Sunday, February 6, 2022

All Eyes on Putin - William Manning

 

by William Manning

Is the Russian president a Bismarck or a Hitler? And what should America do about it?

It's a story as old as time.  A powerful country masses an army on the border of a weaker neighbor with the intent to invade or intimidate.

Vladimir Putin believes that mobilization of forces near Ukraine will support Russia's foreign policy objectives.  Some suggest that civilization has advanced, and no sovereign nation innocent of wrongdoing should fear foreign aggression.  This observation is noble, but many political leaders are not.

Vladimir Putin kills his enemies.  Some endured horrible suffering when poisoned with radioactive materials, while others were simply shot in the head.  Russia, China, and many other countries are despotic regimes.  Powerful people rule these countries dictating terms of governance.  They may establish goals that will improve the lives of their people, but the primary beneficiary will be those in control.  Noble objectives can be goals of foreign policy, but the policy itself must be based on the harsh realities of the world we live in.  The foreign policy objectives of the United States must be for the benefit of the American people, not a party, faction, or politician.

Defeat of the Soviet Union is evidence that Democrats and Republicans can achieve a common foreign policy objective.  One of the primary reasons for this achievement was the strength of the American economy.  Domestic circumstance and foreign policy don't operate in a vacuum, one independent of the other.  Shortly after the Iron Curtain came tumbling down, American industry began outsourcing itself to foreign factories with lower labor costs and fewer regulations.  Some outsourcing was supported by the North American  Free Trade Agreement, which also enjoyed bipartisan support.  The agreement was an instrument of American foreign policy.  Millions of Americans lost their jobs as a result.  The U.S. economy is still the largest in the world, but American industry is diminished.

Outsourcing of American industry may enjoy bipartisan support and increase the profits of political donors but can have devastating  effects on America.  As the COVID pandemic began to dominate news coverage, a story circulated that the United States no longer produces pharmaceutical chemicals required to make antibiotics.  The chemicals are produced in China, a potential adversary.  Recently, many products were in short supply because electronic components weren't available.  The computer chips and electronic components used to manufacture thousands of products, including military equipment, could and should be produced in the U.S.  A vibrant economy and a reliable industrial base are important to America's security and well-being.  If the United States allows its industrial base to shrink, its capacity to compete globally will diminish.

Government planning and interference in financial markets can negatively impact the well-being of its people.  Germany's policy position on Ukraine is currently affected by its  energy plan.  In 2010, Germany legislated an energy policy to transition from conventional energy sources to renewables.  The country has greatly reduced coal production, the only fossil fuel available in commercial volumes.  They are committed to ending consumption of fossil fuels by 2050.  Renewable sources have proven unsatisfactory, and Germans are now paying some of the highest energy costs in Europe.  As a remedy, Germany is importing large volumes of natural gas from Russia, since gas burns cleaner than coal.  Germany has been less critical of Russian aggression toward Ukraine than many of its allies.  The Germans don't want to undermine their energy imports from Russia.  If these imports stop, it will be a cold, dark winter.  The decision to stop using fossil fuels may be a noble national policy, but it is now affecting the foreign policy of Germany, its allies, and the Russians.

Many Americans are aggravated by foreign interference in elections.  In 2016, the Russians planted propaganda on Facebook and other media sites attempting to interfere with the presidential election.  Consider that the United States has broadcast what a Russian might consider propaganda into eastern Europe for generations via Radio Free Europe.  Competitive governments undermine one another.  Remember the fate of the Soviet Union.  This is not to suggest we should overlook foreign interference, but we should expect it.  America must protect its elections, intellectual property, government secrets, and the privacy of its people against all foreign interference.

We know that China has blatantly stolen a variety of technology, business, and government secrets.  The Chinese have funded some politicians and bribed other politicians' relatives.  China dwarfs Russia as an economic and military power.  The Chinese challenge American interests all over the world.  They don't hide  their intention to conquer Taiwan.  The National Institutes of Health financed Chinese studies of viral infections at a laboratory where gain of function research was conducted.  China is America's largest and most dangerous competitor.  Why does America fund Chinese science and business?  Sending money to China for any reason will only serve to advance the objectives of the Chinese Communist Party.

The crisis in Ukraine has everyone's attention.  Putin lectures the world, but the audience he plays to is the Russian people.  Putin can toy with his adversaries while telling domestic audiences his foreign policy is purely for the benefit of Mother Russia.  He knows that the United States will not defend Ukraine because this is what President Biden told the world.

During a crisis like this, one might expect a president to suggest "all cards are on the table" even if they're not.  When a president takes military intervention off the table, it makes ongoing negotiations more difficult.  One might also expect the government of the United States to tell an aggressor to "stand down."  When the aggressor asks what that may mean, the answer would likely be "you don't want to find out."

Putin knows that if he wants Ukraine, it's his.  The Ukrainians seem to be willing to fight.  There is some likelihood that the Ukrainian military and brave civilians may engage in a fight and give the Russians a bloody nose.  Putin doesn't want a bloody nose or trouble with European nations.  They are funding Russia's mobilization by purchasing huge volumes of natural gas and petroleum.  If valves on the pipelines are closed, Europe will be left shivering in the dark, and Russia won't have petrodollars to pay for its exploits.  Nobody has a winning hand in this game.  It's also conceivable that Ukraine's European friends might wink at Vladimir and suggest he make quick work of his Ukrainian conquest.  The valves won't be turned off for long.  The lights will hardly dim.

This may be another Munich moment for Western democracies.  Putin may be seeking security for the Russian people, or this may be the first step in expanding Russian influence and control.  Teddy Roosevelt advised his successors to "speak softly and carry a big stick."  The soft voice of the government must be amplified by a robust economy.

Americans tend to view foreign policy as achievement of dynamic goals.  For decades, the country's main objective was to bring down the Soviet Union.  America is a country by, for, and of the people, and all the government's policies should support this dynamic.  The world is a harsh place that can quickly become cruel.  America's foreign policy must be forged to benefit the American people in the face of the harsh realities that surrounds them.

Image via Pixabay.

 

William Manning

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/02/all_eyes_on_putin.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Will France Wake Up and Defend Her Freedom – or Not? - Giulio Meotti

 

by Giulio Meotti

Thirty-five persons in France are now living under police protection for criticizing Islam.

  • "If every time we are shocked, we were to pronounce death sentences, what would become of us? What kind of society would we live in?" — Mila to a tribunal, L'Union, June 21, 2021.

  • "We resist because, otherwise, they will have won". — Mila's mother, testifying in court, bfmtv.com, June 21, 2021.

  • One morning... Val learned that Al Qaeda had issued a death sentence on him. The poster showed his photograph, stained in blood.

  • Social media are filled with ways to kill her -- bullets, explosives, crushing her head, slitting her throat or setting her on fire.

  • These threats and attempts to intimidate prove the danger presented by those committed to... creating a new society by force and terror: If you criticize me, I will kill you -- behead you or slit your throat.

  • Fear works. No one wants to see their name on an internet hit list, or falsely be called racist. Journalists studiously look the other way and are nowhere to be found.

  • In April, the country will vote. The next day, it will be possible to tell what direction the country -- and with it, Europe -- will take. Will it submit -- or not?

The threats and attempts to intimidate prove the danger presented by those committed to creating a new society by force and terror: If you criticize me, I will kill you -- behead you or slit your throat. Fear works. No one wants to see their name on an internet hit list, or falsely be called racist. Journalists studiously look the other way and are nowhere to be found. (Images source: iStock)

"What else do you need to wake up and understand that we have to defend ourselves?", asked the late Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci.

We should be worried about Europe. It is the cradle of European culture, especially France. Henry James, in The Ambassadors, writes about France as the epitome of civilization, as the "eldest daughter of the Church". Now, however, France's churches are being burned, demolished and abandoned, and its adherents sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. France's Jews, "the canaries in the coalmine", are being physically attacked and leaving their country. Since 2000, more than 60,000 have fled.

In the face of this massive assault on freedom and culture, an army of "useful idiots" is siding with the enemies of civilization. Professor Robert Redeker was forced into hiding after criticizing radical Islam and now has to be protected by police.

Mohamed Sifaoui's mobile phone contains 853 numbers of police and security officers: all assigned to protect him. Some have retired, others have been transferred, many are still active. His driver began his career with him. "It will be nineteen years in April," Sifaoui told Le Point. "I met him young and we grew old together". This journalist, a specialist in terrorism and radical Islam, holds a record: since 2003, he has intermittently been living under the eyes of the police. "I happened to have up to six bodyguards, with men posted in front of my building, long guns in hand. When I couldn't take it anymore, I went on assignments abroad to get away from it all".

Forced to change his address regularly, Sifaoui has paid a high price for being "protected by the Republic".

"For relatives, it is an unbearable pressure. Planning your schedule around that of your policeman is hellish, even if you end up getting used to no longer going to the terrace, frequenting certain neighborhoods and experiencing any unforeseen events. You get used to it, like an amputee can get used to living with one limb missing..."

Thirty-five persons in France are now living under police protection for criticizing Islam. Women include Zineb el Rhazoui; Marika Bret; Claire Koc; Christine Kelly, a star of the CNews channel and longtime studio partner of Éric Zemmour, threatened with beheading by Islamic fundamentalists, also lives under guard; Fatiha Agag-Boudjahlat, a teacher and author who had reproached a few students for not respecting the minute of silence during the homage to Samuel Paty, and most recently Ophélie Meunier.

Meunier is a reporter ofr the TV program Zone Interdite, who filmed a documentary, "The Islamization of Roubaix", broadcast on prime time television. She is the third French citizen in a single week to go under police protection. A high school science teacher in Trappes and Amine Elbahi, a lawyer who appeared in the film, were both threatened with beheading.

Meunier showed what is happening in France: men who will not shake hands with women, restaurants with curtained cubicles reserved for women "so that the women can neither see out or be seen", and toys and children's books without faces, as in Islam, depiction of images is forbidden (Hadith, Sahih Muslim, 818-875).

Dozens of people in France have been thrown into a parallel universe of fear, threats, insidious noises, prying eyes, policemen who follow them everywhere and death lists. This is all taking place not in Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia or Somalia, but in the capital of Enlightenment and European culture.

It is not just about politicians such as Marine Le Pen or judges such as Albert Lévy. The whole country now lives in fear of Islam. Anyone who dares to speak about it in a straightforward way can expect alarms, armored doors, "safe rooms", metal detectors, automatic weapons, precautions, movements coordinated with the police. Meanwhile, two churches a day are vandalized, and in 2021, ten Jews a day emigrated from France.

Imams such as Hassen Chalghoumi also live under guard. After he supported the law banning the burqa in public, Islamists besieged his mosque and entered the prayer room. One of the Islamists exclaimed: "Aiqtalah aiqtala! Let's kill him! Let's kill him!" He now travels in armored vehicles, is protected by six policemen and never sleeps two nights in the same place. Terrorists have placed a bounty of 150,000 euros ($172,000) on his head.

A high school student, Mila, has been removed from a military school where she took refuge after receiving 50,000 death threats after, at the age of 16, criticizing Islam on Instagram.

A feminist, Peggy Sastre, wrote in Le Point that feminists who had turned out to protest a potential award for the filmmaker Roman Polanski had failed to show up on for Mila's first hearing on June 3:

"Why so much disaffection on the part of feminists? It is perhaps because, in Mila's case, rising up against the most violent and retrograde manifestations of the Muslim religion requires taking real risks and can lead to far more real consequences than we would expect when we leave a movie theater and are careful to hold up our evening dresses not to fall down the stairs".

Listening to what Mila said in a Paris court, one understands why these flaccid multiculturalists deserted the trial. Mila said what none of them wants to hear.

"If every time we are shocked, we were to pronounce death sentences, what would become of us? What kind of society would we live in?" she asked.

"I am sure that if I had formulated my criticism of Islam without vulgarity, without profanity, they would have reacted exactly the same way, with other arguments. Because their goal is, first of all, to prevent any criticism of Islam. But I'm not giving up".

Mila then replied to those who told her that it is better to leave social media:

"I no longer go to school, I have no social life, I have lost everything, and what's more, do I have to let myself be forgotten? Do I have to disappear completely? Should a woman who has been raped not go out on the street to avoid being raped again? I say no! I would be psychically dead, destroyed, if I had let all these people trample me".

"Mila... knows she cannot have a future," her mother testified in court. "Beyond the risk of an attack, what future can we imagine with such deadly pressure? We resist because, otherwise, they will have won".

"Islamism is gaining ground on our soil", wrote 60 French MPs in Le Journal du dimanche. "Islamism is poisoning France, rotting many minds and many neighborhoods that are now lost territories for the Republic".

Éric Zemmour, a candidate in the upcoming presidential elections who has been called "the most endangered man in France", the prominent French novelist, Michel Houellebecq, and a dozen teachers and professors, from Trappes to Grenoble, also live under guard. Many have seen their careers, lives and names destroyed.

The entire editorial staff of the satiric magazine Charlie Hebdo -- after a massacre on January 7, 2015, in which 17 people lost their lives -- still live protected behind 85 police officers and 6 armored doors. The house of its former director, Philippe Val, has bulletproof windows and an armored "safe room" with a direct telephone line for rescue, if needed. One morning at the Ministry of the Interior, Val learned that Al Qaeda had issued a death sentence on him. The poster showed his photograph, stained in blood.

A former journalist of Charlie Hebdo, Zineb El Rhazoui, spoke with police about her daily life:

"Do you see the confinement? Well, I've been confined since 2015. I kept fighting against something that kept getting stronger. The fate that the Islamists want to reserve for me is unacceptable, but I want to bury the hatchet".

The French newspapers call her "the woman in danger" and "the most protected woman in France". El Rhazoui, originally form Casablanca, Morocco, has, for security, moved from home to home in Paris over the years, and has more bodyguards than most ministers. Walking down the street or taking the subway is unthinkable. Social media are filled with ways to kill her -- bullets, explosives, crushing her head, slitting her throat or setting her on fire. "Zineb El Rhazoui must be killed to avenge the Prophet", ordered a fatwa after the attacks. "I arrived at a moment of my journey," El Rhazoui said to Le Point, "when I feel the urgent need to get out of the fight". That this courageous woman and journalist, after five years of countering death threats, wants to get out of this fight is understandable, but it means that we are losing the fight.

These threats and attempts to intimidate demonstrate the danger presented by those committed to Islamizing the society and creating a new one by terror or force: If you criticize me, I will kill you -- behead you or slit your throat.

Meanwhile, the state and the judicial institutions prove to be paper tigers. Fear works. No one wants to see their name on an internet hit list, or falsely be called racist. Journalists studiously look the other way and are nowhere to be found.

"This is what happens when you show the French people the Islamization of our country," wrote Éric Zemmour, one of the few to speak the truth.

This is France 2022. In April, the country will vote. The next day, it will be possible to tell what direction the country -- and with it, Europe -- will take. Will it submit -- or not?

 

Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18206/france-freedom

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Truth About Biden’s Fake War With Russia - Daniel Greenfield

 

by Daniel Greenfield

The “war” with Russia is as real as Russiagate.

 


Biden tried to be FDR and failed at that. Now he’s settling for playing a senile elderly JFK.

If you watch 5 minutes of CNN or any cable news network, you might believe that we’re on the verge of war with Russia. That’s what the same people who claimed that President Trump was working for Putin want you to believe. Their new war with Russia is as real as Russiagate.

Democrats want to fight Russia to the last Republican. 

They aren’t about to fight a real war. Their fake wars with Russia are an attack on Republicans.

Russiagate came after Democrats spent eight years giving Putin everything he wanted as Hillary toted a Reset Button from a swimming pool and Psaki posed in a sickle and hammer hat.

And that was just what we knew about. The depths of betrayal were only touched on when  Obama was caught on hot mic assuring outgoing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility”, to which Medvedev replied, "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir."

The subject under discussion was another fake missile deal with Russia. President Trump later refused to renew an arms treaty which Russia cheerfully cheated on unless we got better terms. 

Biden promised to renew it with no preconditions. And he did just that. 

To believe that Biden is about to get tough and go to war with Russia, you have to also believe that there’s a Moscow hotel tape of Trump and all the other Russiagate nonsense and lies.

Even while the Biden administration issues meaningless threats of “devastating” consequences and “disaster” for Russia, it’s also made it clear that there will be no troops in the Ukraine. 

And there will also be no sanctions on Putin’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline (one of whose lobbyists is a Schumer backer) even as the Biden administration not only killed the Keystone XL pipeline, but the Greco-Israeli East Med pipeline. The Biden administration just got through lobbying Democrats to filibuster a sanctions push by Senator Ted Cruz on Nord Stream 2.

Is it any wonder that Biden signed off on a “minor incursion” by Russia.

The only way there could even be a war between Russia and the U.S. would be if Putin decided to invade Poland. And even then the same administration which turned over Kabul to the Taliban, stranding Americans behind enemy lines, would turn Warsaw into the new Saigon.

You can accuse Biden of many things, but being a warmonger isn’t one of them.

Warmongers don’t rule out sending troops before an invasion has even happened, or announce that they would be okay with a minor incursion. They don’t leave Americans behind in enemy territory or keep sending money to every enemy from Iran to the Taliban to North Korea.

(The Biden administration's envoy to Kim the Lesser announced that it is willing to send "humanitarian aid" to North Korea "regardless of progress on denuclearization".)

But Biden would like a fake war with Russia. And Putin probably wants one too.

Democrats have played this game for a while, building up tensions with Russia in the media, while remaining good friends behind the scenes. The more the public thinks a war might happen, the tougher and more heroic the Democrat in the White House seems. And when a war that was never going to happen, doesn’t happen, they also look like great peacemakers. 

The Cuban Missile Crisis blueprint has been rerun any number of times. During the Cold War it was a useful defense against accusations of Communist sympathies. Now it’s a failed attempt to attack Republicans and distract the public from runaway inflation, a massive economic mess, the pandemic, crime in the streets, and a dozen other Biden administration failures. 

But the vast majority of Americans aren’t paying attention and don’t care.

After four years of Russiagate, Putin and Biden are giving each other what they want. Both Biden and Putin want to look tough, and the Russian is also looking to extract any concessions that he can get from Ukraine and Europe. Biden is pressuring Ukraine to make that happen, but Ukraine’s government knows it can ignore Biden because he’s offering no support anyway.

There may indeed be an invasion and a war, but it won’t involve the United States. Eastern Europe, like the Middle East, has been learning the hard way that America under the Democrats isn’t an ally and can’t be counted on to do anything except issue press releases and sell it out.

The Middle East responded with the Abraham Accords that are continuing to bring together Israel and the Sunni oil kingdoms over a shared disappointment with Obama and Biden. Eastern Europe will also have to look inward, building new internal alliances to avert not only outright invasions, but assaults like the mass of Iraqi Muslim migrants hurled at Poland’s border by Putin’s puppet in Belarus and the migrant attacks on Hungary’s territorial borders.

Whatever Eastern Europe does or doesn’t do, America won’t be a part of it.

NATO is largely a fiction. The idea that America and Europe would go to war with Russia over an invasion of a NATO nation (let alone a non-NATO one like Ukraine) is another myth. 

When Russian planes invaded Turkish airspace leading to the first casualties and exchange of fire between a NATO member and Russia since the end of the Cold War, nothing happened except anxious meetings in which NATO members made it clear that they didn’t want to be involved. Message received. Turkey befriended Russia and made it its new arms dealer.

The United States is not going to war with Russia, and Russia is not going to war with us.

Neither Biden nor Putin want to fight a world war. And if there were any chance of one happening, the troops would be going home right now. But both profit from the illusion of war.

Biden wants to pretend that he stopped a war and Putin wants to prove that America is weak.

The odds are that by the time this is over, both will be declaring victory to their respective domestic constituencies, but only Putin will have actually won while Biden will have lost. 

Biden isn’t about to fight Russia. But the fake tensions provide a distraction, however limited, from the price of gas, the mandatory face masks, and the rising murder rates in major cities. And when this farce wraps up, Biden will claim credit for preventing a war that never was.

 

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/02/truth-about-bidens-fake-war-russia-daniel-greenfield/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

News With The Union Label - Larry Sand

 

by Larry Sand

Teachers union boss assures American children will be spared “drowning in an ocean of online dishonesty.”

 


In a recent press release, the American Federation of Teachers announced that it has launched a national partnership with NewsGuard, which the union informs us is a “leading anti-misinformation tool” which protects and champions legitimate journalism and fact-based reporting and “will help educators and their students navigate a sea of online disinformation.” AFT president Randi Weingarten claims that the deal will be a game-changer for the union’s 1.7 million teachers and the tens of millions of children and their families who are currently "drowning in an ocean of online dishonesty." She adds quite melodramatically, “It is a beacon of clarity to expose the dark depths of the internet and uplift those outlets committed to truth and honesty rather than falsehoods and fabrications.”

But one look at NewsGuard’s lists outs them as leftist advocates, and nothing close to objective. Nine out of the 10 websites on NewsGuard’s “Ten Most Influential Misinformers” list for 2021 lean right, with NewsMax, TheGatewayPundit.com and The Federalist deemed the worst of the worst. On the other hand, “The Ten Top Trustworthy and Trending Sites” are all center- to far-left with NBCNews.com, The New York Times and The Washington Post ranked highest.

The bias of their “anti-disinformation tool” is glaring. A recent study by the Media Research Center (MRC), a conservative media watchdog, reveals that NewsGuard has an “extraordinary” political bias that makes left-wing news outlets more likely to get a better rating. The study found that outlets rated “left” or “lean left” received an average NewsGuard score of 93, while sites considered “right” or “lean right” had an average rating of just 66. The MRC reports that Jacobin, a socialist magazine which calls itself the “leading voice of the American left” and champions such notions as the nationalization of supermarkets, receives a score of 92.5 by NewsGuard. The Nation, also a far-left magazine which has defended the looting and vandalism committed during the widespread riots in the summer of 2020, also has a 92.5 NewsGuard score.

And then there is The New York Times, the #2 rated “Trustworthy and Trending” site. In reality, the Grey Lady may be, historically speaking, the worst, most deceitful newspaper in the country. Most notably The Times and its writer, Walter Duranty, colluded to knowingly overlook the Stalin-led starvation of Ukraine in 1931. The newspaper also went all in for the great Duke University lacrosse team hoax of 2006, which centered around an alleged rape that never happened. And in 2021, the newspaper referred to the blatantly satirical Babylon Bee as a “far-right misinformation site.”

Which brings us back to Randi Weingarten. In December of 2021, New York Times writer Michelle Goldberg wrote a glowing piece, initially titled, “Can This Woman Save American Public Education?” The bizarre reference to the union boss was a bridge too far even for The Times, which, after an explosion on social media, quickly renamed the piece “We Desperately Need Schools to Get Back to Normal.” The slobbering content was not changed a whit, however. Among other blatant falsehoods, Weingarten was praised as the woman who has desperately tried to keep schools open during the era of Covid.

Goldberg missed an opportunity to ask Weingarten so many questions. If I had written the column, it may have come out, oh…just a bit differently. Here is a brief sampling of the questions I would have asked the union boss:

  • Despite insisting that your union has been trying to keep schools open during the time of Covid, multiple studies have shown that the teachers unions have been the biggest obstacle to school reopenings across the country. As Mike Antonucci reports, in every major school district in the country – New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami, Houston, etc. – your union’s local affiliates threw up roadblocks to getting schools up and running. What evidence can you supply that you have really been trying to keep schools open?
  • At an AFT conference in July 2021, you stated, “Let’s be clear: critical race theory is not taught in elementary schools or high schools.” Yet, one month before your union tweeted that “critical race theory allows educators to give our students the opportunity to understand the full breadth and depth of the American society.” And if you really believed that there is no CRT in k-12, why would you have Ibram X. Kendi, probably the most vocal and aggressive CRT proponent in the country, speak at the conference?
  • Also, in July 2021, you hysterically tweeted, “Millions of Floridians are going to die for Ron DeSantis’ ignorance and he’s choosing to profit from it.” To your credit, you walked back that insane comment shortly thereafter, but added, “Fauci is an amazing public servant.” That’s the equivalent of removing the left foot from your mouth, and then inserting the right one in its stead. What about Fauci leads you to your glowing words?
  • When I saw you outside the Supreme Court after the Janus oral arguments in February 2018, you went on a brief rant to a newsman in which you asserted that unions “actually make communities safer and…the right-wing is threatened by that.” Do you honestly believe that statement?
  • In November, you tweeted, “First & foremost, we must listen to parents. They are our partners.” Actually, the unions’ positions on CRT and the shutdowns have awakened parents to the evil that the unions have perpetrated. You have made them your enemy, Randi, not your partner. In fact, when you did a live C-SPAN event, a West Virginia granddad called in and said, “It is pathetic how the teachers union and the government has failed our children. I don't see how you can sit up there and defend that.” Your response was bizarre. You talked about how unions help teachers get higher salaries, and then uttered something incoherent about coal miners. Could you please provide a thoughtful answer to the man’s question? Also, what were you thinking when you retweeted Virginia’s former secretary of education’s post calling parents advocating for their children “racists?” 

All in all, Randi Weingarten has collected enough Pinocchios over the past two years to start her own puppet shop.

On a similar note, parents are rapidly awakening to the problems in our government-run k-12 schools, and there is now a push for curriculum transparency. On January 26, it was revealed that “lawmakers in at least 12 states have introduced legislation to require schools to post lists of all of their teaching materials online, including books, articles and videos.”

Seems reasonable, right? Well, not to the teachers unions, which are fighting curriculum transparency all over the country. Late last year, a mother was sued by the Rhode Island state affiliate of the National Education Association after she made a public records request to find out exactly what her daughter was being taught. In Indiana, the teachers union is currently battling against two bills that would require teachers to post school curricula online, which would then be vetted by parent review committees. In Utah, the teachers union is trying to fend off a bill that would require educators to disclose what they are teaching. Heidi Mathews, president of the Utah Education Association, quaintly asserted, “We need to stop it in its tracks, not let it enter into the legislative process, and just kick it in the tush.”

So we have a teachers union bringing an “internet librarian” with a left-wing bias into the lives of millions of school children, but the same crowd doesn’t want to let parents know what teachers are actually teaching. There is a screaming contradiction here. But then again, such positions are all too typical for the teachers unions. Indeed, it is they who need a good tush-kicking.

 

Larry Sand, a former classroom teacher, is the president of the non-profit California Teachers Empowerment Network – a non-partisan, non-political group dedicated to providing teachers and the general public with reliable and balanced information about professional affiliations and positions on educational issues. The views presented here are strictly his own.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/02/news-union-label-larry-sand/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The 'Jewish Question' Has Come to America - Abraham H. Miller

 

by Abraham H. Miller

American Jewish progressives have become obsessed with the anti-Semitism of the right. But it is not the right that walks the corridors of power in Washington.

There has never been in America a Jewish Question, at least, not until now.

America was built on the idea of a universal identity and a tolerance of differences. From the evolution of a liberal Protestant theology to George Washington’s embrace of the Jewish community, America -- unlike Europe -- did not see the Jews as strangers in its midst, as a people apart, or as a group whose identity stood at variance with others.

In America, there was no compelling desire for society to define the Jew. In Europe, Karl Marx, himself born a Jew and later a convert to Christianity, wrote an anti-Semitic screed, On the Jewish Question. Later Thomas Mann, who might be called a Philo-Semite, authored a lengthy essay with a similar title because the subject haunted Germany and Jews needed a defender.

Europe was consumed, if not obsessed, with the Jew in its midst.

While America had no shortage of anti-Semitic customs and displays of bigotry, Jews were well integrated into American society from the founding of the Republic until the great waves of Eastern European immigration began crashing on America’s shores and brought a different kind of Jew to its attention.

Nonetheless, Jews defined themselves. There was bigotry, hatred, and gentlemen’s agreements, but American intellectuals did not feel compelled to define the place of the Jew in society. To do so would have been contrary to America’s primary values.

America might not have uniformly adhered to its primary values, but its aspiration to embrace those values led to Jewish acceptance that never occurred in Europe even to this day.

But that has now changed and is the biggest threat to Jewish existence since the Klan almost took over the Democratic Party in the early 1920s.

There is now in America a Jewish Question. It emerges graphically in two investigations of campus anti-Semitism, one at Stanford University and the other at Brooklyn College.

In both cases, Jews allegedly are not permitted to define themselves but to be placed into the so-called oppressor class of white supremacists.

Indeed, the issue of the Jewish Question should be expanded to ask how is it that white students -- or any group of students -- are to be defined by their skin color and be classified in the vilest terms for attitudes they do not possess and crimes they have not committed?

The answer resides within the rise of the diversity, inclusion, and equity bureaucracy, an insidious institution within an institution that must discover racists or establish pre-determined categories of racists to justify its otherwise meaningless and superfluous existence.

Its very presence is a tribute to white guilt and the incorporation of an us and them mentality that draws on critical race theory to see all explanations of the social order in terms of racism.

Success and failure of groups, especially in the comparison of blacks and whites, is interpreted as determined by racial privilege. The existence of this bureaucracy and its impact student admissions and faculty recruitment, promotion, and tenure is, ironically, itself determined by racial privilege. But that can neither be discussed nor acknowledged. To so much as raise the issue is to be called a racist.

The consequence of this ideology is that if some are underrepresented then others must be overrepresented. And who are overrepresented, why Jews and Asians of course? Jews are now defined as white, something they have not been in America, especially since the latter part of the 19th century, and Asians are defined as white-affinity types, whatever that means.

Given the ideology of the diversity, inclusion, and equity bureaucracy, Jews cannot define themselves but are to be defined by others. It would not be surprising to see a clumsily authored essay by a member of this bureaucracy titled, On the Jewish Question.

The investigation into the alleged anti-Semitism at Stanford University and Brooklyn College will at best reveal the tip of the iceberg because these problems permeate not just the diversity bureaucracy but also the minions of so-called campus progressives, who have found in anti-Zionism a cover for the left’s historic anti-Semitism.

American Jewish progressives have become obsessed with the anti-Semitism of the right. But it is not the right that walks the corridors of power in Washington. It is not the right that controls America’s institutions of higher education.

A group of tiki-torch-carrying white supremacists in Charlottesville is the image Jewish progressives like to hold dear, but the harm such people will do will have no bearing on America’s institutional structure. The real threat to the future of American Jews comes from those who have emulated the bigotry of Europe and raised the Jewish Question. They have been institutionalized in the higher education regime, and their removal will be nearly impossible.

Image: Israeli Government Printing Office

 

 

Abraham H. Miller is an emeritus professor of political science, University of Cincinnati, and a distinguished fellow with the Haym Salomon Center.  Titles are for identification purposes only.

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/02/the_jewish_question_has_come_to_america_.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Damaged police trust helped fuel retaliatory murders, criminologists say - Ethan Barton

 

by Ethan Barton

Packing culture, retaliation became worse after George Floyd died

This is the fourth story in a series about murders in Washington, D.C. Read the rest here: Part 1 Part 2 Part 3

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Larry McMichael was arrested for a gun charge before he could retaliate against his brother’s killer, the reformed drug dealer, who has been shot 22 times, told Fox News.

But others were shot in the fallout. The victim’s best friend, for example, was killed.

"It was a lot of going back and forth," McMichael said.

His story embodies what criminologists told Fox News: packing culture and a drive to retaliate, rather than turn to law enforcement, has driven homicides in the nation’s capital. Those elements have become more prevalent since trust in law enforcement deteriorated after the defund the police movement took hold following George Floyd’s killing.

DC MAYOR, ATTORNEY GENERAL TRADE BLAME AMID SPIKE IN JUVENILE VIOLENCE

"One of the hardest things to deal with in the streets is when somebody kill anybody you love, McMichael, 52, told Fox News. "At that point right there … the gun is in your hand."

"Is you gonna to take up for your man or are you going to be a b****?" he continued. "Either you a b**** or you gonna go take up for your brother, your best friend, your cousin, your uncle, whoever."

"Really, man, you throwing your life down a river either way you go," McMichael said. "It's a no-win situation."

High-crime communities became more reliant on illegal guns for protection as they and the rest of the nation lost faith that the police could effectively keep them safe, criminologists told Fox News.

The influx of illicit firearms ultimately contributed to the ongoing homicide surge, since victims are frequently killed over petty disputes, rather than criminal endeavors, Fox News previously reported. McMichael said his 18-year-old brother was murdered for breaking up a dice game.

And neighborhoods that had poor police trust even before Floyd’s death – like many high-crime neighborhoods – tend to prefer retaliation to criminal justice.

Tensions between law enforcement and neighborhoods that already had poor relations with law enforcement were aggravated "even further as people lost confidence in the police," University of Missouri-St. Louis criminology professor Richard Rosenfeld told Fox News. Consequently, those communities were less likely to "report crimes to the police that they were aware of" and more willing to "take matters into their own hands to settle disputes."

Essentially, people carrying illegal guns in violent communities were already more likely to pull the trigger over a minor incident. But since Floyd’s death, more people are packing and are more willing to draw their weapons – all while witnesses are less likely to help the police catch killers.

‘Bring your .38’

McMichael planned to rob someone in 1991. But his would-be victim, who was packing, caught wind of it.

"He stood over top of me, shot me 17 times," McMichael, who spent nearly his whole life working D.C.’s streets, told Fox News. "I don't know why that boy did not bend down and put that gun to my head and end me. I could never figure that out."

Larry McMichael, a reformed drug dealer, shows off bullet wounds.

Larry McMichael, a reformed drug dealer, shows off bullet wounds.

Packing culture, even before May 2020, was already a driving factor behind homicides, according to criminologists. McMichael’s brother was killed in 1998, for example.

"We've done a little research on why kids pack," a criminologist at the Louisiana State University School of Public Health, Peter Scharf, told Fox News. "The answer is pretty simple: The other kids are packing and they're stealing your lunch."

TWICE-DEPORTED CRIMINAL ACCUSED OF DRAWING SWASTIKAS AT DC UNION STATION PROTECTED BY BIDEN POLICIES

"You know the American Express cliche, ‘don't leave home without it,’ right? Bring your .38 or else you shouldn't go outside," Scharf continued.

Tyrone Parker, who founded the Alliance of Concerned Men, a violence prevention organization, echoed Scharf’s remark.

"‘I'd rather be caught with a gun than without a gun,’" he said, describing the mentality of members of violent communities. "It becomes a way of life in our particular community."

"It has hit an epidemic perspective in our community," Parker continued. Illegal guns can be obtained "almost as easy as them going to the store."

Essentially, people living in high-crime communities feel they need to carry a gun for protection since they assumed everyone else is packing.

"A lot of folks think they need to carry a gun for a defense," Deputy Mayor Christopher Geldart told Fox News. "They're scared. They need some kind of self-defense, and if they don't have it, they're going to be the next victim."

D.C. Witness Editor-in-Chief Trina Antoine said a "gun culture" in D.C. has led "people to think that the only way they can protect themselves, to keep themselves safe is to have a gun."

"They feel that they need a gun to feel safe within the city," she told Fox News.

The sentiment stems from a sense that police aren’t protecting high-crime communities.

"If people believe the cops are going to keep them safe and that there will be a swift response to a violent offense, they are less likely to feel the need to protect themselves," Charles Fain Lehman, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute, told Fox News.

‘Morally and ethically immature’

But the guns aren’t being used simply for self-defense.

"Somebody get in your way, you're going to kill them or they're going to kill you," McMichael, who works for Parker's group teaching conflict resolution and mentoring youth, told Fox News. "That's your mentality every day."

McMichael describes his brother's murder.

McMichael describes his brother's murder.

Killers frequently lack conflict resolution skills, meaning they’ll impulsively turn to a weapon to resolve issues, Fox News previously reported. Consequently, petty insults are the most frequent motivation behind D.C. murders.

"There are kids who are cognitively, morally and ethically immature … And they're armed with semiautomatic weapons," Scharf said.

Guns become "a way of dealing with the challenges that they're confronted with," Parker told Fox News. They’re used "when they have a dispute about tennis shoes, dispute about a basketball game, dispute about how you looked at them, you dispute about this, it's my territory."

"They settle it so easily with a gun because the availability is there," Parker added. 

And shootings put bystanders at risk of getting hit with stray bullets.

"We have been seeing an increase in homicides in other areas that have typically not been associated with violent activity," Antoine told Fox News. "Violent crime is dispersing throughout" D.C.

DC HOTEL SHOOTING: 1 DEAD, 4 INJURED

In 2021, there was a shooting outside of the city’s baseball stadium and multiple in areas packed with bars and restaurants, including a D.C.-famous spot where both President Biden and Vice President Harris have been sighted.

Innocent victims killed include a six-year-old girl and a Peace Corps worker.

More guns, shorter fuses

As police trust fell even further following Floyd’s death, packing on the premise of self-defense became even more common in dangerous neighborhoods, criminologists and local experts told Fox News.

Soon after an officer killed Floyd in May 2020 and set off nationwide demonstrations calling for police reform, Gallup reported its lowest results for confidence in law enforcement since 1993 when the group began surveying the topic.

A woman argues with protestors for blocking a street. (Photo by Kerem Yucel / AFP) (Photo by KEREM YUCEL/AFP via Getty Images)
A woman argues with protestors for blocking a street. (Photo by Kerem Yucel / AFP) (Photo by KEREM YUCEL/AFP via Getty Images)

"The reason why there's been a rise in homicides from last year and this year is because there's a gun culture in D.C.," Antoine told Fox News. She said there’s been an increase in turf battles, though those are typically predicated over a petty insult, rather than criminal activity.

Murders increased by 19% in 2020 up to 198 killings, Metropolitan Police Department data show. The next year jumped to 226 homicides – the most since 2003.

The criminologists stressed that there’s no clear, definitive cause for the ongoing homicide surge. But they made clear that people have become more likely to carry and use illegal guns.

‘Cycle of revenge’

"How can you not want retaliation when somebody just killed your little, brother?" McMichael told Fox News. "I don't care who you are, you're going to think about it."

He said police never caught his brother’s killer. Fox News asked if he knew who it was.

"If somebody killed someone in your house, would you know who did it?" McMichael replied. 

The flood of illegal guns has helped perpetuate cycles of retaliation, leading to even more murders, according to criminologists.

GEORGETOWN SHOOTING LEAVES MAN DEAD IN UPSCALE WASHINGTON, DC NEIGHBORHOOD, POLICE SAY

Rather than going to the police, a shooting victim or their friend or relative will seek revenge, the criminologists said. Even if they witnessed a shooting – or if they themselves were the victim – they may refuse cooperate with police so they can handle the matter themselves.

"You can get what are called pingpong shootings or pingpong murders, where one side shoots a guy and the other side shoots a guy and you get this constant classic feud cycle or a cycle of revenge," Lehman, the Manhattan Institute fellow, told Fox News.

Handguns displayed on a counter.

Handguns displayed on a counter.

The preference to retaliate, rather than cooperate, became even more prevalent as police trust fell, according to criminologists.

Scharf described an incident where he saw boys showing off their gunshot wounds to each other.

"Being shot is, for some, a badge of honor," he said.

Witnesses have also become even less willing to work with detectives as a result of diminished police trust, Fox News previously reported.

A cooperative witness is an investigator’s best chance at arresting a murder suspect, according to criminologists. As police fail to make an arrest, trust and cooperation decline further, forming a vicious cycle.

"A byproduct of the defund the police [movement] is this resistance to cooperate among the people that the detectives need most to cooperate," Scharf told Fox News. "We've had several cases in the last few months where kids are killed and no one talks."

"In the life of a street police officer, you haven't lived until you look a kid in the eye and they basically say, ‘f*** you, I'm not going to talk to you,'" he added.

But it wasn’t just the defund the police movement. Officer misconduct and fear have also kept witnesses from coming forward.

"The culture of our communities has been reluctant to support or work with the police by virtue of the treatment and the behavior that has occurred within our community," Parker told Fox News. "There's a distrust. It has developed into a code of conduct within our communities."

Threats of retaliation could also lead to silence.

"Many witnesses are afraid that if they cooperate with the police, they'll be subject to retaliatory violence," Rosenfeld, the University of Missouri-St. Louis criminology professor, told Fox News. "That's not an unreasonable fear."

McMichael said: "It's a bad look in the hood. You deal with the police, you a snitch. Cut and dry."

"People won't talk to you," he continued. "People don't want to do business with you. You pretty much an enemy."

 

Ethan Barton is a producer/reporter for Digital Originals. You can reach him at ethan.barton@fox.com and follow him on Twitter at @ethanrbarton.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/us/damaged-police-trust-helped-fuel-retaliatory-murders-criminologists-say

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Saturday, February 5, 2022

Eurosceptic Alliance to Fight Creation of European Superstate - Soeren Kern

 

by Soeren Kern

The signatories said that the EU has become a tool of "radical forces" that are determined to carry out a civilizational transformation of Europe.

  • "There is a growing threat that seeks to transform the European Union into an ideologically charged federalist super-state; a corporation which disregards national identity and sovereignty, and therefore democracy, plurality and the interests of the citizens of the nations that form the Union. This drift endangers the Union itself by moving away from the Christian European ideals on which it was founded.... We should cooperate and join forces to protect Europe from enforced ideologies and anti-democratic drift that are leading to its downfall." — Joint Statement, Madrid Summit, January 29, 2022.

  • "European institutions cannot become a tool of social engineering aiming at creating a new 'European nation.' Examples of such social engineering could be, among other things, the attempts to ideologically alter our languages in a way which will detach a human being from their culture and heritage, like the recent decision of the European Commission to remove the word 'Christmas' from the public sphere." — Joint Statement, Warsaw Summit, December 4, 2021.

  • The signatories said that the EU has become a tool of "radical forces" that are determined to carry out a civilizational transformation of Europe. They accused conservative establishment parties in Europe of having abandoned traditional Judeo-Christian values ​​and of aligning themselves with leftist positions for political gain.

  • "The slightest national decision that does not correspond to the wishes of the European institutions is now the subject of blackmail: that is not what the Europe of freedoms is! We love Europe because we love our nations. And we will defend Europe because we defend our nations!" — Marine Le Pen, President, France's National Rally party.

  • "What brings us together is stronger than what separates us: the fight for our civilization!" — Nicolas Bay, MEP for France's National Rally party.

  • "With regard to major European issues such as more effective external border protection, greater economic independence for Europe and a common, more restrictive migration policy that is completely diametrically opposed to the current one. We all agreed." — Marlene Svazek, Chairwoman, Freedom Party of Austria.

Leaders of European conservative and populist parties met in Madrid on January 28-29 to build a unified political front aimed at defending traditional Judeo-Christian values and the sovereignty of European nation states. The so-called Madrid Summit marked an important milestone in efforts to create a continent-wide alliance to fight the federalist, globalist and anti-democratic drift of the European Union. Pictured: Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán speaks to the media during the summit, on January 29, 2022. (Photo by Oscar del Poso/AFP via Getty Images)

The leaders of European conservative and populist parties met in the Spanish capital of Madrid on January 28-29 to build a unified political front aimed at defending traditional Judeo-Christian values and the sovereignty of European nation states.

The so-called Madrid Summit — held under the motto "Defending Europe" — marked an important milestone in efforts to create a continent-wide alliance to fight the federalist, globalist and anti-democratic drift of the European Union.

The two-day closed-door summit, hosted by Spain's conservative party Vox, was attended by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki and French presidential candidate Marine Le Pen, as well as by the leaders and representatives of conservative parties from Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Estonia, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, and Romania.

The conservative eurosceptic leaders, who vowed to work together more closely in the European Parliament, issued a joint statement that outlined the challenge as well as a path forward:

"The European Community was forged as an area of free cooperation between sovereign states. However, there is a growing threat that seeks to transform the Union into an ideologically charged federalist super-state; a corporation which disregards national identity and sovereignty, and therefore democracy, plurality and the interests of the citizens of the nations that form the Union.

"This drift endangers the Union itself by moving away from the Christian European ideals on which it was founded. Today, some bureaucrats and some parties mistakenly believe that they can promote agendas without democratic legitimacy which go against the needs of Europeans and the survival of Western civilization itself.

"Faced with this situation, we, the participants of the Summit, commit ourselves to defend Europe from external and internal threats. We will confront the currents that advocate a European Union which is alien to its history and which, detached from reality, lead to demographic suicide and societal transformation. Europe is in demographic decline. We have to support pro-family policies.

"We love Europe because we love our nations. And we will defend Europe because we defend our nations. That is why we will not cease to demand a Union focused on common European values, on people, on their families, on the protection of their borders and on the freedom to have energy, industry, and a strong primary sector. We have to regain the culture of mutual respect among Member States and with the EU institutions, where constitutional identities are safeguarded and not criticized. We denounce the politically motivated attacks from Brussels against Poland and Hungary which demonstrate a complete disregard of basic EU principles and violate the spirit of the Treaties.

"In short, we should cooperate and join forces to protect Europe from enforced ideologies and anti-democratic drift that are leading to its downfall."

The joint declaration included nine action points at the EU level, including commitments to: improve border protection; crack down on illegal immigration; ensure that asylum seekers can enter the EU only after asylum has been granted; work toward greater European energy independence; and defend the primacy of national constitutions over EU law.

In a surprising display of unity, Orbán and Le Pen — who are friendly with Russian President Vladimir Putin — agreed to insert a paragraph in the joint declaration that condemns Russia's threats against Ukraine. The leaders vowed to:

"Work to ensure that the nations of Europe act in solidarity in the face of the threat of external aggression. Russian aggressive actions on Europe's eastern border have led us to the brink of war. Solidarity, decisiveness and defense cooperation between the nations of Europe are needed in the face of such threats."

The joint declaration also pledged to establish a "coordination office" in Brussels to "join forces and speak with one voice as often as possible at the European level vote in the European Parliament on the aforementioned issues."

Polish Prime Minister Morawiecki said that Europe's future rests on sovereign states:

"We have shown that there is a different future for Europe, which is based on sovereign countries, not on any centralized structure that takes away powers from states.

"We showed each other that we think almost alike about such important issues as the Russian threats towards Ukraine, migratory pressures, energy issues, with very high gas prices being the result of manipulations on the part of Russia.

"The most important thing is to be united in our values ... and create a document presenting an alternative to the future of Europe. I hope that we are the alternative to the future of Europe."

Eurosceptic Alliance

The Madrid Summit is the second official meeting of eurosceptic leaders. It builds on the first such summit held in Warsaw, Poland, in December 2021. The Warsaw Summit declaration stated:

"The participants of the conference share a common and deep conviction that the EU is made up of free and equal nation states, bound by numerous areas of close cooperation. We share this conviction with many millions of citizens across EU member states.

"Only through such a European cooperation can we save the EU from further crises and tensions, and put a stop to the disturbing idea of creating a Europe governed by a self-appointed elite. We reject the arbitrary application of Union Law, bending or even violating the Treaties. Only the sovereign institutions of the states have full democratic legitimacy. European institutions do not enjoy the same legitimacy, and therefore should play a subservient role in the political architecture to the nation state.

"Equally, for this reason they cannot become a tool of social engineering aiming at creating a new 'European nation.' Examples of such social engineering could be, among other things, the attempts to ideologically alter our languages in a way which will detach a human being from their culture and heritage, like the recent decision of the European Commission to remove the word 'Christmas' from the public sphere. Such a concept of the nation has never existed, does not exist today nor can it exist in the future. The participants declare their will to cooperate in the spirit of solidarity, at various levels and forums with all the parties and organizations that hold Europe's unique heritage and the idea of a Europe of Nations dear."

The two summits are the result of the July 2021 "Joint Declaration on the Future of the European Union," an agreement by 16 eurosceptic parties to jointly oppose efforts by European federalists to transform the European Union into a godless multicultural superstate.

The signatories said that the EU has become a tool of "radical forces" that are determined to carry out a civilizational transformation of Europe. They accused conservative establishment parties in Europe of having abandoned traditional Judeo-Christian values ​​and of aligning themselves with leftist positions for political gain.

The author of the July 2021 document, former Polish President Jaroslaw Kaczynski, said that the EU is "preparing to carry out a cultural revolution that will destroy social structures, starting with the family and traditions, and create a new man." He added: "We don't want this revolution, which we believe will bring unhappiness and a drastic decline in the freedoms of individuals and countries."

An obstacle to building an effective alliance to fight European federalism in Brussels lies in the fact that the conservative eurosceptic parties belong to different political groups in the supranational European Parliament. Members of the European Parliament are organized into ideological groups — currently there are eight different political groups — and may only belong to one group.

Some conservative parties — the Bulgarian National Movement (IMRO), the Electoral Action of Poles in Lithuania–Christian Families Alliance (LLRA–KSS), Poland's Law and Justice (PiS), Romania's Christian Democratic National Peasants' Party (PNT-CD) and Spain's Vox — belong to the center-right European Conservatives and Reformists Group, which advocates for long-term reform of the European Union, but does not want to exit the bloc.

Still others — the Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ), Belgium's Flemish Interest (VB), the Alternative for Germany (AfD), the Conservative People's Party of Estonia (EKRE), France's National Rally (RN) and Italy's Lega — belong to the more hardline eurosceptic Identity and Democracy group, some of whose members have advocated for the abolition of the euro, Europe's single currency.

Meanwhile, Hungary's ruling party, the Hungarian Civic Alliance (Fidesz), recently left the European People's Party (EPP) and currently does not belong to any political group in the European Parliament.

The long-term goal of uniting all the eurosceptic parties into a single "supergroup" is easier said than done. They hold different positions on a wide range of domestic and foreign policy issues. Those differences — including economic policy and relations with Russia — will be difficult to paper over.

For instance, although Orbán and Le Pen agreed to include criticism of Russia in the Madrid Summit's joint statement, Orbán subsequently met with Putin at the Kremlin and pledged to cooperate with Moscow. At the same time, Le Pen omitted the paragraph about Russia from the French translation of the joint declaration.

Moreover, neither the leader of Italy's Lega party, Matteo Salvini, nor the three co-leaders of Germany's Alternative for Germany party, attended the Madrid Summit.

Salvini, once at the vanguard of Europe's anti-EU movement, has seen his eurosceptic reputation tarnished by his decision to join the pro-EU government of Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi. "I can be in a pro-Europe government while dreaming of a different Europe," Salvini said recently. In any event, Lega was represented in Madrid by Italian MEP Paolo Borchia.

Comments by Signatories

In opening remarks at the Madrid Summit, the leader of Spain's Vox party, Santiago Abascal, said:

"We are all allies. We are all united by our values. If we want to ensure the well-being of our compatriots in Europe, we must change the current course. We must work together to free our citizens from this crisis. There is a lot at stake — our survival as nation states. It is our duty to pass on traditional values ​​to the younger generations."

Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki added:

"Today we face many threats. Together we must find the answer to them. We must win the dispute over the sovereignty of nation states, which is threatened by European institutions that usurp rights that go beyond Community law. We must fight together to ensure that freedom means freedom, democracy means democracy and that sovereignty is guaranteed."

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán emphasized:

"We need to strengthen and consolidate common values ​​that are based on Christian values. We need to create a new platform for cooperation to make our positions and views more heard and visible in Europe. Let us not forget that the essence of democracy is elections, so let us support each other."

Vox vice president Jorge Buxadé said:

"National constitutions are the product of many years of historical evolution. Europe has 2,500 years of history. The European Union is just 70 years old. The EU must be at the service of the Europe of nation states."

The leader of France's National Rally party, Marine Le Pen, tweeted: "The slightest national decision that does not correspond to the wishes of the European institutions is now the subject of blackmail: that is not what the Europe of freedoms is!" She added: "We love Europe because we love our nations. And we will defend Europe because we defend our nations!"

French MEP Nicolas Bay for France's National Rally party tweeted:

"Italians, Belgians, Hungarians, Poles, French; members of different groups in the European Parliament; in Madrid we have made progress in friendship, because what brings us together is stronger than what separates us: the fight for our civilization!"

Italian MEP Paolo Borchia of the Lega party said:

"The goal is to build a European center-right alternative to a European Popular Party (EPP) that is excessively biased to the left. It will inevitably be a long process, but the party leaders will focus on what unites us, rather than the differences. From this point of view, I reiterated Lega's willingness to proceed in the direction of a clear and concrete path, respectful of the sensibilities of each individual party."

The chairwoman of the Freedom Party of Austria, Marlene Svazek, in an interview with Austrian public broadcaster ORF, said that the main purpose of the Madrid Summit was to strengthen mutual trust:

"We have decided to set up a coordination office in Brussels at parliamentary level, which will in future more closely dovetail the votes and the structural and organizational aspects of the two parliamentary groups.

"With regard to major European issues such as more effective external border protection, greater economic independence for Europe and a common, more restrictive migration policy that is completely diametrically opposed to the current one. We all agreed."

 

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18202/eu-alliance-conservatives-populists

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter