The European Union - the New Soviet Union?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Daskalot
    Senior Member
    • Sep 2008
    • 4345

    #61
    Pavlos was killed by Mitre Vlahot in 1904, if my memory serves me right. You will exterminate noone.
    Macedonian Truth Organisation

    Comment

    • Sportster
      Banned
      • May 2010
      • 97

      #62
      Originally posted by Daskalot View Post
      You will exterminate noone.
      hehehehe I like this..very smart. But hey that goes against the "Macedonia Genocide using napalms, knives and big ugly hairy TurkGreeks" scenario...eh what the heck its all crap anyway.
      Last edited by Sportster; 05-11-2010, 05:44 AM.

      Comment

      • Mikail
        Senior Member
        • Sep 2008
        • 1338

        #63
        Thanks for the short lived entertainment Sportster. No you can enjoy feeling the breeze through you arxithia as you ride your bitch bike in your fishnets
        From the village of P’pezhani, Tashko Popov, Dimitar Popov-Skenderov and Todor Trpenov were beaten and sentenced to 12 years prison. Pavle Mevchev and Atanas Popov from Vrbeni and Boreshnica joined them in early 1927, they were soon after transferred to Kozhani and executed. As they were leaving Lerin they were heard to shout "With our death, Macedonia will not be lost. Our blood will run, but other Macedonians will rise from it"

        Comment

        • Risto the Great
          Senior Member
          • Sep 2008
          • 15658

          #64
          I think Sportster had this forum mixed up with something else.
          I hope he finds true happiness in another world because he is not for this one.
          Risto the Great
          MACEDONIA:ANHEDONIA
          "Holding my breath for the revolution."

          Hey, I wrote a bestseller. Check it out: www.ren-shen.com

          Comment

          • The LION will ROAR
            Senior Member
            • Jan 2009
            • 3231

            #65
            The Macedonian Digest
            “From the readers for the readers”
            Edition 29 – May 2008



            THE MONSTER THAT IS NATO

            Put simply, Europe doesn't like the Orthodox Christian -Slav Russians. (France and Germany have both tried to conquer Russia on separate occasions, but Russia ended up defeating both of them!) Like Russia, Serbia and Macedonia too are Orthodox Christian -Slav nations! Get the drift?!
            In 2004 Serbia and Macedonia were effectively "blocked" from their natural ally Russia when NATO "strategically" (cunningly) expanded by admitting a "wall of nations", seven new members in all!
            Montenegro recently split from Serbia, and Serbia is now "land-locked". The Republic of Macedonia too is "land-locked". (Hmmm!!!)
            NATO has created the "phony" state of Kosovo which is on Serbian territory!
            *In fact the west has been creating anti-Russian/anti-Orthodox Christian -Slav buffer states since 1829! These also include:
            The Southern Balkan (Mediterranean) Republic > "Artificial Greece".
            The Eastern Balkan (Black Sea) Republic > "Artificial Bulgaria".
            The Southern Balkan (Adriatic) Republic > "Artificial Albania". (Note: There is a Roman map from 117 AD, during the time of Emperor Trajan, which shows Albania being in central Asia!!!)
            Bosnia-Herzegovina.
            NATO, not surprisingly, has admitted two more non-Orthodox Christian -Slav states, "Artificial Albania" and Croatia.
            NATO (speaking for "Artificial Greece") barred the Republic of Macedonia from joining its ranks, saying "until it settles the name dispute with Greece"! Reply: It is not Greece! The "Southern Balkan (Mediterranean) Republic" is an anti Orthodox Christian -"Slav"/Russian buffer state! In 1913 it was given the nod by the Western Powers of the time to illegally seize 51% of the Ottoman occupied Macedonian nation!
            Artificial Greece has broken the 1995 Interim Agreement with the Republic of Macedonia. An Agreement which the Republic of Macedonia was "forced to sign in the first place under duress"!!! Excuse me, but the Republic of Macedonia, at least, should have been admitted into NATO under the reference FYROM!
            It is time for the Republic of Macedonia to look after its own interests! (Since the outset it was always obvious that Artificial Greece was going to de-rail Macedonia at every opportunity. We should not be talking to them or listening to what they have to say. Don't believe them! Don't trust them!) The Republic of Macedonia must now take the appropriate counter measures it said it would if Artificial Greece vetoed its accession to NATO!
            Furthermore, the Republic of Macedonia should:
            -Recognize and establish ties with the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.
            -"Not Recognize" the 'phony state' of Kosovo. (The terrorists in Kosovo must, but don't, respect the 2001 UN recognized border agreement between Belgrade and Skopje).
            If the US-Macedonia Military Pact turns out to be some "Mickey Mouse Agreement" which doesn't go far enough to protect our borders the Republic of Macedonia, along with Serbia, must turn to Russia and China!!! (Russians could even be descendants of Ancient Macedonians themselves! Although the Russians abandoned us in Berlin in 1878, the chess game is different now!)
            Unless the EU racists recognize the Republic of Macedonia under its constitutional name RIGHT NOW, Macedonia should DITCH the EU! Why continue with the "bullshit EU reforms" when it is obvious that Artificial Greece will Veto our accession anyway! It is pointless! Macedonia can establish other trade links. They can turn to China, India, Russia, etc, etc. There are plenty of other options. (The racist EU should look at the appalling records of their own member states!)
            Now that Artificial Albania is going to be a NATO member they should not bother with the Republic of Macedonia and should try to catch the bigger fish. They should be pushing for the recognition of the Albanians in Artificial Greece! (Chemeria!) Imagine how many there must be!!!
            On a final note, who can blame the Russians from pointing their nukes at these NATO rogue states?!

            BY ZAC I -THE FIRST
            The Macedonians originates it, the Bulgarians imitate it and the Greeks exploit it!

            Comment

            • Onur
              Senior Member
              • Apr 2010
              • 2389

              #66
              Originally posted by The LION will ROAR View Post
              Furthermore, the Republic of Macedonia should:
              -Recognize and establish ties with the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.


              Man, Greece goes mad if this would happen. I mean reeaalyy mad because current situation in Cyprus is their last desperate hope to realize "Enosis" one day in the future and what would happen if Macedonia destroys their hope even before Turkey does?

              Actually, Turkey will force the world to recognize Turkish republic soon. We`ve waited long enough for that. EU and USA have to accept the ongoing fact for 37 years in the island otherwise there will be referendum in Cyprus in near future to join Turkey and we will annex it in the end to destroy their "Enosis" officially. This stupid Greek embargo forces us to that. If they continue to listen Greece, EU will face the consequences of this with the shame of accepting southern Greek side as a representative of whole island few years ago. Only thing which prevented us to that was the never-ending EU negotiations and i hope that this will be over soon.



              Greek politicians know this too;
              Turkey no longer regarded as ‘invader/occupier’ by UN, says Clerides;

              Glafcos Clerides, a former leader of the Greek Cypriot administration, has suggested that the United Nations no longer considers Turkey an “invader/occupier” force due to the presence of its troops in the northern part of the divided island of Cyprus. "If Turkey had been accepted as an “invader/occupier,” its membership in the UN Security Council would not be possible, Clerides said in response to a question in an interview published on Saturday in Greek Cypriot daily Simerini.

              Clerides: KKTC may be recognized if Cyprus issue not settled soon;

              “In a couple of years, recognition [of the KKTC] will be on the agenda, too. The Greek side should formulate a Plan B, especially in the event of Eroğlu’s victory,” he was quoted as saying by the Greek Cypriot press. Clerides is known for his strong support for the reunification of the island in accordance with the Annan plan, which 65 percent of Turkish Cypriots accepted and 75 percent of Greek Cypriots rejected in a referendum.

              17 April 2010, Saturday







              Originally posted by The LION will ROAR View Post
              Macedonia should DITCH the EU! Why continue with the "bullshit EU reforms" when it is obvious that Artificial Greece will Veto our accession anyway! It is pointless! Macedonia can establish other trade links. They can turn to China, India, Russia, etc, etc. There are plenty of other options. (The racist EU should look at the appalling records of their own member states!)
              Now that Artificial Albania is going to be a NATO member they should not bother with the Republic of Macedonia and should try to catch the bigger fish. They should be pushing for the recognition of the Albanians in Artificial Greece! (Chemeria!) Imagine how many there must be!!!
              On a final note, who can blame the Russians from pointing their nukes at these NATO rogue states?!



              The world is changing, thats for sure.

              20 years ago, who would believe to the events we live today? USA, EU struggling with economical crisis while countries like India, China, Russia getting stronger. Middle-eastern countries will run out of oil in 40 years and Caucasus will be the new energy source of the world.



              For example, Like whole cabinet of Russia including the president Dmitry Medvedev, ministers of Deputy, Foreign and Interior relations, Agriculture, Energy, Transportation and also presidents of Chechnya and Tataristan will be in Turkey tomorrow to sign billions of dollar agreements and projects;

              Medvedev comes to Turkey with giant projects in his agenda

              Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has billion-dollar projects in his agenda to discuss during his visit.

              Turkey and Russia will discuss plans to introduce a visa-free regime, natural gas pipelines and construction of a nuclear power plant in Akkuyu district of southern coastal city of Mersin on the first day of Medvedev visit. Russia and Turkey will sign more than 20 agreements, including energy deals, the Kremlin's top foreign policy adviser Sergei Prikhodko said. In Ankara, Russia and Turkey will sign a cooperation memorandum to build and service a nuclear power station, Mr Prikhodko said, without providing further details.

              According to Turkish diplomatic sources, during Medvedev’s visit a deal initialed between the two countries envisaging the elimination of visa requirements may be signed without waiting for the domestic confirmation process.

              Russia and Turkey are becoming strategic partners, President Dmitry Medvedev said shortly before his visit to Ankara, due May 11-12. "First of all, we can say with conviction that Russian-Turkish ties are reaching the level of full-scale strategic partnership," the Russian leader said, adding that a declaration signed by the two presidents in Moscow in February 2009 testified to that. He also said Russia sees Turkey as a "good and reliable neighbor with whom we are happy to jointly build plans to further strengthen cooperation for the good of our countries' peoples." Medvedev said the two countries should aim at increasing bilateral trade three- to fivefold during the next five years, not only at the expense of raw materials but also through cooperation in hi-tech fields and mutual investment.

              The planned South Stream and Blue Stream-2 natural gas pipelines, the construction of the Samsun-Ceyhan oil pipeline will be the other most critical issues of the talks. The two countries will also discuss ways to boost the mutual trade volume. Medvedev’s visit cheered the exporters in Turkey, too. A Russian-Turkish Business Forum will also be carried out in this framework Wednesday. Representatives of the business circles point that if concrete step can be dealt in this forum, a surge in trade volumes between the two countries is certain.

              Russia is Turkey’s single biggest trading partner and provides two-thirds of its gas. The two countries have bilateral trade ties totaling some $40 billion. According to daily Zaman’s report an almost 15-percent discount in gas prices might be agreed during the negotiations.

              Medvedev during his two-day visit starting Tuesday will chair the first meeting of High Level Strategic Cooperation Council, a new council for higher cooperation. Turkish-Russian ties have predominantly expanded on an economic basis, with gigantic energy deals and projects constituting the backbone of the growing cooperation. But Medvedev's visit is likely to be a cornerstone in introducing a political and strategic dimension to the growing ties. The two countries are also expected to discuss regional and international issues and bilateral relations in particular. Officials from the two countries will most probably talk about the situation in the southern Caucasus, with a special focus on the Nagorno-Karabakh problem between Azerbaijan and Armenia.

              Russia is Turkey's main gas supplier and wants to build a section of its key South Stream pipeline through Turkey's portion of the Black Sea to create a new route for Russian gas to Europe that will bypass Ukraine. Turkey, which supports the rival EU-backed Nabucco pipeline, has agreed to allow Moscow to start surveys in its territorial waters in the Black Sea for South Stream.

              Medvedev will be accompanied by a large number of businessmen and officials, and various agreements regarding energy, economy, agriculture and security are expected to be signed during the historic visit. In the 50-persons official delegation will include Chechnya President Ramazan Kadirov and Tatarstan President Mintimer Şaymiyev as well as Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Ministers of Interior, Agriculture, Energy, Transportation.

              http://www.haberturk.com/general/hab...-in-his-agenda



              I can easily say that this is a radical change on both Turkey`s and Russia`s foreign policy. Russia and Turkey never agreed on anything throughout history but it seems that this will change.

              "Mutual elimination of visa requirements between Turkey and Russia"!!!! Man, few years ago, Turkish people was getting arrested in Russia with the accusation of being the member of Turkish intelligence service or a spy of NATO and quite same was true for some Russians in Turkey. Historically, we never trusted each other but now they want 73 million Turkey citizens to travel in Russia freely?? Thats really odd!

              Turkey will also create new route for the pipelines together with Russia instead of EU-backed Nabucco project which completely bypasses Russia. This will be biggest blow and shock to the EU since Turkey is the only way to transport Caucasus oil and natural gas to the Europe and if we cease our support to their project, then they will be bound to Russia too as well as Turkey to get oil and natural gas. I am sure they wont like that since having dependency to Turkey for it was probably disturbing enough for them but now Russia will involve to it as well.



              I fully agree to the article you posted TLWR. I also think that NATO served its purpose on cold-war days and its kinda dead coalition after that anyway. The future of EU doesn't look bright either. I think Macedonia should jump on the wagon for the new world order as well since i believe the future will be at east anymore, not with the old and crippled west.
              Last edited by Onur; 05-11-2010, 08:59 PM.

              Comment

              • Makedonetz
                Senior Member
                • Apr 2010
                • 1080

                #67
                Onur the grass must be greener on the Turkish side of Cypris ;D

                They had a show once on BBC discussing the situation in Cyprus and they showed these "Andarte's" cyprus form of greek soilders shooting road signs, even at a wedding the bride and groom were shooting off hand guns. Blazo grci
                Last edited by Makedonetz; 05-11-2010, 04:46 PM.
                Makedoncite se borat
                za svoite pravdini!

                "The one who works for joining of Macedonia to Bulgaria,Greece or Serbia can consider himself as a good Bulgarian, Greek or Serb, but not a good Macedonian"
                - Goce Delchev

                Comment

                • I of Macedon
                  Member
                  • Sep 2008
                  • 222

                  #68
                  Nigel Farage stands up to Globalist Sarkozy July 10, 2008.

                  YouTube - Nigel Farage stands up to Globalist Sarkozy July 10, 2008.

                  Let the People Decide their own Future - Nigel Farage MEP

                  YouTube - Let the People Decide their own Future - Nigel Farage MEP

                  Daniel Hannan MEP: The European Union is not safeguarding democracy

                  YouTube - Daniel Hannan MEP: The European Union is not safeguarding democracy

                  EU NATIONALISM - EVIDENCE OF THE PLAN FOR A SUPERSTATE

                  YouTube - EU NATIONALISM - EVIDENCE OF THE PLAN FOR A SUPERSTATE - MUST SEE!

                  Daniel Hannan on Turkish membership to the EU


                  YouTube - Daniel Hannan on Turkish membership to the EU
                  No need to sit in the shade, because we stand under our own sun

                  Comment

                  • I of Macedon
                    Member
                    • Sep 2008
                    • 222

                    #69
                    Nigel Farage warns of euro meltdown in January 2009

                    Nigel Farage also warned of the problem with Greece and how Greece can't do anything about its impending problem...again this is back in January 2009.

                    YouTube - Nigel Farage warns of euro meltdown

                    EU Corruption

                    There is some laughs in this, mostly the joke the EU system is or is becoming

                    YouTube - EU Corruption

                    UKIP MEP Nigel Farage confronts José Manuel Barroso


                    YouTube - UKIP MEP Nigel Farage confronts José Manuel Barroso
                    No need to sit in the shade, because we stand under our own sun

                    Comment

                    • Onur
                      Senior Member
                      • Apr 2010
                      • 2389

                      #70
                      Nigel Farage is an intelligent person. Daniel Hannan is also right about turkey`s membership to EU.

                      Turkey signed the first paper with EU in 1960s, they were economical union then. We are doing negotiations for full membership since 2004 and they keep inventing new excuses to keep us at their door forever but never allow us to enter. In the meantime, they accepted ex-communists like Bulgaria to the EU.

                      Hannan also right about losing an ally vs new potential totalitarian regimes. Majority of people in Turkey doesn't want EU anymore and we don't care if some freaking radical islamists attacks France or Germany as long as they don't touch us. We wont be their buffer anymore like they forced us to be vs communist Russia.

                      I didnt even know they criticised us for women political representation. LOL...
                      Like Hannan said, we had woman prime minister 15 years ago and Turkey gave full political rights to women, to vote and be elected at 1934, even before France did.

                      Comment

                      • The LION will ROAR
                        Senior Member
                        • Jan 2009
                        • 3231

                        #71
                        50 reasons to leave the EU...

                        The Macedonians originates it, the Bulgarians imitate it and the Greeks exploit it!

                        Comment

                        • Onur
                          Senior Member
                          • Apr 2010
                          • 2389

                          #72
                          'The Eurozone has failed' - Czech President

                          After the fall of communism in 1989, the Czech Republic wanted to be a normal European country again as soon as possible, after being excluded from participating in the post-World War II European integration process for 41 years. The only way to achieve this was to become a member country of the European Union. We had no other choice, but the communist experience was still too "fresh." We wanted to be free and didn't want to lose our freedom and our finally regained sovereignty. Many of us were therefore in favor of a looser form of European integration, against the so-called deepening of the EU and against the creation of political union in Europe. People like me understood very early that the idea of a European single currency is a dangerous project which will either bring big problems or lead to the undemocratic centralization of Europe. My position was clear: With all my reservations, we had to apply for EU membership, but at the same time we had to fight against projects such as the euro.

                          As a long-standing critic of the idea of a European single currency, I have not rejoiced at the current problems in the euro zone because their consequences could be serious for all of us in Europe—for members and non-members of the euro zone, for its supporters and opponents. Even the enthusiastic propagandists of the euro suddenly speak about the potential collapse of the whole project now, and it is us critics who say we have to look at it in a more structured way.

                          The term "collapse" has at least two meanings. The first is that the euro-zone project has not succeeded in delivering the positive effects that had been rightly or wrongly expected from it. It was mistakenly and irresponsibly presented as an indisputable economic benefit to all the countries willing to give up their own long-treasured currencies. Extensive studies published prior to the launch of the European single currency promised that the euro would help to accelerate economic growth and reduce inflation and stressed, in particular, that the member states of the euro zone would be protected against all kinds of external economic disruptions (the so-called exogenous shocks).

                          This has not happened. After the establishment of the euro zone, the economic growth of its member states has slowed down compared to previous decades, increasing the gap between the rate of growth in the euro-zone countries and that in other major economies—such as the United States and China, smaller economies in Southeast Asia and other parts of the developing world, as well as Central and Eastern European countries that are not members of the euro zone.

                          Economic growth in Europe has been slowing down since the 1960s, thanks to the increasingly damaging economic and social system which started dominating Europe at that time. The European "soziale Marktwirtschaft" is an unproductive variant of a welfare state, of state paternalism, of "leisure" society, of high taxes and low motivation to work. The existence of the euro has not reversed that trend. According to the European Central Bank, the average annual rate of growth in the euro-zone countries was 3.4% in the 1970s, 2.4% in the 1980s, 2.2% in the 1990s and only 1.1% from 2001 to 2009 (the decade of the euro). A similar slowdown has not occurred anywhere else in the world (speaking about "normal" countries, e.g. countries without wars or revolutions).

                          Not even the expected convergence of inflation rates has taken place. Two distinct groups have formed within the euro zone—one (including most of the countries of western and northern Europe) with a low inflation rate and one (including Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland) with a higher inflation rate. We have also seen an increase in long-term trade imbalances. There are countries where exports exceed imports and countries that lastingly import more than they export. It is no coincidence that the latter countries also have higher inflation. It has no connection with the world-wide crisis. This crisis "only" escalated and exposed longtime hidden economic problems; it did not cause them.

                          During its first 10 years, the euro zone has not led to any measurable homogenization of its member states' economies. The euro zone, which comprises 16 European countries, is not an "optimum currency area" as defined by the economic theory. Even Otmar Issing, the former member of the Executive Board and chief economist of the European Central Bank, has repeatedly pointed out (most recently in a speech in Prague in December 2009) that the establishment of the euro zone was primarily a political, not an economic, decision. In such a situation, it is inevitable that the costs of establishing and maintaining it exceed its benefits.

                          My choice of the words "establishing" and "maintaining" is not accidental. Most economic commentators were satisfied by the ease and apparent inexpensiveness of the first step (the establishment of the common monetary area). This helped to form the impression that everything was fine with this project.

                          The exchange rates of the countries joining the euro zone probably more or less reflected the economic reality at the time when the euro was born. However, over the last decade, the economic performance of euro-zone countries diverged and the negative effects of the "straight-jacket" of a single currency have become more and more visible. When "good weather" (in the economic sense of the word) prevailed, no visible problems arose. Once the crisis (or "bad weather") arrived, the lack of homogeneity manifested itself very clearly. In that sense, I dare say that—as a project that promised to be of considerable economic benefit to its members—the euro zone has failed.

                          The second meaning of the term collapse is the possible collapse of the euro zone as an institution, the demise of the euro. To that question, my answer is no, it will not collapse. So much political capital had been invested in its existence and in its role as a "cement" that binds the EU on its way to supra-nationality that in the foreseeable future the euro will surely not be abandoned.

                          It will continue, but at a very high price—low economic growth. It will bring economic losses even to non-members of the euro zone, like the Czech Republic.

                          The huge amount of money that Greece will receive can be divided by the number of the euro-zone inhabitants, and each person can calculate his or her own "contribution." However, the "opportunity" costs arising from the loss of a potentially higher growth rate, which is much more difficult for a non-economist to imagine, will be far more painful. I do not doubt that for political reasons this price will be paid and that the euro-zone inhabitants will never find out just how much the euro truly cost them.

                          The mechanism that will save the European monetary union is the increasing volume of financial transfers that will have to be sent to euro-zone countries suffering from the biggest economic and financial problems. Yet everyone knows that sending massive financial transfers is possible only in a state, and the EU, or the euro zone, is not a state. Only in a state there is a sufficient feeling of solidarity among its citizens. Only in a state—and unified Germany in the 1990s is an excellent example—can massive financial transfers be justified and made politically viable. (By the way, the inter-German financial transfers in that era annually equaled the whole sum potentially needed for Greece to survive). Twenty years ago, I happened to be the minister of finance in a dissolving political—and monetary—union called Czechoslovakia. I have to confess that the country broke up because of the lack of mutual solidarity.

                          That is why Europe will have to decide whether to centralize itself politically as well. Europeans don't want that because they know (or at least feel) that it would be to the detriment of liberty and prosperity. There is, however, a real danger that the politicians will do it anyway—behind the backs of those who elected them. And this is what bothers me most. The recent dealings in EU headquarters in Brussels—literally behind closed doors—about the aid package for Greece demonstrated that there is no democracy there. The German-French tandem made the decision on behalf of the rest of the euro-zone countries, and I am afraid this will continue.

                          It is evident that the euro—the European single currency—and the currently proposed measures to save the euro do not represent any "salvation" for the European economy. In the long run, it can be saved only by a radical restructuring of the European economic and social system. My country had a velvet revolution and made a radical transformation of its political, economic and social structures. Fifteen years ago, I sometimes joked that after entering the EU we should start a velvet revolution there as well. Unfortunately, this ceases to be a joke now.

                          The Czech Republic has not made a mistake by avoiding the membership in the euro zone. I am glad we are not the only country taking that view. In April, the Financial Times published an article by the late governor of the Polish central bank, Slawomir Skrzypek. He wrote it shortly before his tragic death in an airplane crash near Smolensk, Russia. In that article, Mr. Skrzypek wrote, "As a non-member of the euro, Poland has been able to profit from flexibility of the zloty exchange rate in a way that has helped growth and lowered the current account deficit without importing inflation." He added that "the decade-long story of peripheral euro members drastically losing competitiveness has been a salutary lesson." There is no need to add anything to that.


                          Last edited by Onur; 06-04-2010, 05:14 PM.

                          Comment

                          • Onur
                            Senior Member
                            • Apr 2010
                            • 2389

                            #73
                            Hungary Warns of Greek-Style Crisis

                            Fears that the debt crisis could migrate to central Europe were stirred Friday after a senior Hungarian government official said the previous government had manipulated budget figures and lied about the state of the economy, but most financial experts dismissed the remarks as a ham-handed negotiating ploy.

                            The official, Peter Szijjarto, a spokesman for Prime Minister Viktor Orban, was quoted by Bloomberg News and other news agencies as saying that the Hungarian economy was in a “very grave situation.” He even raised the specter of a default, saying such speculation “isn’t an exaggeration.”

                            His comments followed similar warnings on Thursday by Lajos Kosa, a vice president of the governing center-right Fidesz party, and other officials that Hungary was in danger of suffering a Greek-style crisis, with budget deficits — officially 4 percent of gross domestic product in 2009 — possibly reaching 7.5 percent of G.D.P. this year.

                            After the comments, the Hungarian currency slid and the yield on benchmark 10-year Hungarian bonds surged, to close at 8.1 percent from 7.4 percent on Thursday. The Budapest Stock Exchange Index closed down 3.4 percent, having fallen as much as 7.1 percent earlier in the day.

                            For all the alarmism by senior government officials in recent days, however, economists said the country was nowhere near the crisis level of Greece and emphasized that the comments appeared to have been politically motivated to tarnish the previous Socialist government and to give Mr. Orban a stronger negotiating position with the I.M.F.

                            Mr. Orban, whose Fidesz party won a sweeping victory in April in part on a platform of ending austerity and promoting growth, has indicated repeatedly that he wants the I.M.F. to allow Hungary to run a higher budget deficit than the current 2010 target of 3.8 percent of gross domestic product.

                            Hungary is among the countries in Eastern Europe hardest hit by the international financial crisis. In late 2008 it was forced to approach the International Monetary Fund for $25 billion in emergency financing. Unemployment has soared to 11.4 percent while the economy s contracted by 6.3 percent last year.

                            Peter Rona, a leading economist, said the doomsday talk had seriously backfired by spooking investors already jittery over debt problems in the euro zone, potentially depriving Hungary of credit on the international financial markets and undermining the government’s credibility.

                            “Fundamentally, Hungary’s economy is nowhere near the debt level of Greece, and it has more than enough money to service its debt, while I don’t think there is a data integrity problem,” he said. “But the government has shown itself to be a bunch of bunglers and amateurs when it comes to communicating with financial markets, and it will now face a challenge to convince the markets that Hungary is heading in the right direction.”

                            Mr. Rona added that the government’s credibility had been further dented by its pledge on Friday to slash taxes, even as it compared Hungary’s economic situation with Greece. “Their economic plans and statements are confusing and contradictory.”

                            The comments from Hungary “reminded investors of what happened in Greece,” said Martin van Vliet, an economist at ING in Amsterdam. “The bond markets are still hyper-sensitive to any bad news on sovereign debt.”

                            In Athens, it was a new Socialist government that blamed the previous administration for lying about the state of the finances, leading to substantial upward revisions in the country’s deficit projections.

                            Nigel Rendell, a senior emerging markets analyst at RBC Capital Markets in London, said the Hungarian comments appeared to have been aimed at a domestic audience by a “naïve” official.

                            In fact, since receiving the I.M.F. aid, Hungary appears to have made good progress in controlling its deficit, he said.

                            According to European Union figures, the country’s budget deficit was stable in 2009 at 4 percent of gross domestic product, higher than the 3.8 percent a year earlier but well below 2006 and 2007 levels. Its total debt was equal to 78 percent of G.D.P. last year, about the same level as France.

                            “It takes years to build credibility, and that can be destroyed in days,” Mr. Rendell said. “They should have known better. They have damaged themselves, and it may take many, many months to recover.”

                            The new Hungarian government was sworn in just last month. A government fact-finding panel will present a preliminary report on the state of the economy over the weekend, to be followed by a government action plan, Mr. Szijjarto, the spokesman, said.


                            Economists said the comments by officials appeared to have been politically motivated to tarnish the previous Socialist government.

                            Comment

                            • Onur
                              Senior Member
                              • Apr 2010
                              • 2389

                              #74
                              As nationalism rises, will the European Union fall?

                              The European Union is dying -- not a dramatic or sudden death, but one so slow and steady that we may look across the Atlantic one day soon and realize that the project of European integration that we've taken for granted over the past half-century is no more.

                              Europe's decline is partly economic. The financial crisis has taken a painful toll on many E.U. members, and high national debts and the uncertain health of the continent's banks may mean more trouble ahead. But these woes pale in comparison with a more serious malady: From London to Berlin to Warsaw, Europe is experiencing a renationalization of political life, with countries clawing back the sovereignty they once willingly sacrificed in pursuit of a collective ideal.

                              For many Europeans, that greater good no longer seems to matter. They wonder what the union is delivering for them, and they ask whether it is worth the trouble. If these trends continue, they could compromise one of the most significant and unlikely accomplishments of the 20th century: an integrated Europe, at peace with itself, seeking to project power as a cohesive whole. The result would be individual nations consigned to geopolitical irrelevance -- and a United States bereft of a partner willing or able to shoulder global burdens.

                              The erosion of support for a unified Europe is infecting even Germany, whose obsession with banishing the national rivalries that long subjected the continent to great-power wars once made it the engine of integration. Berlin's recent reluctance to rescue Greece during its financial tailspin -- Chancellor Angela Merkel resisted the bailout for months -- breached the spirit of common welfare that is the hallmark of a collective Europe. Only after the Greek crisis threatened to engulf the euro zone did Merkel override popular opposition and approve the loan. Voters in local elections in North Rhine-Westphalia promptly punished her party, delivering the Christian Democrats their most severe defeat of the postwar era.

                              Such stinginess reflects the bigger problem: Germany's pursuit of its national interest is crowding out its enthusiasm for the E.U. In one of the few signs of life in the European project, member states last fall embraced the Lisbon Treaty, endowing the union with a presidential post, a foreign policy czar and a diplomatic service. But then Berlin helped select as the E.U.'s president and foreign policy chief Herman van Rompuy and Catherine Ashton, respectively, low-profile individuals who would not threaten the authority of national leaders. Even Germany's courts are putting the brakes on the E.U., last year issuing a ruling that strengthened the national Parliament's sway over European legislation.

                              This renationalization of politics has been occurring across the E.U. One of the starker signs of trouble came in 2005, when Dutch and French voters rejected a constitutional treaty that would have consolidated the E.U.'s legal and political character.

                              The Lisbon Treaty, its watered-down successor, was rejected by the Irish in 2008. They changed their minds in 2009, but only after ensuring that the treaty would not jeopardize national control of taxation and military neutrality.

                              And in Britain, May elections brought to power a coalition dominated by the Conservative Party, which is well known for its Europhobia.

                              Elsewhere, right-wing populism is on the upswing -- a product, primarily, of a backlash against immigration. This hard-edged nationalism aims not only at minorities, but also at the loss of autonomy that accompanies political union. For example, Hungary's Jobbik Party, which borders on xenophobic, won 47 seats in elections this year -- up from none in 2006. Even in the historically tolerant Netherlands, the far-right Party for Freedom recently won more than 15 percent of the vote, giving it just seven fewer seats than the leading party.

                              If these obstacles to a stable union weren't sobering enough, in July, the E.U.'s rotating presidency fell to Belgium -- a country whose Dutch-speaking Flemish citizens and French-speaking Walloons are so divided that, long after elections in June, a workable governing coalition has yet to emerge. It speaks volumes that the country now guiding the European project suffers exactly the kind of nationalist antagonism that the E.U. was created to eliminate.


                              The renationalization of European politics is a product, first and foremost, of generational change. For Europeans who came of age during World War II or the Cold War, the E.U. is an escape route from a bloody past. Not so for younger Europeans: A recent poll revealed that French citizens over 55 are almost twice as likely to see the E.U. as a guarantee of peace as those under 36. No wonder new European leaders view the E.U.'s value through cold cost-benefit calculations, not as an article of faith.

                              Meanwhile, the demands of the global marketplace, coupled with the financial crisis, are straining Europe's welfare state. As retirement ages rise and benefits dwindle, the E.U. is often presented as a scapegoat for new hardships. In France, for example, anti-Europe campaigns have focused ire on the E.U.'s "Anglo-Saxon" assault on social welfare and on the "Polish plumber" who takes local jobs because of the open European labor market.

                              The E.U.'s rapid enlargement to the east and south has further sapped it of life. Absent the cozy feel the smaller union had before the Berlin Wall came down, its original members have turned inward. The newer members from Central Europe, who have enjoyed full sovereignty only since communism's collapse, are not keen to give it away. As Poland's late president, Lech Kaczynski, put it soon after taking office in 2005, "What interests the Poles is the future of Poland and not that of the E.U."


                              European participation in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has added to the weariness. In Germany, roughly two-thirds of the public opposes having German troops in Afghanistan -- not good news for an E.U. intended to project a united voice on the global stage. Although giving Europe more geopolitical heft is one of the union's raisons d'être, this task has no constituency; these distant wars, coupled with plunging defense expenditures mainly due to the economic downturn, are tempering the appetite for new burdens.

                              "The E.U. is now just trying to keep the machine going," a member of the European Parliament told me recently. "The hope is to buy enough time for new leaders to emerge who will reclaim the project."


                              Buying time may be the best the E.U. can do for now, but its slide is poised to continue, with costs even for those outside Europe. The Obama administration has already expressed frustration with an E.U. whose geopolitical profile is waning. As Defense Secretary Robert Gates complained in February to a gathering of NATO officials, "The demilitarization of Europe -- where large swaths of the general public and political class are averse to military force and the risks that go with it -- has gone from a blessing in the 20th century to an impediment to achieving real security and lasting peace in the 21st." As the United States tries to dig itself out of debt and give its armed forces a breather, it will increasingly judge its allies by what they bring to the table. In Europe's case, the offering is small and shrinking.


                              [email protected]

                              Charles Kupchan is a professor of international affairs at Georgetown University and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He is the author of "How Enemies Become Friends: The Sources of Stable Peace."


                              The European Union is dying -- not a dramatic or sudden death, but one so slow and steady that we may look across the Atlantic one day soon and realize that the project of European integration that we've taken for granted over the past half-century is no more.

                              Comment

                              • Onur
                                Senior Member
                                • Apr 2010
                                • 2389

                                #75
                                Nigel Farage galore;


                                Farage welcomes the Hungarian president in EU parliament in January 2011;
                                YouTube - ‪Farage: Meet your new Soviet overlords, Mr Orbán‬‏


                                Farage thanks to the Hungarian PM for the "achievements" during his presidency term. July 5 2011;
                                YouTube - ‪Nigel Farage: The Worm has Turned‬‏


                                And Farage welcomes the new Polish EU president in 6th July 2011;
                                YouTube - ‪Farage: Isn't the EU quite as bad as the USSR, Mr Tusk?‬‏




                                I am following Farage and Daniel Hannan from youtube for some time. It`s so useful and enjoyable to watch these people;

                                'Europarl' Youtube Channel (since January 2007) features speeches in the European Parliament, initially mostly by the then UKIP leader Nigel Farage MEP, now Leader of The Brexit Party and President of the EFDD group in the European Parliament - preceded by the EFD Group (2009-14), ID (2004-09) and EDD (1999-2004), all chaired or co-chaired by Nigel Farage. The Brexit Party was set up on 20th January 2019.


                                UKIP Members of the European Parliament (1999-2019). UKIPmeps is the official channel of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) Members of the European Parliament, affiliated with the EFDD Group (Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy). Videos cover all Plenary and Committee speeches by UKIP MEPs (2009-2019). See also the sister channel, featuring Nigel Farage and other MEPs: http://www.Youtube.com/europarl (Europarl started as a private channel in January 2007 and eventually evolved into BrexitMEPs channel after Nigel Farage left UKIP in 2018 to set up the Brexit Party; now Reform UK). Post Scriptum: UKIP was set up in 1993 with the sole aim of taking the UK out of the EU. The party successfully forced a Conservative government to hold a referendum on the issue, which was eventually won by the Leave side on the 23rd of June 2016. The last European Parliament legislature to include UK MEPs ended in June 2019. www.ukip.org


                                Share your videos with friends, family, and the world
                                Last edited by Onur; 07-07-2011, 02:25 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X