American Resistance To Empire

Viktor Orban’s “we will not be a colony” Speech

Viktor Orban speech, Budapest, 15.03.2012

The political and intellectual program of 1848 was this: we will not be a colony! The program and the desire of Hungarians in 2012 goes like this: we will not be a colony!

Hungary could not have stood against the pressure and things dictated from abroad in the winter of 2011-2012 if it were not for those hundreds of thousands of people who stood up to show everyone that Hungarians will not live as foreigners dictate it, will not give up their independence or their freedom, therefore they will not give up their constitution either, which they finally managed to draft after twenty years. Thank you all!

Don’t be misled if tomorrow you will read in the international press that there were only a few hundred people here in the square and even those who were here, rallied against the government.

As things stand, we have not been as strong as we are today for long decades.

As things stand today we are enough in numbers and in our resolve to fight for a free Hungarian life also, after fighting for our liberties.

Freedom for us means that we are not inferior to anyone else.

It means that we also deserve respect.

Freedom also means that de decide about the laws governing our own life, we decide what is important and what isn’t. From the Hungarian perspective, with a Hungarian mindset, following the rhythm of our Hungarian hearts.

Therefore we write our own constitutions. We do not need writing-lines, nor do we require the unsolicited assistance of foreigners wanting to guide our hands.

We are more than familiar with the character of unsolicited comradely assistance, even if it comes wearing a finely tailored suit and not a uniform with shoulder patches. We want Hungary to revolve around its own axis, therefore we are going to protect the constitution, which is the security for our future.

We have to ask and to respond to the biggest question. Will we submit ourselves to being at the mercy of others until death or will we rely on the virtues which make Hungarians Hungarians, which make sovereignty sovereignty and history history. Will we opt for the fate of a colony or for a Hungarian existence made up and made complete according to the best of our knowledge?

There is one thing that no one can question. Our freedom fights always meant a step forward for the world. They meant progress because we were right. We were right even if everyone denied this.

In 48 we said that we should tear down the walls of feudalism and we were proven right. In 56, we said we have to crack, we have to break the wheels of communism and we were proven right.

Today also, they look at us with suspicion.

They looked at us like this in 48-49, when Europe became silent, silent again, but then the feudalist world disintegrated all around Europe and strong nations were born in its place.

They looked at us like this in 56, but the communist tyranny, that we drove the first nail into, finally collapsed, allowing Europe to reunite again.

European bureaucrats look at us with distrust today because we said: we need new ways. We said we have to break out of the prison of debt and we also declared that Europe can only be made great again with the help of strong nations. You will see my dear friends that we will be proven right yet again.

It was not the feudalist vassals who caused the demise of feudalism, nor was communism destroyed by party secretaries. The rule of speculators will not be terminated by them or by bureaucrats, nor will they come help save the ditched carriage of Europe.

It is not going to be them, but instead it is going to be European citizens living off the fruits of their personal efforts. Because their world has to come. If it doesn’t, then the days of Europe are over.

The Youth of March also saw, what many in Europe today refuse to see, that financial independence is a precondition for freedom. This is why they had to include the indispensable demand for a National Bank on their 12-point list.

Although the Youth of March were not board members or bankers, they fully understood the weight of the issue of a national bank. They knew that an independent national bank is not one that is independent from its nation. An independent national bank is one, which protects the national economy from foreign interests. They knew and we also know well that anyone with common sense will not entrust the neighbours with the keys to the pantry.

Our Lithuanian, Czech, Latvian, Slovenian and Romanian friends have all stood up for us. Not only did they stand up for us, they also came, our Lithuanian and Polish friends are here to celebrate with us.

Glory to Lithuania!

God bless Poland!

We also have with us the silently abiding Europe of many tens of millions, who still insist on national sovereignty and still believe in the Christian virtues of courage, honour, fidelity and mercy, which one day made our continent great.

There are people, there are many people who still remember 56 and think that “you Hungarians were right”. We are capable of standing our ground against the injustice of stronger empires. This is why we are respected by those who respect us. This is why we are attacked by those who are against us.

We understand that Europe has a lot of problems. The clog wheels are creaking, muscles and tendons are flexing.

But as a thousand year old European nation we have one demand. We demand equal standards for Hungarians. As a European nation we demand equal treatment. We will not be second class European citizens. Our rightful demand is to have the same standards apply to us, which apply to other countries. We have learnt that the recovery of Europe and Hungary are inseparable from each other. Any time Europe found itself in distress, the fate of Hungary also took a turn for the worse.

We are not happy, but we understand that European unity is not a unity of saints, but we will not sit and watch idly, if any political or intellectual trend tries to force an unholy alliance on Europe.

Europe cannot surrender and give in; the feeling of belonging together may not weaken it any more. This would lead to the defeat and to the demise of Europe. This is why Europe cannot leave whole countries by the roadside.

If we don’t act in time, in the end, the whole of Europe can become a colony of the modern financial system.


Viktor Orban Walks in Putin’s Footsteps

Hungary’s Viktor Orban Walks in Putin’s Footsteps

Moscow Times

Hektor Pustina / AP

The wind is “blowing from the East.” That’s how Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has described the recent swirl of Russian precedent and influence, the storm of ethnic chauvinism and anti-Brussels sentiment that begins in Moscow and whips low across the Ukrainian plains.

This storm is currently sweeping across Donetsk, and if Orban has his way, it’s heading directly toward the EU. How the EU will handle this rapidly approaching reality remains anyone’s guess.

Hungary’s Viktor Orban channels Putin’s rightist, ethnic-based rhetoric.

Orban last month called for the end of the “liberal state.” Six years after the economic recession battered Europe and four years after ascending to power, Orban claimed that the era of the welfare state had come to a close. Hungary, he said, would not become an economic colony of Brussels, but would develop itself into a “workfare” state.

Likewise, Hungary should form itself into a buttress against all that horrific tolerance that the EU has seen fit to promote. Amoral allowances like abortion rights and protection for sexual minorities may be fine for other nations, but they are not for Orban.

It’s time to “respect Christianity, freedom and human rights,” as Orban says, and to crack down on NGOs that receive funding beyond Hungary’s border. It’s time for the rise of the “illiberal state.”

If these parameters sound familiar, it’s not surprising. Russia has enacted conservative legislation rooted in similar arguments, and indeed in his speech Orban cited Russia as an appropriate model for political development.

Hungary’s democratic backslide has wrung more than a few hands over the past few years. Local media has become increasingly restricted, and opposition parties have repeatedly warned of electoral malpractice.

This latest speech from the president, as Human Rights Watch noted, was not necessarily unexpected. But it was still shocking.

After all, Hungary stands as a full member state of the European Union. It has now spent a decade as a member, having sloughed its communist, Soviet-dominated past. Budapest remains one of Eastern Europe’s jewels, and Hungarians are as entrenched in European economic and defense groupings as any other nation. Hungary is, in a sense, a quintessential EU nation-state.

And that’s what makes Orban’s calls so disturbing. It’s not simply that Orban has sought to curtail the powers and avenues of potential political adversaries. That would be understandable, although distinctly unfortunate.

What’s frightening about Orban’s policies is that he seems to be following Russia’s precedent. Not only has Budapest seen itself fit to mirror the Kremlin’s suppression of civil rights, but Orban has begun channeling the rightist, ethnic-based rhetoric that Putin has perfected.

Much as the Kremlin defended its annexation of Crimea by claiming that it was simply protecting ethnic Russian speakers, Orban has taken on the role of guarantor of the safety of Hungarian nationals, regardless of whether they are actually Hungarian citizens.

After the eruption of fighting in Ukraine, and as Russian nationalists began to craft the idea of a new, greater Russia, Orban wasted little time in calling for autonomy for ethnic Hungarians in southwest Ukraine. In fact, while formalizing his call for an “illiberal state” last month, Orban was speaking to an audience of ethnic Hungarians in Romania, some of whom have begun agitating for greater autonomy in Transylvania.

Just as the Kremlin’s supporters envision a new Soviet Union, a century after the Austro-Hungarian Empire drew its last breath, fascist and nationalist groups within Hungary have begun clamoring for a greater Hungary, for an empire restored to the glory it once knew.

Whereas Putin has Alexander Dugin and his Eurasianists, who call for Russia to create a new empire in the East, in Hungary the openly anti-Semitic and extremist party Jobbik strongly influences Orban’s policies. There’s even a link between the two: When the Kremlin illegally annexed Crimea earlier this year, some Jobbik members voiced approval.

The internal dynamics within Hungary and Russia are distressingly similar. A populist, hard-right president has been painted as domestically centrist by the frothing, fascistic groups calling for territorial expansion and ethnic supremacy.

But where Russia has morphed into the EU’s bete noire over the past few months, Hungary is fully ensconced within Europe’s liberal structures. The EU’s supranational structures were supposed to buttress the rights gained since the fall of communism.

Orban, however, has seen fit to challenge that assumption. And he’s looking to Moscow as an example.

More than French concerns about defense industry profits, and more than British hopes of attracting Moscow’s oligarch money, the situation currently unfolding in Hungary presents Russia’s greatest challenge to the rights and protections achieved by the EU.

A decade ago, naysayers pegged Bulgaria as Moscow’s “Trojan Horse” in the EU. Greece, Cyprus and Italy have also earned the title. But these detractors were only half-right. Moscow’s precedent of autocratic intolerance, of ethnic-only borders, has in fact taken root in Budapest.

And Orban was only half-right, too, because there’s something coming from the East. But it’s not a wind. It’s a virus. And with Orban’s help, this virus has begun to infect the EU.

Casey Michel is a Bishkek-based journalist and a graduate student at Columbia University’s Harriman Institute.

Hungarian President Viktor Orban Really Pisses Obama Off

[In addition to sticking its finger in Obama’s eye over its embrace of Putin’s South Stream project, Hungary is also fighting back against Obama/Soros and their armies of NGO social revolutionaries (SEE:  The Hungarian right’s latest: The Soros-Clinton-Obama axis).  As you can see in the speeches of American diplomats like Victoria Nuland (SEE: US state official slams Viktor Orbán and Fidesz in all but name), Hungarian President Viktor Orban has really pissed Obama off, as well as the entire EU.  More on Mr. Orban follows.]

US Directs Its Economic Terrorism At Hungary, Desperate To Kill SOUTH STREAM

Hungary–the country that dared to disobey the US and EU

Hungary Begins Laying Pipe for South Stream System

GEICO 500 - Practice

The United States Embassy did not give a substantive answer to the request of the Hungarian Nation on their part to who and what has been negotiated in 2011 with Peter Konya, the Gordon Bajnai’s 2014 Co-founder of the Solidarity movement leader.

As stated intention, “an informal nature” Communicating with governments or individuals.

– The United States government maintains close contact with the Hungarian government. And more frequent level discussions are taking place with regard to the areas in which the two countries work together. Fight against corruption, this also includes. We will continue with the Hungarian government of that matters will continue to work closely together – answered questions from the panel, who initiated the meeting, those who attended, what it was about, and that is still made a similar request.

Peter Konya admitted recently that even as a professional soldier, a lieutenant colonel discussed American diplomats. Konya stated that the only reasons then organized demonstrations and law enforcement objectives, as well as the democratic institutions and the legal system “downsizing of” informed the representatives of various levels of American diplomacy. Who they were, he refused to reveal, as advised to ask about the US embassy.

Konya in 2011, even references to “clown revolutionaries as” unleashing the potential of violence did, but added the solidarity and October 2013, seeing the “statue decision” when one depicting Viktor Orban hungarocellszobornak cut off his head .



ZIONIST Stench Killing Leviathan “Bonanza” for Big Oil

[SEE:  BIG OIL Doesn’t Like the Stench of Zionist Gas–No One Is Willing To Partner with Israel ; Report: Israel’s $15b gas deal with Jordan may be in jeopardy]

Energy companies will call final shots for Cyprus gas

Cyprus mail

Energy companies will call final shots for Cyprus gas

By Elias Hazou

Whereas the talks in Nicosia on Tuesday provide a political backbone for potential natural gas deals, it is the energy companies that will ultimately call the shots, energy expert Charles Ellinas has told the Cyprus Mail.

British energy outfit BG Group are currently desperate to secure gas supplies for their liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities in Idku, Egypt, which are operating at below capacity.

The Idku plant has a capacity of around 7.2 million tonnes of LNG per annum, but is currently working with around 2 million tonnes.

BG are exploring a number of options to plug that gap, with Cypriot gas from the Aphrodite field being one such alternative.

If developed, Aphrodite could plausibly yield anywhere from 3.5 to 4 million tonnes a year, channelled to Egypt by pipeline from the Aphrodite reservoir. The pipeline must be coupled with a floating production, storage and offloading (FPSO) unit built on top of the gas well. An FPSO is essentially a platform producing and treating the gas on-site.

The earliest completion date for such a project would be late 2019, Ellinas said. It is less capital-intensive than either onshore or marine-based LNG and, given falling LNG prices worldwide, would make more economic sense for Noble Energy, operators of the Aphrodite field.

Assuming Noble clinches a deal to pipe the bulk of the Aphrodite gas to Egypt, the revenues from the contract might then make it worthwhile to construct a second, small-diameter pipeline running from offshore Block 12 to Vasilikos on the southern coast of Cyprus, supplying small quantities of gas for domestic electricity generation here.

It’s understood that Noble has been discussing these scenarios with BG as well as with the Cyprus Hydrocarbons Company.

By way of example, were Cyprus to buy the Aphrodite gas for $10 per million BTU (mmbtu), and the profits to be made are around $3 per mmbtu, Cyprus would pocket two-thirds ($2 per mmbtu) of the profits, as it owns two-thirds of the Aphrodite gas. That leaves a net cost of $8 per mmbtu for gas purchased from the Block 12 reservoir, a substantially lower price compared to importing natural gas via the so-called interim solution.

But when it comes to supplying BG’s gas-starved export plant, Cyprus faces stiff competition. BG has already signed a letter of intent with the partners in Israel’s Leviathan gas field for approximately 5 million tonnes of LNG a year. And BG is in talks with BP to link their two gas developments off Egypt’s coast. BP’s North Alexandria gas field is expected to come online next year – far sooner than Cyprus’ Aphrodite field – and could provide BG’s plant with up to 2 million tonnes of LNG per annum.

“Right now everything is on the table,” Charles Ellinas said.

The expert also drew a connection between the technical study for a Cyprus to Egypt pipeline – unveiled by the two countries’ energy ministers on Tuesday – and the ongoing gas supply tender put out by the Natural Gas Public Company (DEFA).

DEFA chairperson Eleni Vasiliadou has confirmed to the Cyprus Mail that the validity period of the ‘interim gas’ tender has been extended – for a second time – to the end of January 2015.

DEFA on Tuesday began assessing the three remaining bidders’ revised financial offers. According to press reports, the prices quoted by the bidders hover around the $14 per mmbtu mark.

Time-wise, the new validity period of DEFA’s tender now coincides with the completion of the technical study for the Cyprus-Egypt pipeline.

“It’s very likely that officials are waiting on the Cyprus to Egypt pipeline analysis to come through before plunging ahead with the DEFA gas imports,” offered Ellinas.

US Officials Pleading With the EU Over Plans For Breaking-Up Google Monopoly Over the Internet

[US global dictators are desperate to maintain their total control over the Internet.  They are sticking to their usual routine, first diplomatic persuasion, followed by begging, then the crying gets underway, followed by the threats, before denying US services as a “penultimate” punishment, followed quickly by military measures (SEE: THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT Demands Google Search Dictatorship Be Broken-Up).]

US voices concern over Google break-up motion




The United States voiced concern yesterday (25 November) over a draft plan by two MEPs to break up Google Inc, saying politicians should not influence the EU’s antitrust inquiry into the world’s most popular Internet search engine.

The US Mission to the European Union said in an email it “noted with concern” the call for competition regulators to consider splitting search engines from other Internet services.

“It is important that the process of identifying competitive harms and potential remedies be based on objective and impartial findings and not be politicized,” it said.

The European Commission has been investigating Google for four years following complaints by rivals and has yet to come to a conclusion.

The comments by the US Mission came a week after Andreas Schwab, a German conservative, and Ramon Tremosa, a Spanish liberal at the European Parliament, unveiled a draft of their resolution saying that separating search engines from other commercial services would ensure a level playing field.

Parliament has no power to break up Google. But the proposal underlines widespread concerns among some EU politicians and companies about American dominance of the Internet, and could put pressure on the bloc’s antitrust regulators to take a stronger line against Google.

Andrus Ansip, the EU’s top official for digital markets, told Reuters on Monday he was concerned that some tech companies may be abusing their dominant positions but added that the Google investigations must not be rushed.

Every Drone Assassination Kills 28 Civilians

It takes 28 civilian lives to kill a single terrorist leader – UK human rights group


A U.S. Air Force MQ-1 Predator, unmanned aerial vehicle (Reuters / U.S. Air Force)


Eliminating a specific terrorist leader is a ‘targeted killing’ according to the US. However, Britain’s Reprieve human-rights group calculated that it takes about 28 innocent lives to take out a single terrorist leader, often with multiple drone strikes.

The UK human-rights group gave The Guardian the latest statistics (November 24) compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, on collateral damage from American drone strikes in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen.

The statistics are the most striking in 10 years: attempts to kill 41 terrorist leaders resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1,147 people, the vast majority – civilians and families.

“Drone strikes have been sold to the American public on the claim that they’re ‘precise’. But they are only as precise as the intelligence that feeds them. There is nothing precise about intelligence that results in the deaths of 28 unknown people, including women and children, for every ‘bad guy’ the US goes after,” said Jennifer Gibson, who headed Reprieve’s study.

Over the decade of ever-intensifying drone strikes in countries Washington has never actually declared war on, thousands of civilians have been killed – something the US has consistently denied.

“The only people we fire a drone at are confirmed terrorist targets at the highest level, after a great deal of vetting that takes a long period of time. We don’t just fire a drone at somebody and think they’re a terrorist,” The Guardian cited the US Secretary of State John Kerry as saying at a BBC forum in 2013.

Yet the statistics speak for themselves: it takes dozens, sometimes hundreds of lives to eliminate a single Al-Qaeda or Taliban warlord.

Over the last eight years there have been several attempts to eliminate an Al-Qaeda leader called Ayman Zawahiri. Drones have proved ineffective – the man is still alive. In two known attempts, in 2006, as many as 76 children and 29 adults were killed.

If Zawahiri’s name sounds familiar to some Americans, this definitely cannot be said about Qari Hussain, a former deputy commander of the Pakistani Taliban.

Supporters of the Difa-e-Pakistan Council, an Islamic organization, burn a U.S. flag as they shout slogans during a protest against U.S. drone attacks in the Pakistani tribal region, in Karachi November 8, 2013 (Reuters / Athar Hussain)

Supporters of the Difa-e-Pakistan Council, an Islamic organization, burn a U.S. flag as they shout slogans during a protest against U.S. drone attacks in the Pakistani tribal region, in Karachi November 8, 2013 (Reuters / Athar Hussain)

In 2008-2010 there were four attempts to get this man before missiles from an American drone killed him. But there was collateral damage: the US drones accidentally killed 128 people, including 13 children.

Most of the terror suspects were targeted in Pakistan, where a drone hunt after 24 terrorist leaders resulted in the deaths of 874 people, 142 of them children. The mission registered only six successful strikes.

This makes the terrorist/civilian drone death ratio in Pakistan as high as 1:36.

In Yemen, 273 people were killed (including at least seven children) in drone airstrikes targeting 17 terror suspects (terrorist/civilian death ratio 1:16).

However, 41 terrorist deaths claimed can’t actually be confirmed. Some have apparently been proclaimed dead twice, some have disappeared from American intelligence radar, and also identities have been mistaken. Others were even found dead under circumstances different from drone strikes.

There were 33 confirmed drone kills of the named targets, yet 947 people died in the attacks.

The statistics presented by Reprieve don’t cover other types of American drone strikes. These are the so-called ‘signature strikes’ against groups of people whose activities appeared to be ‘suspicious.’

The usually conservative US Council on Foreign Relations think tank assesses that in Afghanistan and Iraq, alone, some 500 drone ‘signature airstrikes’ have killed 3,674 people.

All CIA or Joint Special Operations Command drone strike operations are conducted in strict secrecy. Any information that is leaked is done so anonymously. So the data compiled by Reprieve is far from being complete.

“President Obama needs to be straight with the American people about the human cost of this program,” Reprieve’s Jennifer Gibson told The Guardian. “If even his government doesn’t know who is filling the body bags every time a strike goes wrong, his claims that this is a precise program look like nonsense, and the risk that it is in fact making us less safe looks all too real,” Gibson said.

%d bloggers like this: