at Vienna. On that day in 1683, the Blue Elector [of Bavaria] took part with Polish King Jan Sobieski in the victory over the Turkish Muslims. “Without the victory of united European armies over the Muslims at Vienna, we would have had no Enlightenment. Europe would have taken an entirely different path” says Bystron.

The Catholic Church celebrated the holiday in Mary’s name for a long time. Pope Innocent XI (1676-1689) made the holiday mandatory for the entire Church, following the victorious breaking of the Turkish siege on the Kahlenberg by united Christian armies under King Jan III Sobieski.

A banner with an image of the Madonna’s Protective Mantle was borne before the Christian army at Vienna. Liturgy reforms removed the holiday from the liturgical calendar in 1970. Already in the background was the attempt to appease Islam, driven since the 1970s by progressive circles within the Church.

Apparently, however, the Vatican was aware as early as 2002 of the reality of this historical background. Since then, the holiday appears again in the general calendar. In the meantime, it had been celebrated by devout Catholics in Germany and Austria. They remember only too well the danger of Islamization of the Christian West.

Below are two additional meaningful memorabilia featuring Jan III Sobieski.

First, a drawing by the Swedish artist Lars Vilks of the Hero of Vienna with a Rondellhund (Roundabout Dog) prophet at the Gates of Vienna. It was drawn especially for this blog, and I treasure it:

Continue reading

From the Heart of Darkness to the Tuscan Hills

Last Wednesday former Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini was attacked in Pontassieve, near Florence in Tuscany, while campaigning for the regional elections. His assailant was a Congolese woman whose attack, according to one of the articles below, was not premeditated. However, other sources identify the woman as an “activist”, which would make it less likely that the assault was spontaneous.

The video below is a composite of several clips, and shows the attack itself as well as Mr. Salvini’s remarks afterwards. Many thanks to FouseSquawk for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:

Below are excerpts from two articles about the assault on Matteo Salvini. First, from ANSA:

Black Woman Rips Salvini’s Shirt and Rosary Off

At election rally near Florence

(ANSA) – PONTASSIEVE, SEP 9 – A 20-year-old woman from Congo on Wednesday pushed and shoved rightwing League leader Matteo Salvini, ripping his shirt and breaking off the rosary around his neck, as he arrived for an election rally at Pontassieve near Florence.

The young woman was in “a clear state of psycho-physical excitation”, police said.

They said her actions did not appear to have been premeditated.

They said she found herself alongside Salvini as she was returning from work.

Separately, a group of young leftists and anarchists protested Salvini’s visit.

The woman was part of a crowd that had gathered for the League leader’s arrival.

The League is a populist and nationalist anti-migrant and Euroskeptic party.

Salvini said his assailant “should be ashamed of herself”.


“The nice thing I take away from Pontassieve,” Salvini went on, “is not that poor woman, but a lady who told me ‘Matteo, I don’t think like you, but I apologise on behalf of that idiot, if you want I’ll buy you a coffee’.”

And from RMX News:

Video: Migrant Woman Attacks Matteo Salvini at Campaign Event, Tears Off His Rosary

Matteo Salvini, leader of the Italian opposition League party, was assaulted by an Congolese woman at a campaign event in Tuscany on Wednesday, with the woman tearing his shirt and breaking his rosary.

Salvini was in the area campaigning for his party due to regional elections that will be held on Sept. 20-21.

Italian parties, without exception, condemned what happened, however, the police are being criticized for their handling of the situation.

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Matteo Salvini: “I will declare myself guilty of defending Italy and the Italian people”

Like Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, former Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini has been subjected to prosecutions for political reasons. The latest judicial proceeding against him is a charge of “kidnapping” for his actions as interior minister in forbidding the landing of migrant-ferry vessels at Italian ports.

Mr. Salvini is also campaigning for the Lega in the regional elections in Apulia, which will be held later this month. In the following video he is speaking to a crowd of supporters in Manduria.

Many thanks to FouseSquawk for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Turkish Aspirations From the Aegean to the Crimea

The waning of European power in the first two decades of the 21st century has emboldened the Turkish government under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whose ambition to head a reborn Ottoman Caliphate is unconcealed. Mr. Erdogan evidently has plans to harness the awakened Islamic vigor of the Turkish state to push westward into Europe and northeastward into the Caucasus.

For months Turkey has been exhibiting provocative behavior towards Greece and Cyprus, exploring for mineral wealth inside Cypriot territorial waters, conducting military overflights of Greek airspace, and asserting territorial claims over islands in the Greek archipelago of the eastern Aegean.

Angela Merkel and her pro-Turkish German government have given Greece the cold shoulder on the issue of Turkish belligerence. Since the foreign policy of the European Union is steered mainly by Germany, the collective attitude of the EU towards the plight of the Greeks has remained cool and restrained.

France, however, is another matter entirely. It seems the French government has decided to pursue its interests in the Mediterranean by assisting the Greeks unilaterally. The following excerpts from article in InsideOver, an offshoot of the Italian daily Il Giornale, shed some light on events in the eastern Mediterranean:

The Alleged Rafale Deal: French-Greek Rapprochement in the Troubled Eastern Mediterranean

by Alex Kassidiaris
September 4, 2020

Since late July 2020, we have been witnessing the most severe escalation in Greek-Turkish relations in decades. It seems that both sides are pushing for a definitive solution on the long-term pending issues of the maritime boundaries across Eastern Mediterranean, changing the regional dynamics and prompting new geopolitical alliances to emerge in the region.

French-Greek Political and Security Rapprochement

The current Greek-Turkish crisis has created the appropriate circumstances for a new approach in relations between Athens and Paris.

On the one hand, France is concerned about the rise of Turkey as a considerable power in the Mediterranean region. Ankara is gaining significant momentum in an area that is actually connecting France with Africa, the continent where traditionally vital French interests are at stake. A potential Turkish dominance in the Mediterranean at the expense of Greece, would be catastrophic not only for Athens but also for Paris, since it could possibly disrupt the French maritime routes to Africa.

At the same time the current framework is the perfect chance for President Emmanuel Macron to showcase that France could still be seen as one of the key players within the European Union, a role that has gradually been overshadowed by Berlin, especially in the past decade.

The Greek Perspective

Meanwhile, Greece is actively looking for a reliable partner, a country with substantial international standing and with aligning interests, which could be used as a counterbalance and a deterrence for the Turkish claims in the Mediterranean. The unsympathetic role of Germany in the last months has prompted Greece to turn to France for this sought-after assistance and assurance. Macron in mid-August — at a moment that the Greek-Turkish dispute seemed to be reaching its peak — publicly adopted an unambiguous position in support of Athens. In response the Greek Prime Minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, thanked the French President with a tweet in French, making clear that Athens has a strong ally by its side.

Apart from the close bilateral relations in political and diplomatic level, there have been some critical moves in a military context.

By late August, with the Turkish unauthorized research activity still ongoing in the Greek continental shelf, a joint Cypriot, French and Greek naval exercise took place, in the area of interest. French Minister of the Armed Forces Florence Parly publicized the activity through her Twitter account sending a political message to all the parties involved.

The developments have been even more interesting in the field of armament programs. Following some failed —possibly due to German and US involvement— negotiations in July for a major upgrade of the Greek Navy, Athens and Paris are currently holding fresh talks about the acquisition of a significant number of Rafale jet fighters.

Potential Rafale Acquisition; a Tactical Rather than Strategic Advantage

The Greek Ministry of Defense has been considering over the previous year the purchase of the fifth-generation Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter aircraft. However, the latest developments and the rapprochement with France have put on the table the potential acquisition of 18 fourth-generation (or 4.5 generation) Dassault Rafale.

Continue reading