Tuesday, August 29, 2006

The Chancellor and the Pope

Cranmer has reported on this before, but the more frequent the meetings, the more credible an agenda appears. The German Chancellor met with her compatriot Pope yesterday, and both agreed that Europe needs a constitution that makes reference to Christianity and God.

No matter that the EU’s Constitution has been rejected by the electorates of two of the EU’s founding states; no matter that ratification has to be unanimous among all EU members; no matter that France’s secularists have previously rejected that ‘God’ should feature in the document: no matter that it may present Turkey with an insurmountable hurdle for EU accession: the Pope has other plans, and Chancellor Merkel is his mouthpiece. She said: ‘We need a European identity in the form of a constitutional treaty and I think it should be connected to Christianity and God, as Christianity has forged Europe in a decisive way.’ In this, she echoes the suggestion of other EPP leaders that the Constitution should be resurrected as a ‘treaty’, thus bypassing the need for national referenda, and should include more overt references to Europe's Christian heritage.

All this, of course, is largely ignored by the mainstream media. Cranmer notes that when one examines the notion of a European economy, there is acknowledgement of competing agendas; when one raises European defence, there is discussion of diverging priorities; when one looks at European justice, there is examination of differing histories; when one raises European agriculture or fisheries, there are national interests. Yet when one raises the issue of a European religion, it is dismissed as a ‘plot’. Thus the search for the EU’s political identity is openly discussed in terms of agendas, priorities, and interests, but there is no quest for the EU’s ‘soul’, and those who assert the contrary are dismissed with 16th-century verbiage. Thus there is no ‘plot’; there is not even a Vatican ‘agenda’, and any discussion of such is purely for the obsessive eccentrics preoccupied with yesterday’s battles. And further, the German Chancellor’s frequent meetings with the German Pope are of no significance whatsoever…


Blogger Fruning Graplecard said...

This piece reminded me of some Evangelical Christians who, 30 years ago, told me as a young convert, that the Pope was the Anti-Christ and that the EC was all part of the prophesies of Revelation, coming true.

See you at the Auto-da-Fe (oops!)

29 August 2006 at 12:44  
Blogger Croydonian said...

One might note that the US Constitutiuon makes no reference to 'God', and the only reference to religion is in the First Amendment: 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof'.

And yet church attendance is proportionately a great deal higher than in most EU states.

29 August 2006 at 13:10  
Anonymous Old Red Socks said...

I am slighly puzzled (perhaps in awe of His Grace's erudition and intelligence) but is Cranmer opposed to the inclusion of God/Christianity in such a text? That might seem a curious position for an Archbishop who was himself instrumental in binding church and state in our beloved land.

Or is this a Papist "thing"?

Of course, the issue is quite separate from whether any EU Constitution should be approved - it shouldn't.

29 August 2006 at 13:50  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Old Red Socks,

His Grace is opposed to a 'Constitution for Europe' in principle. But he further notes that such a document would have a superior legal status to, and thereby supplant, the (regretfully) uncodified Constitution of the United Kingdom, which is Protestant by Statute Law. When a continental-European constitution talks of 'God', it would be, of course, a Roman Catholic understanding of its nature, contingent upon Roman Catholic definitions of 'Church' and other matters of ecclesiology. Such a document, with all the legal force of a 'constitution', would render the Monarch once again subject to Rome, whose theology would permeate a re-united Christendom as irrevocably and effectively as Roman Catholic Social Doctrine underpins the whole EU empire. It must be remembered that the Roman Catholic Church perceives herself to be the Church (all others are deficient, and the Church of England is 'not a Church in the proper sense' [Cardinal Ratzinger, Dominus Iesus, 2000]), and its Pope is the universal pastor. Therefore to give this constitution a foundation of 'God' is to bestow upon the Pope (in his understanding) a considerable amount of political power, which he, in any case, already assumes.

A 'Constitution for Europe' is thereby the antithesis of all that His Grace set out to achieve, and for which, indeed, he gave his life.

29 August 2006 at 14:59  
Anonymous Rick said...

I think this would be so funny.......to impose a Constitution by treaty would make it impossible to amend.

That would be so delicious to watch polticians hamstrung by the need to get 25+ nations to agree a treaty first time around.........I can see Poland being very 'difficult'.

Then again Merkel wants it to block Turkey gaining access - that is the purpose - the British Govt will join France in opposing any reference to Christianity which is not in keeping with these two states being Dar-al-Islam candidates.

This is so very funny..........it will tie these states in knots. They thought the ECB was a straitjacket wait until they see what an intergovernmental treaty as constitution means...............I see the German Supreme Court has just thrown out Eu rules on taxation of SUVs........they will simply refuse to accept the "constitution" because the German Constitution prohibits the Bundestag from delegating authority

29 August 2006 at 15:25  
Anonymous old red socks said...

I thank His Grace for that most comprehensive exposition. But how a simple reference to God or Christianity, as opposed to a 'church', in such a text contrives to result in a Catholic supremacy and the subversion of our constitutional order is something that still eludes me. His Grace will surely need no reminding that Frau Merkel is the daughter of a Protestant pastor.

Confronted with the clear and present menace of Islamofascism to which His Grace has courageously devoted many of esteemed commentaries, one might hope that centuries' old antagonisms, in which Cranmer was by no means the sole victim, could abate in the face of a common threat.

29 August 2006 at 15:35  
Anonymous Ulster Man said...

Spot on, Your Grace.

This is why we faithful Ulster Prods have resisted a United Ireland. Only those with eyes to see and ears to hear know of the 'other' governments above national ones. Rome is just one, but a powerful one in Europe and an influential one in the Republic.


29 August 2006 at 16:15  
Blogger Cranmer said...

how a simple reference to God or Christianity, as opposed to a 'church', in such a text contrives to result in a Catholic supremacy and the subversion of our constitutional order is something that still eludes me.

Mr Old Red Socks,

This is, as Mr Ulster Man observes, apparent to 'those who have ears to hear'. It is so subtle as to be almost imperceptible. The nexus of the issue is in His Grace's reference to Rome's perception of herself, and her role as intercessor between God and man, and as the repository of all spiritual truth. It is not that there will be any overt contrivance to result in Catholic supremacy, or the subversion of our constitutional order, nor even of an assertion of Catholic supremacy within the EU. This would be politically unacceptable, and would awaken the demons of secularism to re-ignite old Church-State conflicts.

The importance of the issue lies in Rome's perception of herself; thus when Christianity is mentioned, this would be Roman Catholicism (for in Rome's view there is no other), and when God is credited, it is for Rome to define this deity, since she, by her own declaration, has been uniquely bequethed the keys to understanding the role of the Kingdom of God on earth.

So, there you see - what are a few, apparently inconsequential words to the laity, represent volumes of encyclicals, and encyclopaediae of Christus Victor theology for the clerics, and a gift for the Pope of immense significance.

29 August 2006 at 16:49  
Anonymous G. Tingey. said...

Ein volk, ein Reich, ein Papa (ach, sheiss" - ein Führer. )

29 August 2006 at 17:41  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Mr Chirac and Mrs Merkel should not expect Poland to meekly submit in the face of a Franco-German diktat on treaty ratification. The Polish president Lech Kaczynski, ( a staunch papist if ever there was one) on a state visit to France in February 2006 said that the European Const. has “…practically no chance of being ratified in Poland, neither by referendum, nor via the parliamentary route,". Underlining the central role of nation states, he said "what interests the Poles is what will come out of Poland, not the future of the union as a whole. It's the same in France." In an official visit to Germany in March 2006, Kaczynski told the daily Die Welt "My opinion of the EU is the following: A super state which polarizes countries' areas of competence but which at the same time is rather helpless because it only has a symbolic budget," He said further, “I don't hide that I am against the European constitution project.”

Sound chap that Kaczynski.

29 August 2006 at 18:47  
Anonymous Lena Mouse said...

Why do religious leaders speak to politicians unless it's too court favour?! They're all at it, and neither seems to be doing their job very well. Though it would be more concerning when EU leaders start having meetings with imams, and we're told it's about 'religious freedom'.

30 August 2006 at 10:26  
Anonymous Rick said...

Well lena mouse I suspect that Frau Merkel being German and the Pope visiting his home town shortly in Bavaria has much to do with it.

I suspect also that with Germany involved in behind the scenes negotiations with Iran and Syria that the Pope is being briefed as an interlocutor and head of state ............

I somehow do not believe the issues are to do with the EU Constitution - that is a smokescreen.

In his TV audience a couple of weeks ago the Pope mentioned he would like to visit "The Holy Land" and "Brasil" whilst he is still able

30 August 2006 at 11:33  
Anonymous Lena Mouse said...

The Pope's probably the only one who hasn't yet given his tuppence worth on Israel. Since the Jews ands Muslims can't seem to sort it out, it might be worth letting him try!

30 August 2006 at 11:39  
Anonymous Rick said...

Papst Benedikt beginnt seinen Besuch am Samstag, den 9. September. An jenem Tag trifft er aus Rom in München ein und wird dort mit dem Papamobil durch die mit Sicherheit sehr volle Stadt fahren. Dann sind noch Stationen in Altötting, Regensburg und Freising geplant.

The Pope arrives in Bavaria on 9. September in Munich

30 August 2006 at 13:05  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

The Papacy is not other than the Ghost of the deceased Roman Empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof.

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)

30 August 2006 at 13:40  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Why anybody takes a pope seriously baffles me, a venal old man sat on his backside surrounded by billions of pounds worth of readily saleable goods pontificating about poverty and social justice, that applies to all of them.

30 August 2006 at 16:44  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why anybody takes a pope seriously baffles me

Says more about you than him............

30 August 2006 at 17:59  
Blogger Croydonian said...

Re anon at 5.59, perhaps His Grace shared my surprise at the coverage of the death of John Paul II. I think hagiography might be the right word... I do not suppose that the death of an incumbent Archbishop of Canterbury, or come to that, of a Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland would make that much of a splash. The Pope might well be /a/ spiritual leader, but the vast majority of professed Christians in this country are Protestants and it struck me that the laudatory coverage accorded the Pope smacked of a presumption that he had assumed, de facto, the leadership of Christendom rather than representing a part of it, and furthermore a part that regards the C of E as 'a sect' and 'not a church in the proper sense' and considers Anglican holy orders to be wholly worthless. Who knows what spiritual bile Rome spills against Calvinists, Baptists, Greek Orthodox, Muggeltonians, Seventh Day Advetists et al....

30 August 2006 at 21:43  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

anon 5;59
Says more about you than him............
For some reason when I read your post I heard it in the voice of Kenneth Williams , I can imagine you saying...
"ooooooo takes one to know one"
" oooo Get her"
I presume you are a Catholic priest?

31 August 2006 at 00:14  
Anonymous Rick said...

" oooo Get her"
I presume you are a Catholic priest?

Actually no. I am not. Nor am I a homosexual like Kenneth Williams, nor an actor; and profoundly not anywhere near yourself on the low intellect scale.

31 August 2006 at 06:40  
Blogger Thomas Fuller said...

Forgive Mr Hitchens, for he knows not what he does.

31 August 2006 at 07:53  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

mr Fuller
Natural causes or was he driven to suicide having been "exposed"?

31 August 2006 at 11:26  
Blogger Thomas Fuller said...

He was discovered in a cupboard under the stairs by the cleaner, Mrs Phillips, who is traumatized. I cannot say anything more as the death is going to the coroner; though rumour has it that no note was found. The family are blaming you and Fruning Graplecard, and I can't say that civil proceedings won't follow.

31 August 2006 at 11:37  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Mr fuller,
Thank you for informing me, I shall pack a trunk and make a dash for the boat train to Calais before Scotland yard asks me to assist with their enquiries.

31 August 2006 at 12:23  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

Fuller, Hitchens, Grinning Fraplecard ...

For some time I have appreciated the humour in your repartee.

But now you are all beginning to read and sound like broken records.

You might like to reflect on the possibility your boring exchanges are interpreted by the majority as little more than the silly indulgences of puerile men who missed a cog or two somewhere along the way to maturity.

If this is the best you can do, then kindly bog off, and indulge your limp-wristed urges on your own (presumably) ignored blogs.

31 August 2006 at 15:55  
Anonymous Old Red Socks said...

MI, Infinitely preferably to your own demented BNP conspiracy rantings that somehow contrive to elude His Grace's strictures about erudition and intelligence.

31 August 2006 at 17:08  
Blogger Cranmer said...

His Grace had been wondering when to intervene, and, alas, the hour is upon us.

Gentlemen, intelligence and erudition, with humour if appropriate, are indeed the prerequisites for contributions to this venerable blog.

If one can do theology or philosophy, or even politics, one is most welcome. Inane chit-chat, of the sort one may encounter in the public house or at gatherings of the Women's Institute, is not at all encouraged here.


31 August 2006 at 17:16  
Blogger istanbultory said...

His Grace has made a most timely intervention.
Although I wager that the Women's Institute deal not only in mundane chit-chat but are on occassion prone to grasp the zeitgeist and dissect it with a flourish.

For those who would wittingly wallow in the sin of digression... take heed and repent!

31 August 2006 at 19:20  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Mission impossible

"For some time I have appreciated the humour in your repartee.

"You might like to reflect on the possibility your boring exchanges are interpreted by the majority as little more than the silly indulgences of puerile men who missed a cog or two somewhere along the way to maturity.

So am I/we to infer that you enjoy puerile humour in small doses?
If you could let us all know just how much puerility you can stand than maybe some of us could make an effort to accomodate you.

31 August 2006 at 20:11  
Blogger Fruning Graplecard said...

If you had not ignored my blog Mr Impossible, you may have noticed that I had picked up the Boruc story before anyone else did, and have been quoted on other important political blogs in relation to other stories, most recently, Ian Dale and Guido.

At least I not only have a blog, but also sufficient savvy to know when a serious issue requires a serious reply. Occasionally, a daft remark here or there - but on the whole the intent of my own contributions is that they are readable, relevant and heuristically valuable.

You somehow want to shut down an avenue of expression which is not commensuarate with your rather po-faced take on it all. Sorry. For you, that is.

31 August 2006 at 20:41  
Blogger Robin Hoodie said...

One nation under God?
How ridiculous! Surely not?

31 August 2006 at 20:53  
Anonymous SE said...

+Cranmer was, as expected correct.
Dale's censorship of Conserative critical posts has commenced.

1 September 2006 at 02:14  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

Mr. Fruning, please be informed, I have not ignored your blog. It does indeed contain some notable postings. Your intelligence is obvious, but -- how can I put it? -- why waste it spending time dressing the mythical 'Aubrey' in a basque and black-tops?

Mr. "Peter Hitchens" I have already answered your 8:11 PM post by the construction of my original, 3:55 PM post. You have no obligation to accommodate my wishes, but I retain the right to complain when irreverences begin to pollute the pages of any blog I attend, to such an extent, normal debate is interrupted. [see URL link in Mr. fuller's 7:53 AM post]

"old red socks," you write: Infinitely preferably to your own demented BNP conspiracy rantings that somehow contrive to elude His Grace's strictures about erudition and intelligence

It is clear you have had this bottled up in you for quite some time. I trust you feel a little better now you have shown your true (Trotskyist?) colours. Kindly point to the "demented BNP conspiracy rantings" you allege to have identified. If you cannot, then you are little more than a Marxist Dupe ... even if you think you are a conservative with a small 'c'.

I (and many others) think it is people like you who are responsible for political extremism, and it therefore people like you who will have to be decisively dealt with. You'll defend the rights of the Socialist Worker's Party and Islamist Groups to demonstrate, provocatively, on our streets, yet waste not one second condemning a British political party that in truth does not conform to your blind stereotype.

I shall therefore dedicate this quote to you old red socks:

His honour rooted in dishonour stood,
And faith unfaithful kept him falsely true.

-Alfred Lord Tennyson

1 September 2006 at 05:28  
Anonymous (Quivering in his) Old Red Socks said...

My Dear MI,

I must proffer unreserved apologies and deplore my own lapse in perspicacity. You are, without a shadow of doubt, a glorious self-parodying wind-up merchant.

Only such could so vehemently refute charges of demented BNP ranting and then, but a few lines later, opine

"it [is] therefore people like you who will have to be decisively dealt with..."

Magical. Is there the remotest posssibility that, after ten seconds, you might self-destruct?

1 September 2006 at 08:18  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Veritably, Mr. Impossible's declaration to the effect that "...therefore people like you who will have to be decisively dealt with..." while displaying this gentleman's customary economy of expression does betray a hint of menace unworthy of those who would seek to contribute erudition to this learned and honourable blog.

But, and this is worth stressing (in respect of the mutual non-aggression pact between Mr. Impossible and I that was concluded on a previous thread), we must really abide by His Grace's injunction to divest ourselves of the vice of digression and return ourselves to rigorous analysis of the issue at hand.....

1 September 2006 at 08:46  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Quite so, Mr GC, quite so.

1 September 2006 at 09:08  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

11 seconds ... and still counting.

socks ... you will doubtless read into statements, whatever suits your prejudices; and those you have already made abundantly clear.

You have already been asked to point to the "demented BNP conspiracy rantings" that you claimed exist in your 5:08 PM post. All Cranmer visitors will have noted your cynical attempt to deflect that request. You are without honour or principle.

I also charged ... it is people like you who are responsible for political extremism. Now, you can attempt to explain (preferably in less than 300 words) why this is not so.

gc ... self-proclaimed friend of Sir Norman Tebbit ... you smell like a country lane just negotiated by a large herd of Friesians.

The truth is, we have yet to witness any rigorous analysis by you, since you first introduced yourself. You think by formulae fed to you pre-packaged by others; you are as bigoted a person as anyone is likely to find on an erudite blog.

I also note from the 2nd para of your 7:20 PM post that you belong to that deluded category of 'nearly-men' who can see only good in the female gender. Perhaps you like being spanked; literally or emotionally? Yet another profound indication of your immature thinking.

I think that is enough of my time wasted on two devious and worthless characters.

By me refraining from making you two appear utterly foolish, yet again, the objectives of this blog are met.

1 September 2006 at 09:25  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

Warning: it is those on the political Left who routinely block Freedom of Expression:

The following are two paras extracted from this article published by the Communist Party of Great Britain (7th & 8th paras) as the complain about the behaviour of the Socialist Workers Party.

The SWP retort to this would seem to be that, while it agrees with the idea of freedom of expression in general, there are times when such a right has to be suspended. Such a methodology is essentially Stalinist. Walter Benjamin visited Moscow in December 1926-January 1927 and remarked that in its formative years the bureaucratic regime was “trying to bring about a suspension of militant communism … to depoliticise the life of its citizens as much as possible. On the other hand, its youth is being put through ‘revolutionary’ education … which means that they do not come to revolution as an experience, but only as a discourse” (W Benjamin Moscow diary London 1986, p53).

Ditto the SWP, which agrees with freedom of expression in theory but denies it in practice. From another perspective, I am fresh out of college, interested in revolutionary thought but with a ferment of artistic ideas running around my head. Looking at the SWP through the prism of the Danish controversy, it is unlikely that I would see this organisation as an appealing prospect, despite the ‘general’ guarantee of my artistic freedom. Or, if I did join and the SWP initially found my creative work to its taste, I might still be looking over my shoulder if the ‘political’ line changed to clash with my own output. Again, shades of Stalinism.

1 September 2006 at 09:51  
Anonymous old compassionate red socks said...

I read a report some days ago that Pope Pius attempted to exorcise (from afar) the demons that had apparently taken control of Adolf Hitler. The attempt by His Holiness failed.

In the spirit of the topic at hand perhaps, Pope Benedict, Frau Merkel, Mr. gc, and my humble self (even His Grace?) might make an ecumenical attempt with Mr. Impossible.

Poor deluded and distressed soul: he so desperately needs our prayers.

1 September 2006 at 10:26  
Blogger istanbultory said...

One can but second the cogent remarks of my fellow persecuted brother, old compassionate red socks. I will observe further that Mr. mission Impossible's previous 2 posts are entirely irrelevant to the question posed by the Venerable Cranmer. Thus, they do not merit further comment on my part.

Let us return to the issue at hand free of any further distraction.In her private audience with Pope Benedict XVI on 28 Aug German Chancellor Angela Merkel almost certainly discussed Croatia's rapid accession to EU membership which has been a core aim of German (and Vatican) foreign policy since the dissolution of socialist Yugoslavia. One suspects that Frau Merkel will not have dealt with the fact that the Croatian state and Croatian state Radio in particular are effectively under the control of Roman Catholic institutions.The country has Concordats with both Roman Catholic and Serbian Orthodox churches but the bulk of state financial support is extended to the Catholics.

Of the 400,000 Serbs deported in the 1990s, less than half have returned. All religious instruction in Croatian schools is of a decidely Roman Catholic nature. Rome has now regained most of her property seized by the Communists, but the Serbian Orthodox are continually frustrated.

"Europe" was on the agenda of their bilateral discussions.I do wonder if the pope and frau Merkel had an opportunity to discuss the pressing issue of Croatia's non-Catholic minority and the oppression which it faces, especially given that all of this unpleasantness violates the Copenhagen Criteria to which all aspirant EU member states must adhere....

1 September 2006 at 10:57  
Anonymous Rick said...

Perhaps gentleman you will note that Croatia's friends in Germany are essentially Bavarian, most probably CSU. Outside that constituency there is no interest whatsoever.

Frau Merkel has a party enjoying 30% support in the latest polls and is in coalition with the SPD which garners a full 27%; an upcoming election in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern this month - a state where Frau Merkel holds a parliamentary seat - is anticipating 37% turnout - a record low.

The problems facing Germany are not being faced by the ruling administration; and it is more likely that Frau Merkel is discussing the Pope's visit to Germany a week Saturday and what assistance he can offer German negotiators in seeking the release of captured Israeli soldiers.

1 September 2006 at 11:13  
Anonymous Ulster Man said...

In 1995 Croatian President Franjo Tudjman spoke to his generals: "Close all the ways out and then destroy them. This has to be finished in 8 days maximum. We have the support of Germany, the USA and NATO".

In August 1995 50,000 Croatian troops stormed the Krajina, with an additional force of 10,000 Croatian and 15,000 Muslim troops. American F-16 planes provided support by bombing communication centres in Pljesavica and Djelavac.

When population census records from 1991 and 2001 are compared, it turns out that about half a million Serbs have disappeared from today's Croatia. Croatia became the ethnically "purest" territory of the former Yugoslavia, and is totally Catholic controlled.

1 September 2006 at 11:49  
Anonymous Rick said...

Yes and Tudjman was a fascist with his Ustasha comrades .........and his US linkman was Peter Galbraith son of J K Galbraith

1 September 2006 at 11:58  
Anonymous Ulster Man said...

The German plan to regain their losses of the first and second world wars in Central and South Eastern Europe is now almost complete. The Czechs have been split from the Slovaks (the German puppet State during the Second World War guilty of horrendous trading of Jews to the Nazis) the break up of Yugoslavia into the same Nazi friendly statelets which existed between 1941 and 1945, the abolition of 15 central banks and currencies and the effective destruction of the constitutions of 25 previously sovereign democratic nations - now controlled by Germany in the EU.

The uprising of the terrorist Albanian KLA in Kosovo was preceded by the establishment of a base for the German Secret Services in Tirana (Albania) - just as the illegal recognition of the State of Croatia by Germany in 1991 was preceded by ten years of subversive activities inside Yugoslavia by the those same secret services.

Perhaps the most hilarious example of the Anglo Saxon ignorance was President George W Bush talking in the context of Lebanon of "Islamic Fascists" when the USA and Germany blindly supported the avowedly Islamic Fascist Kosovo Liberation Army which welcomed NATO troops in Kosovo as "Fascists".

1 September 2006 at 12:17  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Exactly, Mr. Ulsterman.

Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo, the Holy See's Secretary for Relations with States, said after talks with Croatian Foreign Minister Kolinda Grabar Kitarovic in June 2006 that the Vatican had always advocated Croatia's full membership in the European Union and that Croatia's society could be perceived only as a European society. He added that the Vatican was not an EU member but that it could freely express its position, and that the Catholic Church was present in every EU member-state.

Despite the slow return of ethnic Serbs and lack of respect for their rights, in July 2006 Elmar Brok, chairman of the European Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee said that it was still possible for Croatia to join the European Union in 2009.....

1 September 2006 at 12:22  
Anonymous Rick said...

and the effective destruction of the constitutions of 25 previously sovereign democratic nations - now controlled by Germany in the EU.

I really don't think Germany controls anything..........it is in a structural crisis itself........if you were au fait with modern Germany you would see that notions of Germany controlling anything in Europe are fancies of yesteryear........German Angst is immense

1 September 2006 at 13:09  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Rick is doubtless right to observe the deep-rooted pessimism, economic stagnation and political paralysis which seem to pervade modern Germany.

German foreign policy post-1989 remains firmly based on multilateralist instincts but has tended to be extremely activist in eastern Europe, with policy to Croatia being a singularly important component of a more high-profile approach. Relations between Germany and Poland and the Czech Republic have also been strained of late. None of this reflects well on Germany's image....

1 September 2006 at 14:00  
Anonymous Rick said...

None of this reflects well on Germany's image....

That is very true

1 September 2006 at 14:41  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older