10
okt
Seneste opdatering: 10/10-15 kl. 1742
8 kommentarer - Tryk for at kommentere!

Jan Høegh er 92 år gammel. Talen er fra i sommer, men først uploadet nu.

»Sveriges politik er en trussel mod hele Europa«

Mikael Jalving interviewer “Johan Andersson” fra Granskning Sverige. Læsere her har kunnet høre ham og hans podradio mange gange. Han er specialist i at stille sådanne spørgsmål til magthaverne, at de knalder røret på ham dog som regel efter at have udleveret deres egen tåbelighed først. Julia Caesar interviewes her af Granskning Sverige. Hun knalder ikke røret på.

Jeg har knap nok tændt båndoptageren, før Johan Andersson er i fuld gang med at kritisere sit eget land og sammenligner med nuværende og tidligere forbryderstater. Det er i særlig grad de svenske myndigheder, det politiske etablissement og medierne, der må stå for skud. Stemmen kalder sig Johan Andersson, men han ønsker ikke at blive fotograferet eller biograferet. Desuden er navnet så almindeligt i Sverige, at det i praksis fungerer som pseudonym. Johan Andersson hedder Johan Andersson – eller måske gør han ikke. Men han har i halvandet år produceret et radioprogram med titlen ”Granskning Sverige” (Undersøgelse af Sverige, red.), hvor han har interviewet journalister, retssystemet, nuværende og forhenværende politikere om nogle af de mest ømtålelige emner i den svenske offentlighed, herunder indvandring, feminisme og folkelighed.

»Alle, der ytrer sig forkert om kontroversielle emner må påregne et vist trusselsbillede. Truslen vokser med indflydelsen. Det måtte bloggeren ”Julia Caesar” sande for nylig, da hendes blogs var nogle af de mest læste politiske blogs i Sverige til trods for, at de blev offentliggjort på en dansk hjemmeside (Snaphanen.dk, red.). Uden nogensinde før at have interesseret sig for indholdet af hendes årelange samfundskritik var hele to formiddagsblade på sporet af hendes virkelige identitet. Til sidst kom den ene avis den anden i forkøbet og offentliggjorde den med billede og det hele. På den måde ønsker mainstreammedierne at lukke munden på hende. Hun var blevet for farlig.« [..]  »Sveriges politik er en trussel mod hele Europa«

Putin’s Great Crime:

He Defends His Allies and Attacks His Enemies

Edward N. Luttwak skriver om Putin og den mærkelige Obama, der er venlig over for sine fjender og fjendtlig over for sine venner. Han har ikke sat én rigtig fod i Mellemøsten siden han blev præsident. Det kan næppe blive værre, med mindre Hillary Clinton bliver præsident. Nu står Obama og NATO og kan egentlig ikke finde en grund til at bebrejde Putins indsats i Syrien, men de gør det alligevel. Det er et sørgeligt syn: Putin’s Great Crime: He Defends His Allies and Attacks His Enemies

So, yes, Ladies and Gentlemen, the aforementioned accused, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is guilty of a very great crime: He defends his allies and attacks his enemies—conduct particularly reprehensible in the eyes of the Obama Administration, which does the exact opposite. Obama’s America dislikes Japan’s staunchly pro-American Prime Minister Abe (deemed “insufficiently apologetic”), it spurns the calls for action of Britain’s Cameron and Hollande of France, and has missed no opportunity to denigrate Benjamin Netanyahu, even as it eagerly embraces the bleak dictators of Cuba and of course Hassan Fereydoun a.k.a. Rouhani, president of the “death to America” Islamic republic of Iran and de facto chief nuclear negotiator—for the second time. The first time, from Oct. 6, 2003 to Aug. 15, 2005, when Rouhani was the official negotiator, under the equally mellifluous President Mohammad Khatami, he boasted that he had used the talks “to buy time to advance Iran’s nuclear program”—but that is not something that would dissuade an American administration that is intensely suspicious, but only of its allies.

Putin is different. He has two aims in Syria, both utterly realistic: Keep his Tartus base that makes Russia a Mediterranean Great Power (look at the competition) at very low cost, and demonstrate that it really pays to serve Russia. The Americans abruptly dropped Hosni Mubarak like a rotten apple after decades of obedient service because his police shot at some demonstrators: Russia still supports Assad vigorously no matter what. The message resonates with potentates across the region, none of whom happens to be democratically elected (with the exception of Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan who is doing his best to undo his country’s democracy). Side with the Americans and you will be promptly abandoned if troublemakers force the police to shoot. Side with Putin’s Russia and you will be supported no matter what. So it little matters what happens to Assad in the end: Putin has already won the credibility competition, which earns him and Russia real gains.

Putin by contrast may understand nothing else but he does understand strategy, and the balance of power. That is why he played no games with Netanyahu, and simply conceded Israel’s right to bomb in Syria—no small thing in the circumstances, given that Russian personnel and aircraft will be on the ground when that happens, within a total geography that is very small indeed at 500 miles per hour.

Such primitive notions are no doubt incomprehensible to Obama and his officials, as well as to their intellectual milieu, for which empire can only be an embarrassment, power cannot be purposeful, peace is obtained by good will and not by assured security, war is purposeless destruction (and all warriors are merely future PTSD cases), and diplomacy should be a multilateral pursuit, having to do with Global Warming if at all possible. These are all useful stances for rank-and-file Obama officials as they prepare their future with Bill and Melinda, Bill and Chelsea, and the rest of the PC foundation universe with its light lifting and ceaseless conferencing travel to yammy destinations, but to conduct the foreign policy of the United States they are hopelessly off-target. Putin and Netanyahu, by contrast, are determined to hit their targets hard.


Donér engangsbeløb?Kan du forpligte dig til fast betaling?