Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old May 27th, 2014 #41
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44,334
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

 
Old May 27th, 2014 #42
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44,334
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

 
Old May 27th, 2014 #43
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44,334
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

 
Old May 27th, 2014 #44
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44,334
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

 
Old May 27th, 2014 #45
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44,334
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

 
Old May 27th, 2014 #46
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44,334
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

 
Old June 10th, 2014 #47
Serbian
Senior Member
 
Serbian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 11,730
Serbian
Default

Neocons at Open Democracy about supposed Western Euro nationalist ties to Kremlin


The Kremlin’s marriage of convenience with the European far right

Anton Shekhovtsov 28 April 2014

Putin’s strong-arm tactics in Eastern Ukraine and ‘moral, family-based’ policies have won him ardent support from far-right European groups. But they should not be under any illusions...на русском языке

For its massive information war waged against the Euromaidan protests and the consequent revolution that has toppled the authoritarian regime of pro-Russian Viktor Yanukovych, the Kremlin presumably mobilised all its lobbying networks in the West. This revealed what experts have long suspected, namely that today’s European extreme right parties and organisations are the most ardent supporters of Putin’s political agenda.


Moscow money talks

Crimea, 16 March. Here they are: international ‘observers’ at the illegal and illegitimate ‘referendum’ held in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea occupied by the Russian ‘little green men.’ The overwhelming majority of the ‘observers’ are representatives of a broad spectrum of European extreme-right parties and organisations: Austria’s Freiheitliche Partei (FPÖ) and Bündnis Zukunft, Belgian Vlaams Belang and Parti Communautaire National-Européen, Bulgarian Ataka, French Front National, Hungarian Jobbik, Italian Lega Nord and Fiamma Tricolore, Polish Samoobrona, Serbian ‘Dveri’ movement, Spanish Plataforma per Catalunya. They were invited to legitimise the ‘referendum’ by the Eurasian Observatory for Democracy & Elections (EODE) – a smart name for an ‘international NGO’ founded and headed by Belgian neo-Nazi Luc Michel, a loyal follower of Belgian convicted war-time collaborationist and neo-Nazi Jean-François Thiriart. Presented by Michel as ‘a non-aligned NGO’, the EODE does not conceal its anti-Westernism and loyalty to Putin, and is always there to put a stamp of ‘legitimacy’ on all illegitimate political developments, whether in Crimea, Transnistria, South Ossetia or Abkhazia. Moscow’s money talks.

Yet the EODE is only a drop in the ocean of extensive co-operation between the Kremlin and the European far right. Front National’s Marine Le Pen now visits Moscow on a seemingly regular basis: in August 2013 and April 2014 she had meetings with Vice Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin and Speaker of the Russian parliament Sergey Naryshkin. Le Pen’s adviser on geopolitical matters Aymeric Chauprade participated, as an ‘expert’, in the meeting of the Committee for Family, Women and Children Issues in the Russian parliament to endorse the laws banning adoption of Russian orphan children by LGBT couples. Several former members of the Front National run ProRussia.TV, an extension of the Kremlin’s international PR instruments such as Russia Today and the Voice of Russia.



The Paris-based, Russian Institute of Democracy and Co-operation (yet another smart name) co-organised a conference in Leipzig on ‘family issues’, featuring speakers such as Thilo Sarrazin who is known for his attacks on multiculturalism, Jürgen Elsässer, chief editor of the far-right Compact magazine, and Frauke Petry, a spokesperson of the Eurosceptic party Alternative für Deutschland.

Jobbik’s leader Gábor Vona gave a lecture at Moscow State University at the invitation of Russian right-wing extremist Aleksandr Dugin; according to Vona, it would be better for Hungary to leave the EU and join the Russia-dominated Eurasian Union. Dugin himself gave a talk in the United Kingdom at the invitation of the far-right Traditional Britain Group and wrote a letter of support to Nikolaos Michaloliakos, the now jailed leader of the Greek neo-Nazi Golden Dawn, whose political programme urges Greek society to turn away from ‘American Zionists’ and ‘Western usury’ towards Russia. Just a few days ago, Bulgarian Ataka’s leader Volen Siderov launched his party’s European election campaign in Moscow.

The list of the instances of the Kremlin’s co-operation with the European far right could be continued, but it seems more important to discuss the underlying motifs of this co-operation as well as the dangers that this co-operation poses to European democracy.

European extreme right perspectives

First of all, the European extreme right parties and organisations respect the Kremlin for its might and vigour. In his manifesto, the notorious Norwegian mass murderer and terrorist Anders Breivik called Putin ‘a fair and resolute leader worthy of respect’. Italian far-right Forza Nuova salutes Putin’s Russia as ‘a new beacon of civilisation, identity and courage for other European peoples.’ FPÖ’s Andreas Mölzer hails Putin as a hero who ‘has managed to steer the post-Communist, crisis-ridden Russia into calmer waters.’ For the European extreme right, Putin is a powerful leader, who has challenged the political status quo of the West and has questioned the global role of the US, which the European extreme right openly loathe. The allegedly anti-globalist agenda of the Kremlin – which, in reality, is a concealed attempt at seizing and securing the position of the global superpower for Russia itself – attracts the European far left too, especially in Germany, France, Greece, Portugal and the Czech Republic.

Russia’s rise as an anti-Western power is seen by the European extreme right as an amazing example of national sovereignty and self-determination. These ideas are most prominent in today’s Eurosceptic rhetoric of the extreme right parties based in the EU, ‘a technocratic monster that only serves the interests of bankers’ (Le Pen), from which, according to Geert Wilders of the Dutch far right Partij voor de Vrijheid, European nation-states should ‘liberate’ themselves. Forza Nuova even calls upon Putin to destroy ‘the Europe of technocrats.’

European neutrality, which verges on national isolationism as the logical consequence of self-determination driven to extremity, is also a popular idea among the European extreme right. It serves as a euphemistic argument in favour of ‘Fortress Europe’ and justifies non-interference in international matters outside Europe. Moscow’s smart trick that prevented the US military from crushing Bashar al-Assad’s murderous regime was celebrated across the broad extreme right spectrum. Preventing the West from stopping the most brutal regimes is presented as promoting multipolarity, but this multipolarity is a sham: its only aim is to undermine democracy globally. In Putin’s Russia, European right-wing extremists see a force that can indeed hamper the world’s democratic development. Less global democracy means less global security, and weakened global security may be interpreted as an excuse for enforcing the anti-immigration agenda.

Russia’s authoritarian conservatism is yet another source of attraction for the European extreme right that consider Russia a country where ‘traditional’, ‘family’ and ‘Christian values’ have triumphed. For Jobbik’s Vona, Russia is ‘a better Europe’ because it ‘preserves its traditions and does not follow the culture of money and the masses’. Russia’s anti-gay laws, in particular, were a hit among many European ultranationalists, especially in France and in Italy, where the far-right Fronte Nazionale expressed its support for Putin’s ‘courageous position against the powerful gay lobby’ (as well as anti-EU and pro-Assad stances) through dozens of posters in Rome.

On a more prosaic note, European right-wing extremists seem to benefit financially from their co-operation with the Kremlin. While no direct evidence exists that the Kremlin provides financial support to its extremist allies in the EU, it would be ridiculous to suggest that they are not paid for their lobbying services – and the extreme right are indeed engaged in lobbying Russia’s interests in the EU.

Kremlin perspectives

Putin’s Russia is a far-right political system characterised by authoritarianism, nationalism and populism – all these characteristics are intrinsic to the European extreme right, so co-operation between them seems like a natural process. Obviously, there are differences between the European extreme right parties – they differ in their radicalism and positions on particular issues. The Front National may be willing to co-operate with the Partij voor de Vrijheid or FPÖ, but not with Jobbik or Ataka. Even in one national context, far-right parties may be unfriendly to each other, so, for example, it is hard to imagine any fruitful co-operation between Italy’s Fiamma Tricolore and Forza Nuova. However, Putin’s far-right government is eager to co-operate with any European ultranationalist party unless it is critical of Russia for historical or other reasons. Thus, the ideological affinity between Putin’s regime and European extreme right parties is one reason for their co-operation.


Second, as the ideological approach of the majority of the European ‘observers’ at the Crimean ‘referendum’ demonstrated, right-wing extremists are the main pool of EU-based politicians who can legitimise Russian actions domestically and internationally. When reporting on the work of the international ‘observers’, the Russian state media never mentioned their ideological positions. On the contrary, they were presented in a boringly neutral way: FPÖ’s Johann Gudenus was simply ‘an MP from Austria’, Front National’s Aymeric Chauprade – ‘a political scientist’, neo-Nazi Enrique Ravello – ‘an observer from Catalunya’, etc. These trivial representations were needed to reassure the Russian audience that the Crimean ‘referendum’ was perfectly legitimate. The European Parliament said it was not? Well, there were members of EU-based parties, among them MEPs, who concluded that it was.

Internationally, too, extreme-right politicians were always most supportive of Putin’s actions. Who praised Putin’s Russia – after ‘observing’ the unfair parliamentary elections in Russia in 2011 – for having ‘a robust, transparent and properly democratic system?’ Nick Griffin, MEP and leader of the extreme-right British National Party. In this sense, the European right are a magic talking mirror from Brothers Grimm’s Snow White, always ready to confirm the fairness of the Evil Queen.

Nick Griffin, leader of the British National Party, as an observer at the 2011 parliamentary elections in Russia.

In 2013-2014, European right-wing extremists were the most vocal in defending the Russian interference in and, later, invasion of Ukraine. They did not even have to convince the international audience fully of the legitimacy of the Russian actions; they only needed to contribute to the disruption of the narrative of the overwhelming majority of democratic leaders and major international organisations that condemned Putin’s actions.

Third, despite the far-right nature of Putin’s regime, it is only a façade hiding a corrupt, self-serving and elitist system, for which cooperation with the European far right is one of the means of furthering and securing its business interests in the West. In his most recent book (‘System of the Russian Federation in the war of 2014’), Gleb Pavlovsky argues that there are two authorities in Putin’s Russia. One is the actual, visible state that is very weak with deliberately inefficient political and administrative institutions; the other is a parallel state, or what Pavlovsky terms the ‘RF System’. The latter has secured absolute power in Russia, but it cannot operate openly because it is straightforwardly unfair and corrupt. Because of this, the ‘RF System’ needs the weak actual state to hide its activities. As Ivan Krastev wrote, ‘Russia clearly has elections, but no rotation of power. [...] In the Russian system elections are used as the way to legitimise the lack of rotation’. As the Russian parliament is virtually a rubber-stamp assembly (‘the parliament is not a place for discussions‘) for legalising the decisions of the parallel state, so Russian nationalism, social conservatism and populism – for the ‘RF system’ – are just instruments for controlling society by feeding its prejudices and phobias.


In the European context, Putin’s Russia uses the extreme right also as tools to undermine and weaken EU political institutions. Stronger EU institutions restrain the Kremlin’s westward corrupting advance in terms of economy, politics and international relations. The strong democratic West is eventually the only obstruction to Putin making Russia the global superpower. Since Russia is unable to win over the West by fair-and-square competition, i.e. by advancing economy, technology, culture, human capital, etc., it can only become the superpower by weakening other actors. Consolidated democracy and good governance, seen as the essential prerequisite for the West’s economic prosperity, are, therefore, one of the first targets for the ‘RF System’. The inherently anti-democratic extreme right (and extreme left) are, thus, natural allies of Putin in his anti-democratic crusade against the EU. Although there is no reason to idealise EU mainstream parties, they are less prone to corruption than the extreme right, or – looking at Germany’s former social democrat chancellor Gerhard Schröder, now the chairman of the board of Nord Stream AG and a top lobbyist for the Kremlin – the extreme right may simply be less expensive to corrupt.

Gas politics

As oil and gas revenues account for more than 50% of Russia’s federal budget, the Kremlin needs to secure its position as a major supplier of gas to the EU. The map of South Stream, a planned gas pipeline to transport Russian gas – deliberately avoiding Ukraine – to the EU, shows that every country on the route has either a pro-Russian government or a far-right party represented in parliament and openly pro-Kremlin: Bulgaria (pro-Russian government, Ataka), Serbia (pro-Russian government), Hungary (Jobbik), Austria (FPÖ, BZÖ), Greece (Golden Dawn), Italy (Lega Nord). The only exception is Slovenia where the far-right Slovenska Nacionalna Stranka is insignificant, and the current political establishment is democratic and pro-EU. Given the cooperation between the Kremlin and the European extreme right, it is no wonder that, for example, Jobbik prefers the South Stream pipeline to Nabucco, another planned gas pipeline aimed at reducing the EU’s dependence on Russian energy.



Map of the South Stream route in Europe


The Kremlin’s cooperation with the European extreme right, while reflecting the ideological affinity between the two parties, is a marriage of convenience for Putin who would be ready to dump his partners when he no longer needs them to implement his political and economic agenda. The Kremlin’s ‘ideal version’ of the EU is not a homogeneously white, pious, socially conservative union, but more of a corrupt, ‘Berlusconized’ Europe or, even better, a corrupt, ‘Bulgarianised’ Europe. In 2008, Russia’s then Ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin called Bulgaria ‘Russia’s Trojan horse in the EU’; it was recently described by President of the European Commission José Manuel Barroso as a country where some elements of political establishment ‘are agents of Russia.’

The Kremlin needs continuously to attach and re-attach Western countries by permeating their economies with Russian (clean or dirty) money, in order to reach the point where Russia, as a business partner of the West, would be ‘too big to fail.’ In this situation, the democratic consensus of the West – in the face of Putin’s anti-democratic crusade – would be shattered by pragmatic considerations. This is why the corruptible, Eurosceptic and anti-democratic nature of the extreme-right parties is more important to the Kremlin than their racism and ultra-conservatism. Today, the far right (and the far left) seem to be the most convenient partners for Putin. The European elections in May will make clear how far Putin will have advanced towards his goal of corrupting and weakening the EU.


http://www.opendemocracy.net/od-russ...pean-far-right
__________________
Don Black's Stormfront ''Russians''
http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=456327
Russia Insider
https://russia-insider.com/en
 
Old June 22nd, 2014 #48
RickHolland
Bread and Circuses
 
RickHolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Jewed Faggot States of ApemuriKa
Posts: 6,666
Blog Entries: 1
RickHolland
Default

Europe Turns Against the EU

Continental federalism's inherent conflicts of interest have empowered skeptical conservatives.




Quote:

Euro-federalists have long dreamed of a united Europe. The Second World War provided them with the rhetorical justification: without continental federalism, racist totalitarianism and war are inevitable. They wish to transform the old continent into the United States of Europe, and the fact that this is an exclusively elite, top-down project without any basis in Europe’s millennia-old history is irrelevant. Indeed while most of Europe’s political establishment and intelligentsia is federalist, no one dares to tell their electorates to forego their respective national symbols. Most importantly, no one even approaches the delicate topic of squaring national and supranationalist interests. These often collide, and are frequently mutually exclusive, but no euro-federalist politician has ever dared to tell their constituency that they would put “European” interests first. With the recent euroskeptic successes in the European Parliament elections, however, it would seem that voters are turning against the euro-federalists nevertheless.

The most recent example of these conflicting interests is the spat over Ukraine, where “Europe” has been asked to unite against Russia’s imperialism. While this may make perfect sense for Poles and Lithuanians, it is quite complicated to justify how Italians or Spaniards would benefit from severing ties with an important economic and strategic partner. Poles may care less about global stability than they do about protecting their cultural and economic interests in Ukraine, but the same does not hold true for countries that cooperate with Russia on such different issues as sanctioning Iran, or combating heroin trafficking and extremism flowing out from Afghanistan.

Yet the conflicts do not stop here. At the level of economic planning, the European Commission often benefits some countries to the detriment of others. When the Commission seeks to regulate as many areas of economic activity as possible, they are structurally benefiting highly regulatory northern European economies to the detriment of southern and eastern European economies, by exporting the North’s competitive disadvantage to the South. The same could be said of Europe’s normative approaches to foreign policy in general. By seeking to punish illiberal regimes and discriminate against uncivilized entities in trade and diplomacy, European institutions are again enforcing a northern pattern of societal regulatory universalism, one that ends up hurting southern member-states with preferential cultural and economic ties to former colonial territories—often ruled by less than democratically pristine regimes.

This is not to suggest a conspiracy theory in which eurocrats are in cahoots with northern business interests against the poor South. Such policies are decided upon in Brussels based on quantitative indicators and good intentions, and indeed such policies as the cohesion funds (which seek to subsidize the advancement of poorer nations towards the level of the EU’s best performers) or the loans disbursed during the financial crisis—together with the IMF—do structurally benefit the South more than the North. Nevertheless, the argument can be made that the North’s solidarity is being backed, at least in part, by favorable regulations emanating from Brussels, and that while there is no conspiracy, there is a grave lack of awareness of cultural differences in Europe as well as a serious disregard for national sovereignty.

This is where national identity comes into play. In the U.S. there are few significant cultural differences between the different states. Indeed statehood is now more of an administrative concept than anything else. In Europe, however, statehood and nationhood are the products of historical experience forging economic, cultural, social, and territorial coherence. It is true that nationalism opened the door for ultra-nationalism and totalitarianism in the past, but it also provided for dynamic cultural diversity and dialogue. To pretend that national identity is a thing of the past is not only erroneous, but anachronistic.

As with any project which is not organic but instead artificial, the EU has based its top-down federalism on economic prosperity. Some authoritarian elitist regimes around the world did the same but when prosperity was interrupted they were forced to face the rage of the populace. Of course unlike the Middle East during the Arab Spring, Europe’s “spring” does not have to turn violent because there is a democratic system in place. Brussels’s elites even believe that the liberal system is a stand-alone guarantee against regime change. However, Western elites should have learned something from their interactions with dissimilar cultures over the last few decades: want trumps ideal. From Africa to East Asia, many a regime draws its popular legitimacy from sustained economic growth. When that growth slows or dissipates, political dissent follows.

In the hallways of the EU institutions’ tall concrete and glass buildings, the fonctionnaires complain that the governments of the member-states shift the blame for economic woes to the EU, even as the institutions themselves try on occasion to blame the national governments. One of the consequences of seeking a more political role is that one takes on more responsibility: if the EU had remained just another technical organization, it could legitimately throw back political responsibility to the 28 capitals; instead the institutions have sought more and more political power.

In fact, the thin line between national and supranational jurisdiction gives rise to much confusion. The would-be UK referendum on EU membership is a prime example. Brussels bureaucrats accuse PM Cameron of being a populist for considering the referendum. According to them, the UK’s government, by ratifying the many European Treaties, has already expressed the will of the British people. If the EU were a mere international organization, they would be right: no one calls for referenda on joining NATO, the UN, the ILO, or the WTO. The problem is that the same people lambasting David Cameron are the very ones who pushed for a Europe-wide “constitutional treaty” that lost its name but kept its structure. Is it not democratically legitimate to consult the people directly if they are changing countries?

Confronted with accusations of a democratic deficit (anthem, flag, decision-making coming from unelected technocratic organs), the EU decided to create a parliament to specifically legitimize its decisions in the eyes of the public. Today more than ever before in its history, the European Parliament includes dissenting voices: one fourth of its members now oppose further political integration. As with the uprisings of the Arab Spring, the economy is to blame, as many euroskeptic parties campaigned on an anti-austerity platform.

While it was predictable that the neo-Marxian far left would make gains given its ideological opposition to both fiscal conservative austerity and liberal-minded EU policies of European free trade, the most interesting outcome of the elections was the rise of right-wing euroskepticism and the growth of some radically liberal euro-federalist parties.

The latter fared well in the Netherlands and Belgium, for instance. At the heart of the EU, for these countries more free markets mean the growth of information and capital flows running through their roads and ports. They are both also accustomed to federal systems; in the case of the Netherlands, a tradition of liberalism goes back centuries with such authors as Hugo Grotius being part of the Dutch national myth.

While support for federalism grew in Benelux, though, it was counter-balanced by a growth in euroskepticism, a political wave that struck other countries with particular force. In the UK, the openly federalist Liberal Democrats—whose leader Nick Clegg is an alumnus of the College of Europe—practically ceased to exist as a political force. Liberal mainstream media in Europe often accuse euroskeptics of being demagogic in their demonization of the EU, but the truth is that no centrist party has dared to address popular concern with mass immigration, rise in crime rates, or the paradoxical interventionist foreign policy in times of austerity.

Marine Le Pen in her interview with Der Spiegel did a good job of addressing these and other concerns head on, and did so with great lucidity and little populism. Whether she would be as sensible as a head of government is anyone’s guess, but what is certain is that the strategies of either demonizing sceptics of integration by painting them as extremists or ignoring them and simply wishing them away are clearly no longer working. France and Britain, despite their economic tribulations, are wealthy countries and for the winning party in an election to be an anti-establishment party signifies more than mere protest votes; it is evidence of some measure of grassroots support.

Yet for all the votes that euroskeptics obtained in France and the UK, they are still divided in the European Parliament (EP). The Parliament attempts to resemble a regular parliamentary system, but there is no senate chamber and the parliamentary groupings are not strict political parties. Instead the EP’s 751 members (MEPs) organize themselves in “political families” which have some semblance of ideological coherence. A political group can only be accepted if it comprises a minimum of 25 MEPs from 7 EU member-states, at which point the group’s official status is rewarded with extra funds for personnel and campaigning.

Because euroskeptics are ideologically divided, it is unlikely that they can actually influence legislation successfully in the future. There currently seem to be four main ideological foundations for this opposition of sorts: we can find neoliberals, libertarians, paleoconservatives, and neofascists. The neofascists are isolated and shunned by virtually everyone else and count very few MEPs. Marine Le Pen leads the paleoconservative faction whose members come mostly from southern countries but it is still uncertain whether they will be successful in establishing their own group. Nigel Farage of UKIP heads the somewhat libertarian “Europe of Freedom and Democracy” group, but he is also struggling to preserve EFD’s group status. The UK’s Conservatives are at the head of the northern and loosely neoliberal European Conservatives and Reformists group, and will manage to grow ECR’s ranks.

What is extraordinary is that these political trends have, in a mostly left of centre social democratic Europe, rarely seen the light of day in the individual national parliaments. This should make one wonder what the EP is doing so wrong as to shift the entire European political spectrum towards something more akin to America or Russia’s right. In Brussels, though, the prevailing narrative remains out of touch. The discussion taking place is not one of existential reflection but one of communication tactics, because if Europeans voted against Brussels, it must necessarily be because they were not sufficiently informed.

Miguel Nunes Silva has worked with the International Criminal Court and the European External Action Service, as well as written for such publications as Small Wars Journal and The National Interest. He is currently an analyst for the geostrategy consultancy Wikistrat and lectures at the Portuguese Atlantic Youth Association.
http://www.theamericanconservative.c...against-the-eu
__________________
Only force rules. Force is the first law - Adolf H. http://erectuswalksamongst.us/ http://tinyurl.com/cglnpdj Man has become great through struggle - Adolf H. http://tinyurl.com/mo92r4z Strength lies not in defense but in attack - Adolf H.
 
Old July 15th, 2014 #49
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44,334
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

The rise of the far right
Five proto-fascist parties you should know
July 14th, 2014 by Dustin Simmonds
http://www.the-peak.ca/2014/07/the-r...the-far-right/


Who Is Mehdi Nemmouche, and Why Did He Want To Kill Jews?
In the first of a five-part series on growing anti-Semitism in France, an intimate look at the alleged Brussels Jewish museum shooter
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news...ate-1-nemmouch

Quote:
According to Gilles Kepel, the Syrian momentum is but the latest episode of a more general renewal—“a postmodern Salafist Jihad of the poor,” as he calls it, as theorized by a Syrian engineer named Abu Mussab al-Suri, who trained in France and has written many thousands of pages that have been posted on the Internet. In those pages, al-Suri argues in favor of training young Europeans from migrant backgrounds to be later sent back to Europe to be sacrificed to the greater cause of jihad. Jewish secular places like museums or schools—not synagogues—are listed among the first targets—with the goal of deliberately victimizing Muslims, creating ethnic “Islamophobic” conflicts in Europe—and later on, religious war. It is, interestingly enough, the very same project that could be heard in the 1990s in some circles of the French extreme right. Why France has become so sensitive and porous to al-Suri’s ideas is another story.

Last edited by Alex Linder; July 15th, 2014 at 03:38 PM.
 
Old August 4th, 2014 #50
Serbian
Senior Member
 
Serbian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 11,730
Serbian
Default

Myopic Nationalism can be very useful for ZOG as we see what is playing out in Ukraine.

Taken from article Turn Left, New Right!
by
Eugène Montsalvat

Quote:
However, more serious variants of rightism have their own flaws. In many ways the myopic nationalism of many “extreme right” movements is used by the internationalists to turn nations against each other, and use the resulting chaos to support western invention in some form, ranging from financial restructuring to full scale military enforced nation building. Today we see troops from the Ukrainian Social National Assembly dying for a pro-EU liberal junta that stands for the exact opposite of their national vision, simply to spite the Russians, all the while cheered on by US Secretary of State John Kerry and French Jewish liberal Bernard-Henri Lévy.

Moreover, liberals use the petty racial and religious bigotries of nationalists to justify their agenda in the name of combating the Islamification of Europe. Hence we see “right wingers” supporting feminism and Zionism in the Netherlands. I do not mean to mitigate the crimes committed against the native populations of Europe by Islamic immigrants, however the root of the problem is the mass immigration and free market policies of the Europeans. It is puerile to rail against the veil, while ignoring western treason and decadence. The root causes of mass Islamic immigration are ignored and their supporters are freed from culpability. The western liberal class manages to deflect criticism onto some distant amorphous threat of “Islam” while at the same time funding Wahhabi fundamentalist Saudi Arabia and demonizing the relatively moderate, but anti-Zionist, anti-liberal nation of Iran. In many regards the threat of fundamentalist Islam in modern times is entirely a product of English and later US support for the House of Saud. Indeed, the US had no qualms about siding with mujahedin in Afghanistan, Bosnia, or Syria.
Don't know if Alex allows linking to that site so I didn't.
__________________
Don Black's Stormfront ''Russians''
http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=456327
Russia Insider
https://russia-insider.com/en
 
Old August 4th, 2014 #51
Samuel Toothgold
Charachature incarnate
 
Samuel Toothgold's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Already in accordance with the future Repulsive Tapir Avatar Mandate
Posts: 4,068
Samuel Toothgold
Default

I link to those all the time. Let them do our reporting for us. I'd even link onto Satan's site, if nobody else has a story on what I need to forward.
 
Old October 8th, 2014 #52
Paulistano
Junior Member
 
Paulistano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: southeastern Brazil
Posts: 124
Paulistano
Default

National Socialist Action on the Streets of Helsinki
Quote:
The activists engaged in lots of positive discussions with passers-by. The main focus was on the international banking fraud and the growing influx of non-White ”cheap labour” to Nordic countries. We concluded that Finland must nationalize its banking system and separate from the European Union in order to create a healthy economy and combat the dispossession of the White Finnish workers and entrepreneurs.

Important parts of the solution are also sealing the borders in order to fight unwanted immigration and denouncing the ideology of neo-liberalism and endless economic growth.

A down-to-earth message with focus on the economic well-being of the Finnish people attracted many locals. As the discussions proceeded and the locals gained more confidence (it’s not everyday you talk politics with an open National Socialist), we also brought up the racial question that is essential should we want to guarantee the welfare of upstanding Finnish citizens.

After the street activism we were joined by some of our support members. A hall had been prepared for us so that people could discuss and attend two lectures. The first lecture was held by Janne Kujala who spoke about the lessons that we had learned from the mistakes of other Finnish nationalist groups in the 1980’s and 1990’s. Kujala concluded that professionalism is the key to reaching long-term goals and growing as a movement.

Next speaker was Juuso Tahvanainen who spoke about the day’s economic theme. Tahvanainen shed light on the history of the National Socialist economic school, brining up people like Gottfried Feder but also C. H. Douglas, Ezra Pound and the radical Finnish war hero Paavo Susitaival. Tahvanainen’s message was that the fight against interest slavery must be brought to Finland. He also spoke about the importance of a corporativist solution to the problem of materialism and class tensions.
LINK

Jew Media in Tears as Swastika Flags Fly on Illinois Home
Quote:
given that it will inevitably draw media attention, and thus help to put the ideas into the minds of the people. Here is one such instance. A man in Illinois is flying two swastika flags on his home, and the local media is flipping out. WAND also noted that the man had a “WPWW” sticker on his car, and said they contacted the SPLC about it and were told it was “White Pride World Wide,” which is the name of a hate group.

“WPWW” is in fact not the name of any group, but simply the tagline of the Stormfront forum.

WAND:

It’s a Douglas County community that pays tribute to the red, white and blue. One neighborhood battles symbols represented by red, white and black.

“That’s the symbols of hate,” one resident told WAND News reporter Doug Wolfe.

A small Arcola home displays two large Nazi flags over its porch. The owner won’t take them down despite numerous objections. He’s protected by the constitution. The right to free speech.

WAND News woke up Sally Biddy who lives nearby proudly displaying her American flags. Her father was a World War II veteran.

“When I stepped out my door and saw that, it upset me a great deal,” Biddy stated. “Thank God he’s not here anymore to have to see it.”

Another neighbor says she tried to talk to the man that owns the house but he would not remove the flags. WAND News knocked on his door but there was no answer.

LINK

Last edited by Paulistano; October 8th, 2014 at 09:22 PM.
 
Old November 10th, 2014 #53
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44,334
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...eland-spain-eu

The centre cannot hold under austerity, in Britain or Europe

Seumas Milne

The crisis is polarising politics from Ireland to Spain, and Labour will sink unless it offers a real alternative

Six years after the crash, the centre cannot hold. Crisis and austerity are delivering polarisation and political fragmentation, and it’s happening almost everywhere across Europe. In Britain the main parties’ share of the vote is shrinking, while Ukip’s rightwing populists are dragging the Tories towards them. At the same time, the Scottish National Party has mushroomed out of the independence referendum campaign as a self-proclaimed party of the left, commanding a level of support that threatens Labour’s chances at next year’s general election. And the radical Greens have overtaken the Liberal Democrats in the latest polls.

It’s a pattern reflected throughout the continent. In the wake of the 2008 meltdown, incumbents were ejected from office one after the other, regardless of political colour. As cuts in services and living standards were imposed in a fruitless attempt to escape the crisis, support for establishment parties plummeted or fractured to left and right.

The main radicalisation has been to the populist right. In mainland Europe, that process began well before the crash, as working-class living standards stagnated under the impact of neoliberal globalisation and the far-right preyed on anti-migrant insecurities. But it has accelerated sharply under austerity. In Hungary the violently anti-Roma and antisemitic Jobbik party took 20% of the vote in this year’s parliamentary elections, while the Front National and Ukip won the European elections in France and Britain.

But radicalisation has been far from one-way traffic. This week Spain’s new leftwing Podemos party, which was only founded in January, overtook the two main parties (and the more traditional United Left) to become the country’s electoral frontrunner, with 27% support. In Greece the radical left Syriza is in the lead with similar polling, five points ahead of the governing New Democracy party. And in Ireland anti-austerity Sinn Féin this week topped polls in the Irish republic for the first time with 26%, following a string of mass protests against water charges.

All three parties are very different, of course. Syriza has its origins in the communist left and has been riding high for several years. Podemos erupted out of anti-austerity and privatisation protests, is strongly critical of the trade unions, and shares some of the “anti-politics” of movements such as Beppe Grillo’s in Italy. Sinn Féin is a working-class nationalist organisation that emerged from a generation of conflict to become in effect a national party of the left.

But they also have essential elements in common – which illuminate what the economic crisis is doing to politics. First, they are all operating in European countries most pulverised by austerity, and drastic cuts in output, living standards and services. Second, they largely come from outside the traditional left and labour movement – and are reacting to economic policies imposed from outside the country by the “troika” of the European commission, IMF and European Central Bank.

And crucially, they are all filling the political gap left by the social democratic and left-of-centre parties that support or are implementing austerity. While parties of the centre-right forcing through austerity are haemorrhaging votes to outfits such as Ukip, social democratic parties are punished even more severely and face potential wipeout.

The flight from European social democracy – after years implementing neoliberal policies that hit core voters – predates the crash. But the embrace of austerity has since taken a far heavier toll, as the internal upheavals and collapse in support for François Hollande’s Socialist government in France have demonstrated. Even in the less baleful economic conditions of Germany, Angela Merkel’s grand coalition with the Social Democrats is leaking support to both left and right — including to the benefit of the Left party, which is about to deliver the country’s first socialist regional premier since reunification.

All of which puts the SNP’s almost 20-point lead over Labour in Scotland in context. The SNP is riding a national tide and isn’t as social democratic as it likes to make out. But there’s no doubt that the demand for social justice and a break with London-imposed Tory austerity were central to the yes campaign for independence. And as Labour’s plans to press on with austerity-lite have become clearer, the way has opened for the new leader, Nicola Sturgeon, to declare that the SNP, not Labour, is Scotland’s real party of the left.

The answer for Labour, you might think, is obvious: break with the New Labour timidity that created the space for the SNP, put the interests of working-class voters who backed independence centre stage, and embrace the progressive mood in the country. One of the candidates standing to lead Labour in Scotland, the Edinburgh parliamentarian Neil Findlay, wants to do just that – and put “clear red water” between Labour and the SNP. But the establishment and media favourite Jim Murphy – the austerity and Iraq war enthusiast who championed campaigning for a no vote in harness with the Tories – wants a return to tried-and-failed Blairite formulas.

That would seal Labour’s fate in Scotland – and possibly the rest of Britain, for that matter. Ed Miliband won Labour’s leadership making clear he understood the failure of the economic model and public revulsion at the elites. When he’s turned that into popular policy, as he did last autumn by promising to crack down on the energy cartels, Labour support has surged. But when Labour’s leaders cling to Treasury orthodoxy and drift back towards New Labour tinkering, the numbers slide and Miliband’s media-inflated quirks take centre stage. The lesson from across Europe is there are no political prizes for embracing austerity – it spells failure in opposition and disintegration in government.
 
Old November 25th, 2014 #54
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44,334
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Russia funds French National Front: is Moscow sowing European unrest?

Leader of French far-right Front National (FN) party Marine Le Pen
Russia has also reportedly lent money to Greece’s neofascist Golden Dawn, Italy’s Northern League and other anti-Europe parties

LAST UPDATED AT 11:29 ON TUE 25 NOV 2014
​​​​Marine Le Pen has admitted that her far-right Front National accepted money from a Russian bank, amid growing evidence that the Kremlin is backing anti-European parties across the continent.

Le Pen said that her party had received a loan of €9 million (£7 million) in September from the Russian-owned First Czech-Russian Bank, but insisted that the money would have no impact on her policies.

“We signed with the First [bank] who agreed and we’re very happy about it,” she said. But it is “ridiculous to suggest that gaining a loan would determine our international position,” she insisted. “These insinuations are outrageous and offensive.”

According to recent opinion polls, the National Front is now France’s most popular party.

Russian loans have also been extended to Greece’s neofascist Golden Dawn party, Belgium’s Vlaams Belang, Italy’s Northern League, Hungary’s Jobbik and the Freedom Party of Austria, The Times reports. All of these parties except Golden Dawn were invited to observe Crimea's vote on joining Russia and all offered their support for the annexation of the south-eastern Ukrainian region.

The loans to the National Front from the Russian-owned bank occurred amid "growing evidence of a secret Kremlin campaign to buy influence in European politics," The Times says.

French politician Bruno Le Maire, a former cabinet minister who is running for the leadership of the centre-right Union for a Popular Movement, said that it was inconceivable that the loans would have no impact on Le Pen's attitude to Russia: “You are always under obligation to your creditor,” he said.

France’s National Front has "long struggled to raise the cash needed to match its political ambitions," France 24 reports. The party's treasurer Wallerand de Saint-Just said that the loans would be used to finance campaigning expenses in the lead up to the French national elections in 2017, for which the party would need approximately "30 to 40 million euros".

Last month, Vincent Jauvert claimed in the French weekly magazine Le Nouvel Observateur that National Front leaders had been in regular communication with the Russian ambassador in Paris, Alexander Orlov.

"The Kremlin has been betting on the National Front," Jauvert said. "It considers the party able to take power in France and potentially reverse the course of European history in favour of Moscow".

http://www.theweek.co.uk/europe/6149...#ixzz3K7vgVBgU
 
Old November 26th, 2014 #55
Armor
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Armorica
Posts: 36
Armor
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Marine Le Pen has admitted that her far-right Front National accepted money from a Russian bank, amid growing evidence that the Kremlin is backing anti-European parties across the continent.
She is called far-right and anti-European by the Jews because she would like to stop immigration.

Quote:
France’s National Front has "long struggled to raise the cash needed to match its political ambitions," France 24 reports.
which means that the French banks were under Jewish instruction not to lend any money to the National Front.

Quote:
amid "growing evidence of a secret Kremlin campaign to buy influence in European politics," The Times says.
According to the jewsmedia and jew-bought politicians, the problem is not Jewish influence and race-replacement, but Russian influence and the wish to stop immigration.

Quote:
a former cabinet minister who is running for the leadership of the centre-right Union for a Popular Movement, said that it was inconceivable that the loans would have no impact on Le Pen's attitude to Russia: “You are always under obligation to your creditor,” he said.
That man has totally been bought by the Jews. His political party, the UMP, is the main "right wing" party in France. It is Sarkozy's party. Their voters are 100% against race-replacement. But the direction of the party is 100% in favor of race-replacement.
 
Old November 27th, 2014 #56
Pierre-Marc
 
Pierre-Marc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 329
Pierre-Marc
Default

MLP did not "accept" money from a Russian bank, she asked for it because no "French" (or other "European") banks would lend them the money. Just a clarification...
__________________
Il n’est pire sourd que celui qui ne veut pas entendre.
 
Old December 3rd, 2014 #57
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,703
Robbie Key
Default

Russia link and Le Pen dynasty mark French National Front congress

Published on Sunday, 30 November 2014 23:52

France's far-right National Front re-elected its leader Marine Le Pen with a 100 percent mandate on Sunday at a party congress marked by closer ties to Russia and the rise of a new generation of the Le Pen dynasty.

Opinion polls suggest Le Pen, who took over from her father Jean-Marie at the party's last congress in 2011, will repeat his 2002 feat of reaching a second-round run-off for president of France at the forthcoming 2017 election.

"No one can be in any doubt that we will be in the second round," Le Pen told some 2,000 enthusiastic supporters, who chanted "Marine, President."

The anti-immigrant party came first in this year's European Parliament elections in France, winning a quarter of all votes. Dissatisfaction with traditional parties on the right and left and frustration at Socialist President Francois Hollande's failure to fix high unemployment have bolstered its support.

It also appeals to voters unhappy with the multicultural face of France and angry about the power of European Union bureaucrats. Meanwhile, the conflict in Ukraine has allowed it to differentiate itself further from mainstream parties, giving vocal support to Russia and denouncing Western sanctions.

Underscoring the close ties with Moscow, a senior National Front official confirmed last week the party had received funding from First Czech Russian Bank.

The Mediapart investigative web site says the party, which accuses Western banks of snubbing it, has secured loans worth 9 million euros ($11 million) from FCRB. The FCRB and the National Front could not be reached for comment on Sunday.

DEFENDING PUTIN

Russian lawmakers also attended Sunday's congress. Andrei Isayev, who sits in the Duma lower house, said on his Twitter account that he gave a speech there. Andrei Klimov, deputy chairman of the Russian upper house of parliament's international affairs committee, was also in attendance according to French media. Both men are members of the United Russia party, which is close to President Vladimir Putin.

Largely ostracised by Western leaders, who accuse him of fomenting a separatist revolt in Ukraine, Putin appeals to the National Front thanks to his image as an uncompromising patriot.

Le Pen has fiercely attacked the French government's recent decision to suspend delivery of a helicopter-carrying warship to Russia, saying France has acted against its national interest and caved in to U.S. pressure.

"We are wrongly accused of being anti-Europe, but we are for (a Europe) that stretches from the Atlantic to the Urals, not from Washington to Brussels," Le Pen said on Saturday.

The party congress also saw Marion Marechal-Le Pen, 24, the leader's niece and granddaughter of the party founder, top Saturday's ballot for the party's central committee, winning 80 percent of the vote, ahead of Florian Philippot, the group's deputy leader who is seen to represent a more liberal wing.

Marechal-Le Pen, whose blonde locks and broad face leave little doubt about her lineage, told BFM TV on Sunday that she backed her aunt and had no grand political ambitions, "above all none that would cast a shadow over her."

Marine Le Pen's emphatic victory came the day after former French leader Nicolas Sarkozy returned to frontline politics, winning the leadership of his conservative UMP party -- a potential step towards seeking a second presidential mandate.

Le Pen painted both Sarkozy and Hollande as losers.

"You messed everything up," she said. "They gave you a treasure -- France -- and a diamond -- its people. You have ruined the one and abandoned the other".

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...0JE0QJ20141130
 
Old December 3rd, 2014 #58
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,703
Robbie Key
Default

Reports multiply of Kremlin links to anti-EU parties

26.11.14 @ 09:29

BY ANDREW RETTMAN

BRUSSELS - Austria’s far-right FPO party has defended its relations with the Kremlin, amid signs of a wider Russian strategy to build ties with anti-EU parties.

The FPO leader, Heinz-Christian Strache, in a statement published on Tuesday (25 November), said “we are convinced of our neutrality and we do not get financial donations or credits” for the party’s pro-Russia politics .

The statement comes after Austria's left-wing SPO party raised questions in Austrian media about FPO’s independence.

The SPO spoke out when Strache posted pictures on Facebook of himself and other FPO top men at a high-level conference in Moscow.

The Facebook posts include comments such as: “An end to the Nato-EU economic war and sanctions against Russia … We need and want no new walls in Europe!”.

The seminar - entitled “Ways of overcoming the crisis of confidence in Europe” - was chaired by Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov.

Other guests included Russia’s EU ambassador Vladimir Chizhov and a former German diplomat, Wolfgang Ischinger, who is also known for his pro-Russia views.

The Austrian furore comes after German tabloid Bild on Monday accused the German eurosceptic AfD party of being financed by the Kremlin.

It said - citing German intelligence “sources” and a strategy paper penned by a Moscow-based think-tank, the Centre for Strategic Communications - that Russia is selling gold to the AfD at below-market prices using shady middlemen without the AfD’s knowledge.

But Bernd Lucke, an AfD founder and an MEP, denied the allegations.

He told Bild: “If the German secret services really had such information, then they shouldn't tell me it via a newspaper. We have no indication of Russian interference. I consider these reports to be untrue”.

Bild also reported that Vladimir Yakunin - a Kremlin confidante and Russia’s railway chief, who is blacklisted by the US - hosted a friends-of-Russia conference at the Hotel Maritim in Berlin last weekend.

It says the guests included: another AfD founder, Alexander Gauland; Egon Bahr, from the ruling coalition’s SPD party; and two men from the neo-Nazi NPD party, Frank Franz and Sebastian Schmidtke.[if true, that's interesting. NPD are for the most part genuine "nazis".]

The reports come after French far-right party Front National this week admitted taking a €9 million loan from a Kremlin-linked bank.

The emerging pro-Russia network also includes Hungary’s far-right Jobbik party, one of whose members, MEP Bela Kovacs, is being investigated for receiving money from Russian intelligence services.

Tatjana Zdanoka, an MEP from Latvia's pro-Russian Latvijas Krievu savieniba party, is facing a similar probe.

Meanwhile, another Russian oligarch, Konstantin Malofeev, in Vienna in May organised a meeting with delegates from the FPO, the Front National, and Bulgaria’s far-right Ataka party.

Apart from criticising EU integration and defending Russia’s war on Ukraine, the parties regularly vote against Russia-critical resolutions in the European Parliament.

Ataka, the FPO, the Front National, Jobbik, and Latvijas Krievu savieniba also sent observers to separatist “referendums” and “elections” in March and November in Ukraine’s Russia-occupied Crimea and Donetsk regions.

They were joined by members from the Italian and Belgian rightist parties Forza Italia, Lega Nord, and Vlaams Belang.

Anti-EU far-left parties, including Germany’s Die Linke and Greece’s KKE, also sent members to monitor the votes.

http://euobserver.com/foreign/126676
 
Old December 8th, 2014 #59
Serbian
Senior Member
 
Serbian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 11,730
Serbian
Default

Another hysterical piece. They are coming on thick lately

We should beware Russia’s links with Europe’s right

Luke Harding
Tuesday 9 December 2014



The Front National confirmed last week that it had taken a whopping €9.4m loan from the First Czech Russian bank in Moscow.' Photograph: Eric Gaillard/Reuters


Moscow is handing cash to the Front National and others in order to exploit popular dissent against the European Union

It sounds like a chapter from a cheesy spy novel: former KGB agent, chucked out of Britain in the 80s, lends a large sum of money to a far-right European party. His goal? To undermine the European Union and consolidate ties between Moscow and the future possible leader of pro-Kremlin France.

In fact this is exactly what’s just happened. The founder of the Front National (FN), Jean-Marie Le Pen, borrowed €2m from a Cyprus-based company, Veronisa Holdings, owned by a flamboyant character and cold war operative called Yuri Kudimov.

Kudimov is a former KGB agent turned banker with close links to the Kremlin and the network of big money around it. Back in 1985 Kudimov was based in London. His cover story was that he was a journalist working for a Soviet newspaper; in 1985 the Thatcher government expelled him for alleged spying. (During the same period Vladimir Putin was a KGB officer in Dresden.)


In Paris, the FN confirmed last week that it had taken a whopping €9.4m (£7.4m) loan from the First Czech Russian bank in Moscow. This loan is logical enough. The FN’s leader, Marine Le Pen, makes no secret of her admiration for Putin; her party has links to senior Kremlin figures including Dmitry Rogozin, now Russia’s deputy prime minister, who in 2005 ran an anti-immigrant campaign under the slogan “Clean Up Moscow’s Trash”. Le Pen defended her decision to take the Kremlin money, complaining that she had been refused her access to capital: “What is scandalous here is that the French banks are not lending.” She also denied reports by the news website Mediapart, which broke the story, that the €9.4m was merely the first instalment of a bigger €40m loan.

The Russian money will fuel Marine Le Pen’s run for the French presidency in two years’ time. Nobody expects her to win, but the FN topped the polls in May’s European elections, winning an unprecedented 25% of the vote; Le Pen’s 25 new MEPs already form a pro-Russian bloc inside the European parliament.

In part, the Moscow loan can be understood as an act of minor and demonstrative revenge. It follows President François Hollande’s decision to postpone the delivery to Moscow of the first of two Mistral helicopter carriers, in a deal worth €1.2bn. His U-turn follows considerable western pressure, in the wake of Russia’s annexation of Crimea and its ongoing covert invasion of eastern Ukraine.

But there is also a more profound and sinister aspect to the Moscow cheque. Since at least 2009 Russia has actively cultivated links with the far right in eastern Europe. It has established ties with Hungary’s Jobbik, Slovakia’s far-right People’s party and Bulgaria’s nationalist, anti-EU Attack movement. Here, political elites have become increasingly sympathetic to pro-Putin views.

According to Political Capital, a Budapest-based research institute which first observed this trend, the Kremlin has recently been wooing the far-right in western Europe as well. In a report in March it argued that Russian influence in the affairs of the far right is now a “phenomenon seen all over Europe”. Moscow’s goal is to promote its economic and political interests – and in particular to ensure the EU remains heavily dependent on Russian gas.


In Soviet times the KGB used “active measures” to sponsor front organisations in the west including pro-Moscow communist parties. The Kremlin didn’t invent Europe’s far-right parties. But in an analogous way Moscow is now lending them support, political and financial, thereby boosting European neo-fascism.

In part this kinship is about ideology or, as Political Capital puts it, “post-communist neo-conservatism”. The European far right and the Kremlin are united by their hostility to the EU. Since becoming president for the third time in 2012, Putin has been busy promoting his vision for a rival Eurasian Union. This is an alternative political bloc meant to encompass now-independent Soviet republics, with Moscow rather than Brussels as the dominant pole.

The Kremlin has also discovered that the western political system is weak, permeable and susceptible to foreign cash. Putin has always believed that European politicians, like Russian ones, can be bought if the money is right. According to US diplomatic cables leaked in 2010, Silvio Berlusconi has benefited “personally and handsomely” from energy deals with Russia; the former German chancellor Gerhard Schröder, Putin’s greatest European ally, sits on the board of the Nord Steam Russian-German gas pipeline.

Far-right and rightwing British politicians, meanwhile, have also expressed their admiration for Russia’s ex-KGB president. In March Nigel Farage named Putin as the world leader he most admires, and praised the “brilliant” way “he handled the whole Syria thing”. In 2011 the BNP’s Nick Griffin went to Moscow to observe Russia’s Duma election. Afterwards he announced that “Russian elections are much fairer than Britain’s”. Last week Griffin tweeted praise for Russia Today, the Kremlin’s English-language TV propaganda news channel: “RT – For People Who Want the Truth”.

There are many ironies here. In his state of the nation address last Friday, Putin implicitly compared the west to Hitler, and said it was plotting Russia’s dismemberment and collapse. In March Putin defended his land-grab in Crimea by arguing he was rescuing the peninsula from Ukrainian “fascists”. A few weeks later a motley group of radical rightwing European populists turned up in Crimea to watch its hastily arranged “referendum”.

Tactically, Russia is exploiting the popular dissent against the EU – fuelled by both immigration and austerity. But as rightwing movements grow in influence across the continent, Europe must wake up to their insidious means of funding, or risk seeing its own institutions subverted.


http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...nt-national-eu
__________________
Don Black's Stormfront ''Russians''
http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=456327
Russia Insider
https://russia-insider.com/en
 
Old December 21st, 2014 #60
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,703
Robbie Key
Default

Right-wing extremists from around Europe meet in Milan
December 21, 2014 8:12am

ROME (JTA) – For the second time in less than a month, right-wing extremists from around Europe met in Milan.

About 300 people, among them representatives of Greece’s Golden Dawn and the British National Party, met at a Milan hotel on Saturday, according to local media.

The gathering, organized by the Italian far-right party Forza Nuova, was intended as the first meeting of a new pan-European party called Alliance for Peace and Freedom.

The group aims to “protect, celebrate and promote our common Christian values and European cultural heritage” and is opposed to “the advocates of US hegemony” in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, according to its website.

Speakers at the Saturday gathering defended “traditional family values” and criticized “Zionist globalism” and immigration, according to local reports.

Also Saturday, several hundred people held an anti-fascist counter-demonstration outside Milan’s provincial government building.

On Nov. 29, several hundred skinheads and other right-wing extremists from around Europe gathered in an outlying district of Milan for a neo-Nazi concert and rally called Hammerfest 2014 that was associated with the white supremacist group Hammerskin.

http://www.donotlink.com/cz5c

Last edited by Robbie Key; December 21st, 2014 at 01:45 PM.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:22 AM.
Page generated in 0.21739 seconds.