Speech of Viktor Orbán at the EPP Congress in Madrid, on the 22nd of October in 2015.
The European “Left” Has A Clear Agenda: They Are Actually Importing Future Leftist Voters To Europe Hiding Behind Humanism.
GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, PRESIDENT, DEAR DELEGATES,
I would like to congratulate to Partido Popular and to the Spanish Prime Minister, Mariano Rajoy for the outstanding performance of their government.
Today I would like to speak about the migration crisis. This issue will determine the future of our political family. We are in a deep trouble.
The migration crisis is able to destabilize governments, countries and the whole European continent. We need a strong and clear-cut answer, timetable and action plan of EPP. The Hungarian delegates welcome the resolution of the congress, declaring that the Spanish approach is the right one.
what we have been facing is not a refugee crisis.
The danger we have been facing demands open and honest speech.
First of all, dear Friends, what we have been facing is not a refugee crisis.
This is a migratory movement composed of economic migrants, refugees and also foreign fighters.
This is an uncontrolled and unregulated process. I would like to remind you that free choice of a host country is not included in the international law. I also want to underline that there is an unlimited source of supply of people, after Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Africa is now also on the move. The dimension and the volume of the danger is well above our expectations.
This is the right time to make clear the nature and the dimension of our moral responsibility.
We are Christian democrats so the issue of moral responsibility must also be put high into consideration.
We have a heartfelt compassion for the people who left their homes.
They are victims of the bad governance of their own countries.
They are victims of bad international political decisions. And they are victims of our bad European policy as well which raises expectations that are impossible to be fulfilled.
They are obviously victims of the human traffickers. But considering them victims must not turn ourselves into being victims. Just because we do not consider them enemies we must not act against ourselves.
Our moral responsibility is to give back these people their homes and their countries.
It can’t be our objective to provide them with a new European life. Right to human dignity and security are basic rights. But neither the German, Austrian nor the Hungarian way of life is a basic right of all people on the Earth. It is only a right of those ones who have contributed to it.
Europe is not able to accept everyone who wants a better life. We have to help them to get back their own lives with dignity and we have to send them back to their own countries.
Let me draw your kind attention to the fact that European Christian democratic approach doesn’t tolerate any anti-Muslim policy. Muslim faith which we honor and respect is not responsible for the root causes of this mass migratory movement.
We cannot avoid speaking about the quality of our democracies.
Does it comply with the freedom of information and speech that medias usually show women and children while seventy percent of the migrants are young men and they look like an army?
How could it happen that our people’s feel that their opinion is not being put into consideration? And we have to address the question whether our people want what has been happening.
Did we get authorization from them to allow millions of migrants to enter our continent? Did we get authorization not to comply with the Schengen regulations for months?
No, distinguished Delegates, we did not. And it is not a convincing argument any more that what we have been doing is because of emergency.
I believe we have to gather all our courage, we have to throw away PC-ness and we should launch a big debate. We have to discuss our own intentions regarding our own continent without hypocrisy and pharisaism.
What do we think about our civilization heritage?
Can the change of cultural pattern forced externally?
Do we accept parallel societies? Or we defend our tolerant and rule of law based way of life we have lived so far?
Europe is currently rich and weak. This is the most possibly dangerous mixture.
We seem not to be able to overcome our challenges on our own. Turkey is an important strategic partner.
But if based on the lack of our own power we expect the solution from them that will make us exposed. This is the current situation of Europe.
If we do not want that we have to protect our borders. If we are unable to do so at Greece which is the Eastern gate of the Balkans and the first line of defence than we have to do it at the Western gate of the Balkans at Hungary and Slovenia.
We cannot hide the fact that the European “Left” has a clear agenda.
• They are supportive to migration.
• They actually import future leftist voters to Europe hiding behind humanism.
• It is an old trick but I do not understand why we have to accept it.
• They consider registration and protection of borders bureaucratic, nationalist and against human rights.
• They have a dream about the politically constructed world society without religious traditions, without borders, without nations.((the kalergi plan))
• They attack core values of our European identity: family, nation, subsidiarity and responsibility.
We are EPP. Our behavior should not be determined by the opinion of our rivals. We are a strong and great party.
The stronger the attack, the stronger we need to fight back.
We need to be ready to fight for our principles.
We have to be innovative as well. In the rise of the new crises, the old ways do not work anymore.
We need courage and new experiments, even if not every idea we try succeeds, but it should not stop us from trying. And we should not attack those who are trying. I thank for our President and for sister parties who defended us, Hungarians in the difficult times when we offered new solutions.
We are the European People’s Party – Partie Populaire, Volkspartei, Partido Popular, Party of the People – our responsibility is towards the people. Listen to the people. Let’s be determined, let’s defend Europe. Do not let the leftist mess up and reconstruct Europe! And do not let them oust the soul of Europe! Do not let liberals and socialists take away Europe from the people!
Ilegal Muslim refugee trafficking is now creating chaos at the Greece-Macedonia border and the constant flood of boats arriving from Libya reveal a network that uses structured routes that seem unstoppable as they generate money for the mafia and the terrorist organizations involved like ISIS.
This scenario seems to fit perfectly with a secret plan of the New World Order known as the Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan that some people in European right-wing circles say was created for the systematic genocide of the people of Europe.
This plan was apparently devised by an Austrian diplomat and Freemason named Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi (1894- 1972). The Kalergi family roots can be traced back to Byzantine royalty via Venetian aristocracy. Coudenhove-Kalergi was actually the first proponent of a unified Europe back in the 1920s and for this reason Coudenhove-Kalergi is recognized as the founder of the first popular movement for a United Europe.
Angela Merkel and Herman Van Rompuy
The Coudenhove-Kalergi European Prize is awarded every two years to European leaders who have excelled in promoting what is beyond any political or religious ideology. Angela Merkeland Herman Van Rompuy, two of the top pawns in the Bilderberg Club, have received this award in recent years.
Coudenhove-Kalergi’s father, initially an anti-semite, later became a close friend of Theodor Herzl, the founder of Zionism, but his son, Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, also has strong connections with the Catholic elite due to his aristocratic status.
According to Coudenhove-Kalergi’s autobiography, at the beginning of 1924 through Baron Louis de Rothschild he was in contact with Max Warburg, who offered to finance his movement for the next 3 years giving him 60,000 gold marks.
The Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan becomes evident in 1925 when he writes in Practical Idealism (Praktischer Idealismus): “The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals.”
In Germany the book is practically censored, although it isn’t present on the official list of books censored by the German government. In 1990, the publishing company, “Independent News,” [Unabhängige Nachrichten], published a summary of the book and contemplated printing it in it’s entirety, but the government initiated a police search of the premises and the only copy of Praktischer Idealismus was confiscated. The book is not mentioned on the official internet pages of the Pan-European Movement, which is understandable because its content is directly in opposition to the movement’s official program.
Coudenhove-Kalergi suggested Beethoven’s hymn as the EU’s national anthem and was very active in connection with the design of the EU logo which contains masonic symbols. He was initiated in Freemasonry in the Humanitas Lodge in Vienna in the early 1920’s but left in 1926 to avoid the heavy criticism which occurred as a result of the relationship between the Pan-European movement and Freemasonry. Some say later, in 1947, he founded the powerful Ur-Lodge Pan-Europa that is still active to this day and draws members from the political and economic elite.
Coudenhove-Kalergi’s ground work prepared the EU for what many Christian’s familiar with the prophecies of “The Book of Revelation” perceive as “The New Holy Roman Empire.”
The socialist elite of Europe born out of Coudenhove-Kalergi’s plan have created a United Europe backed by the Vatican under a centralized government, a system that actually will be the prototype for the US and the rest of the world when the New World Order is finalized.
In the meantime, tensions rise as the Muslim population is being pushed like never before towards Europe to fulfill “The Kalergi Plan.” This will create civil unrest and wars in most areas of southern Europe almost certainly by the 2020’s facilitating population reduction.
Government Announces Plan to Censor Alt Right Sites
EU announcement fake news
EU Demands Social Media Websites Censor “Fake News” within 24 Hours and…
“Lists it in the same context as jihadist propaganda”
The European Union is demanding that Twitter, YouTube and Facebook censor “illegal hate speech” within 24 hours, content that includes so-called “fake news,” a term so broad that it includes perfectly legitimate news content.
Complaining that censorship is currently taking too long, EU commissioners are threatening to pass new laws if the “non-legislative approach” fails. Source: http://www.infowars.com/eu-demands-social-media-websites-censor-fake-news-within-24-hours/
JUST IN CASE YOU DID NOT KNOW MAINSTREAM MEDIA PUBLISHES.
TIME MAGAZINE (time.com)
65 MILLION AMERICANS SHOULD THREATEN TO NOT PAY TAXES
• In France, before the British vote, the weekly JDD conducted an online poll with one question: Do you want France out of the EU? 88% of people answered “YES!”
• In none of the countries the surveyed was there much support for transferring power to Brussels.
• To calm a possible revolt of millions of poor and unemployed people, countries such as France have maintained a high level of social welfare spending, by borrowing money on international debt markets to pay unemployment insurance benefits, as well as pensions for retired people. Today, France’s national debt is 96.1% of GDP. In 2008, it was 68%.
• In the past few years, these poor and old people have seen a drastic change in their environment: the butcher has become halal, the café does not sell alcohol anymore, and most women in the streets are wearing veils. Even the McDonald’s in France have become halal.
• What is reassuring is that the “Leave” people waited for a legal way to express their protest. They did not take guns or knives to kill Jews or Muslims: they voted. They waited an opportunity to express their feelings.
“How quickly the unthinkable became the irreversible” writesThe Economist. They are talking about Brexit, of course.
The question of today is: Who could have imagined that British people were so tired of being members of The Club?
The question of tomorrow is: What country will be next?
In France, before the British vote, the weekly JDD conducted an online poll with one question: Do you want France out of the EU? 88% of people answered “YES!” This is not a scientific result, but it is nevertheless an indication. A recent — and more scientific — survey for Pew Research found that in France, a founding member of “Europe,” only 38% of people still hold a favorable view of the EU, six points lower than in Britain. In none of the countries surveyed was there much support for transferring power to Brussels.
With Brexit, everybody is discovering that the European project was implemented by no more than a minority of the population: young urban people, national politicians of each country and bureaucrats in Brussels.
All others remain with the same feeling: Europe failed to deliver.
On the economic level, the EU has been unable to keep jobs at home. They have fled to China and other countries with low wages. Globalization proved stronger than the EU. The unemployment rate has never before been so high as inside the EU, especially in France.
In Europe, 10.2% of the workforce is officially unemployed The unemployment rate is 9.9% in France, 22% in Spain.
And take-home salaries have remained low, except for a few categories in finance and high-tech.
To calm a possible revolt of millions of poor and unemployed people, countries such as France have maintained a high level of social welfare spending. Unemployed people continue to be subsidized by the state. How? By borrowing money on international debt markets to pay unemployment insurance benefits, as well as pensions for retired people.
So today France’s national debt is 96.1% of GDP. In 2008, it was 68%.
In the the euro zone (19 countries), the ratio of national debt to GDP in 2015 was 90.7%.
In addition to these issue all, European countries have been remained open to mass-immigration.
Immigration was not an official question of the British “remain” or “leave” campaign. But as noted by Mudassar Ahmed, patron of the Faiths Forum for London and a former adviser to the U.K. government, the question of immigration and diversity has been latent:
“In personal conversations, I have found those most eager to leave the European Union are also most uncomfortable with diversity — not just regarding immigration, but of the diversity that already exists in this country. On the other hand, those who are most eager, in my experience, to support remaining in the European Union are far more open to difference in religion, race, culture and ethnicity”.
In France, the question of immigration tied to an eventual “Frexit” is not at all latent. The Front National (FN) strongly supports leaving the EU, and that position is tied to immigration. In France, 200,000 foreigners have been coming annually for several years — from poor countries such as those in North Africa, as well as sub-Saharan countries. The growing presence of Muslims has brought a growing feeling of insecurity, and the cultural traditions of Arab and African countries has created in Europe a cultural “malaise.” Not to everyone, or course. In big cities, people accept diversity. But in the suburbs, it is different. Because those who were on welfare, who were poor, who were old — all these people are living precisely in the same neighborhoods and the same buildings as the new immigrants.
In the past few years, these poor and old people have seen a drastic change in their environment: the butcher has become halal, the café does not sell alcohol anymore, the famous French “jambon beurre” (ham and butter) sandwich disappeared, and most women in the streets are wearing veils. Even the McDonald’s in France have become halal. In Roubaix, for example, all fast food has become halal.
An eventual “Frexit” vote by the poor, the old, and the people on welfare would mean only one thing: “Give me my country back!” Today, to be against the EU is to reclaim the possibility of remaining French in a traditional France.
With the Brexit, the question of the nation is back in Europe. Without immigration, it might have been possible gradually to create an eventual European identity. But with Islam plus terrorism at the door, with politicians saying after each terrorist attack, “These men shouting, ‘Allahu Akbar’ have nothing to do Islam,” the rejection is big.
This “give me my country back” seems frightening. And it is. It is tainted with chauvinism, and chauvinism is not a good thing for any minorities in any country. Jewish people paid a heavy price for chauvinism in WWII.
What is reassuring, nevertheless, is that the “Leave” people waited for a legal way to express their protest. They did not take guns or knives to kill Jews or Muslims: they voted. They waited an opportunity to express their feelings. The “Leave” may not look modern or trendy, but it is peaceful, legal and democratic.
• The European Union now finds itself in a classic catch-22 situation. Large numbers of Muslim migrants will flow to Europe regardless of whether or not the EU approves the visa waiver for Turkey.
• “If visa requirements are lifted completely, each of these persons could buy a cheap plane ticket to any German airport, utter the word ‘asylum,’ and trigger a years-long judicial process with a good chance of ending in a residency permit.” — German analyst Andrew Hammel.
• In their haste to stanch the rush of migrants, European officials effectively allowed Turkey to conflate the two very separate issues of a) uncontrolled migration into Europe and b) an end to visa restrictions for Turkish nationals.
• “Why should a peaceful, stable, prosperous country like Germany import from some remote corner of some faraway land a violent ethnic conflict which has nothing whatsoever to do with Germany and which 98% Germans do not understand or care about?” — German analyst Andrew Hammel.
• “Democracy, freedom and the rule of law…. For us, these words have absolutely no value any longer.” — Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
Turkey has threatened to renege on a landmark deal to curb illegal migration to the European Union if the bloc fails to grant visa-free travel to Europe for Turkey’s 78 million citizens by the end of June.
If Ankara follows through on its threat, it would reopen the floodgates and allow potentially millions of migrants from Africa, Asia and the Middle East to flow from Turkey into the European Union.
Under the terms of the EU-Turkey deal, which entered into effect on March 20, Turkey agreed to take back migrants and refugees who illegally cross the Aegean Sea from Turkey to Greece. In exchange, the European Union agreed to resettle up to 72,000 Syrian refugees living in Turkey, and pledged up to 6 billion euros ($6.8 billion) in aid to Turkey during the next four years.
European officials also promised to restart Turkey’s stalled EU membership talks by the end of July 2016, and to fast-track visa-free access for Turkish nationals to the Schengen (open-bordered) passport-free zone by June 30.
To qualify for the visa waiver, Turkey has until April 30 to meet 72 conditions. These include: bringing the security features of Turkish passports up to EU standards; sharing information on forged and fraudulent documents used to travel to the EU and granting work permits to non-Syrian migrants in Turkey.
The European Commission, the administrative arm of the European Union, said it would issue a report on May 4 on whether Turkey adequately has met all of the conditions to qualify for visa liberalization.
During a hearing at the European Parliament on April 21, Marta Cygan, a director in the Commission’s migration and home affairs unit, revealed that to date Ankara has satisfied only 35 of the 72 conditions. This implies that Turkey is unlikely to meet the other 37 conditions by the April 30 deadline, a window of fewer than ten days.
According to Turkish officials, however, Turkey is fulfilling all of its obligations under the EU deal and the onus rests on the European Union to approve visa liberalization — or else.
Addressing the Council of Europe in Strasbourg on April 19, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said that Turkey has now reduced the flow of migrants to Greece to an average of 60 a day, compared to several thousand a day at the height of the migrant crisis in late 2015. Davutoglu went on to say that this proves that Turkey has fulfilled its end of the deal and that Ankara will no longer honor the EU-Turkey deal if the bloc fails to deliver visa-free travel by June 30.
European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has insisted that Turkey must meet all 72 conditions for visa-free travel and that the EU will not water down its criteria. But European officials — under intense pressure to keep the migrant deal with Turkey alive — will be tempted to cede to Turkish demands.
EU Migration Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos on April 20 conceded that for the EU it is not a question of the number of conditions, but rather “how quickly the process is going on.” He added: “I believe that at the end, if we continue working like this, most of the benchmarks will be met.”
European officials alone are to blame for allowing themselves to be blackmailed in this way. In their haste to stanch the rush of migrants to Europe, they effectively allowed Turkey to conflate the two very separate issues of a) uncontrolled migration into Europe and b) an end to visa restrictions for Turkish nationals.
The original criteria for the visa waiver were established in December 2013 — more than two years before the EU-Turkey deal — by means of the so-called Visa Liberalization Dialogue and the accompanying Readmission Agreement. In it, Turkey agrees to take back third-country nationals who, after having transiting through Turkey, have entered the EU illegally.
By declaring that the visa waiver conditions are no longer binding because the flow of migrants to Greece has been reduced, Turkish officials, negotiating like merchants in Istanbul’s Grand Bazaar, are running circles around the hapless European officials.
Or, as Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently proclaimed: “The European Union needs Turkey more than Turkey needs the European Union.”
The European Union now finds itself in a classic Catch-22 situation. Large numbers of Muslim migrants will flow to Europe regardless of whether or not the EU approves the visa waiver.
Critics of visa liberalization fear that millions of Turkish nationals may end up migrating to Europe. Indeed, many analysts believe that President Erdogan views the visa waiver as an opportunity to “export” Turkey’s “Kurdish Problem” to Germany.
Bavarian Finance Minister Markus Söder, for example, worries that due to Erdogan’s persecution of Kurds in Turkey, millions may take advantage of the visa waver to flee to Germany. “We are importing an internal Turkish conflict,” he warned, adding: “In the end, fewer migrants may arrive by boat, but more will arrive by airplane.”
In an insightful essay, German analyst Andrew Hammel writes:
“Let’s do the math. There are currently 16 million Turkish citizens of Kurdish descent in Turkey. There is a long history of discrimination by Turkish governments against this ethnic minority, including torture, forced displacement, and other repressive measures. The current conservative-nationalist Turkish government is fighting an open war against various Kurdish rebel groups, both inside and outside Turkey. “This means that under German law as it is currently being applied by the ruling coalition in the real world (not German law on the books), there are probably something like 5-8 million Turkish Kurds who might have a plausible claim for asylum or subsidiary protection. That’s just a guess, the real number could be higher, but probably not much lower. “If visa requirements are lifted completely, each of these persons could buy a cheap plane ticket to any German airport, utter the word ‘asylum,’ and trigger a years-long judicial process with a good chance of ending in a residency permit.”
“There are already 800,000 Kurds living in Germany. As migration researchers know, existing kin networks in a destination country massively increase the likelihood and scope of migration…. As Turkish Kurds are likely to arrive speaking no German and with limited job skills, just like current migrants, where is the extra 60-70 billion euros/year [10 billion euros/year for every one million migrants] going to come from to provide them all with housing, food, welfare, medical care, education and German courses?
And finally, “the most important, most fundamental, most urgent question of all”:
“Why should a peaceful, stable, prosperous country like Germany import from some remote corner of some faraway land a violent ethnic conflict which has nothing whatsoever to do with Germany and which 98% Germans do not understand or care about?”
Turkish-Kurdish violence is now commonplace in Germany, which is home to around three million people of Turkish origin — roughly one in four of whom are Kurds. German intelligence officials estimate that about 14,000 of these Kurds are active supporters of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a militant group that has been fighting for Kurdish independence since 1974.
On April 10, hundreds of Kurds and Turks clashed in Munich and dozens fought in Cologne. Also on April 10, four people were injured when Kurds and Turks fought in Frankfurt. On March 27, nearly 40 people were arrested after Kurds attacked a demonstration of around 600 Turkish protesters in the Bavarian town of Aschaffenburg.
On September 11, 2015, dozens of Kurds and Turks clashed in Bielefeld. On September 10, more than a thousand Kurds and Turks fought in Berlin. Also on September 10, several hundred Kurds and Turks fought in Frankfurt.
On September 3, more than 100 Kurds and Turks clashed in Remscheid. On August 17, Kurds attacked a Turkish mosque in Berlin-Kreuzberg. In October 2014, hundreds of Kurds and Turks clashed at the main train station in Munich.
In an essay for the Financial Times titled “The EU Sells Its Soul to Strike a Deal with Turkey,” columnist Wolfgang Münchau wrote:
“The deal with Turkey is as sordid as anything I have ever seen in modern European politics. On the day that EU leaders signed the deal, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish president, gave the game away: ‘Democracy, freedom and the rule of law…. For us, these words have absolutely no value any longer.’ At that point the European Council should have ended the conversation with Ahmet Davutoglu, the Turkish prime minister, and sent him home. But instead, they made a deal with him — money and a lot more in return for help with the refugee crisis.”
April 24, 2016 | by Soeren Kern | Source: gatestoneinstitute.org "Turkey Blackmails Europe on Visa-Free Travel"
The views and opinions expressed in all posted article are those of the original authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of this website or of the owners/administrators of where this article is shared online. Claims made in this piece are based on the original author’s own opinion and not stated as evidence or fact.