Tag Archives: Barack Hussein Obama

Like hippos in a china store

The government of Hungary is considering kicking U.S. chargé d’affaires André Goodfriend out of the country. It is of the view that the American diplomat is poking his nose into matters that are none of his business.

The country’s State Attorney has asked the foreign ministry to initiate stripping Goodfriend of diplomatic immunity so this office can prosecute him based on a legal action started by Hungary’s taxation administration chief, Ildikó Vida.

The foreign minister, Péter Szijjártó, said he’s sending an official request to the State Department. Whether he’ll succeed is more than questionable: the stuffed shirts at Foggy Bottom would go through the roof and describe Hungary’s request impertinent to nth degree, while President Barack Hussein Obama is expected to go ballistic.

Except: if the Americans, as is expected, tell the Hungarians to go and fly a kite, Goodfriend will be flying first: he Hungarian government will designate him as persona non grata, and if they are kind and generous, Goodfriend will have 48 hours to pack up and leave. If not, he’ll have to leave forthwith.

First, a bit of a definition: a chargé d’affaires represents his or her nation in the country she or he is accredited to. That means, this diplomat has to receive le agrément from the host government (for whatever reason, French is still the language of diplomacy). This means that the host government can always withdraw its agreement with the diplomat’s continued stay.

The chargé d’affaires enjoys the same privileges and immunities as a regular ambassador. In most cases, the chargé d’affaires only serves on a temporary basis, while the ambassador is away. Still, these diplomats can be appointed for longer periods of time, something that seems to have happened in Goodfriend’s case. As diplomatic protocol rules, a chargé d’affaires could be appointed also when the two countries disagree on something and they prefer to be represented by lower-ranked diplomats, basically in order to save face.

Now that we have the niceties behind us, here’s the scoop: several governments’ diplomatic representatives (including Canada’s) went public with their masters’ displeasure about what they described as corruption running amok in the countries where they are stationed. Not that it had the desired effect. General populations in these (mostly post-communist) countries are perfectly aware that their governments’ standards of honesty and decency are nothing to write home about. Still, they detest it when foreigners wag their fingers and tell them this isn’t cricket.

In the Hungarian case, the country’s chief taxation official, Ms. Vida, and five of her subordinate officers were denied entry visas into the U.S. this past November, based directly on accusations of corruption as expressed by none other than Goodfriend himself. Ms. Vida described his statements as slanderous and defamatory and libellous drivel, but her prime minister, Viktor Orbán, said this wouldn’t be enough. Sue the bloody Yankee, he told Ms. Vida, or I’ll fire you.

Wonderful. Except you can’t sue a diplomat who’s protected by immunity. You can only ask her or his government for permission to strip her or him of that immunity, and if no agreement is forthcoming, you can kick her or him out.

And this is where it seems to be headed.

President Obama, whom most of the post-communist countries’ citizenry detest about the same they used to detest their communist leaders, didn’t help matters when he announced that in Hungary, in his esteemed opinion, the something he calls “civic society” is in danger. What he had in mind precisely remains unclear, but Hungarian officials figured out that the U.S. commander-in-chief was unhappy because they refused to blindly follow his lead and call Russia and Russian president Vladimir Putin all kinds of names.

That the Hungarians might have a reason for a more nuanced view is something Obama has never considered. In fact, he seems to be frightfully unaware of this.

On the other hand, post-communist countries have been up in arms lately. They have detected that U.S. embassies in their countries have been interfering with their internal affairs. They are quite sensitive about these things: they’ve had their share of being ordered about by the communist leadership in Moscow. Bad enough that the European Union bureaucracy has been trying to replace the communist economic community system with a similar structure of their own. Post-communist countries, one and all, view this kind of behaviour askance.

For example, the Czech Republic is livid because the U.S. embassy has been supporting (financially) a movement to teach Islam in Czech schools.

Now, Canada’s ambassador Otto Jelínek has joined forces with his U.S. and Norwegian colleagues, trying to tell the Czechs that corruption is bad. The Czechs are perfectly aware of what kind of swindlers and fraudsters they have in their government. But they still feel that young Jelínek would do better tending to his knitting or, even better, to his family business that produces the finest plum brandy (slivovice) in the world.

What angers them even more is the gall with which the Americans and Canadians invited the Norwegians to join them in the chorus of anti-corruption condemnation. The Czechs and the Norwegians have been at swords drawn lately. A Norwegian social worker has taken away children from a Czech family that was in the northern country, citing abuse, without providing single proof. The Czech government has been trying to reason with its Norwegian counterpart, to no avail, thus far. And these busy beavers are going to tell us how to behave? is the tenor of the Czech public reaction.

That the Americans didn’t notice they were entering a minefield is behaviour typical for this administration. That ambassador Jelínek, who speaks and reads and writes Czech, was not aware of the backlash this step would create in his parents’ homeland is beyond shameful.

And most of the post-communist countries’ public opinion agrees: the Americans don’t like Putin. Not that we love him. In fact, not that we love the Russian bear, period. But, they say, nobody, and least of all Obama, is going to tell us what to do, what to think, and how to act.

They’ve been there, done that, got the t-shirts.

To heck with the Americans. Let them eat cake. But Canada’s government – of all governments in the world – should know better.

Computer criminals will suffocate the world one day

We’re staring a Trojan horse in the face. Its name: computerization.

The North Korean government drove the message home rather forcefully the other day. Its computer gurus, hackers in unofficial lingo, broke into Sony Corporation’s internal computer networks wreaking havoc all over the place.

They had a good reason, too. Sony Corporation, in a frightfully stupid and typically Hollywood move, sponsored a new flick, to be known as The Interview. Its creative crowd thought it exceedingly and outrageously funny to base the plot on U.S. intelligence telling two American journalists about to talk with North Korea’s Beloved Leader (not my description, North Korea’s) that it would be useful for humanity if they went on and killed him.

A comedy, you know. Insert a laugh track here.

Whether Beloved Leader Kim Jong-Un took it personally isn’t known, not for the record, anyway. That his government did is obvious. They made it clear through the “independent” reporting of their mouthpiece, the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

While they denied any hacking of anybody, they also hinted Sony Corporation had to pay for its sin of laesa maiestas, the crime of violating their Beloved Leader’s majesty. That, you should know, is an offence against the dignity of a reigning sovereign. The Kim family is nothing if not a hereditary gang of sovereigns. Whether the Koreans like it or not.

Of course, so far as the denials go, the good old rule that says one shouldn’t believe any rumours until and unless they have been denied officially comes into force.

Anyhow, upon having its computer networks hacked, Sony went and pulled the film from distribution before it even hit the theatres.

Not that it did much harm to the viewing public. It must have been drivel to end all drivel. The move did obviously hurt Sony Corporation’s bottom line, but who cares, except for Sony Corporation and its shareholders, right? But Sony Corporation’s apparently shocking display of appeasement attracted the wrath of none other than U.S. President Barack Hussein Obama. We’re not going to be intimidated by any censors, not we, he thundered. Sony should have talked to me, he said, and I would have talked them out of this shameful (and shameless) surrender.

Considering this came from the chief censor himself (under the guise of political correctness), if there ever was a tragicomedy, this is it.

Let’s leave aside the minor detail of Sony replying it did talk to some very high-ranked White House officials, and the uncertainty of what has been actually said during the conversations, by whom and to whom.

It’s perfectly irrelevant for what’s going to follow.

And here it is: it is most unfortunate that most politicians and news outlets haven’t paid much attention to the sad fact that our world is in mortal danger.

Anybody and their dog, from the Taliban to al-Qaeda, from Hamas to any rogue state, can hire a young college geek for a few bucks and they would be more than happy to display their prowess by bringing down a bank or two. No need, even, to go as high as hiring Russia’s ex-KGB expert, Yevgeniy Valentinovich Kaspersky. This guy moved from the nefarious former Soviet espionage and security agency to start his own company. The Kaspersky Lab now offers all kinds of security software. Some say it beats hands down most of similar applications on the market these days. And it’s expensive. In twisted computer logic, this means Kaspersky’s capable of writing the most explosive hacking programs, too. Considering that his record shows he’d go anywhere where the money is, just imagine if any of the known (or unknown) terrorist groups decide they want to bring the world down.

Unimaginable?

How about this scenario: banks brought to a standstill, your credit or debit cards no longer working, your accounts emptied by persons unknown (unknown, that is, for the time being, and culprits identified when it’s too late). You would have to resort to cash, provided, that is, that you still have access to any of it. The cashiers in your favourite grocery stores would not be able to use their machines to add up the cost of your purchases. Most of them unaware of basic arithmetic operations, they would have to ask their great-grandparents to teach them how to use their fingers and toes to perform such basic tasks.

Let’s hope the abovementioned great-grandparents are still alive and remember what they heard many decades ago in Grade One.

One can develop this scenario ad nauseam, but one wouldn’t want to give Sony Corporation (or any other movie moguls, for that matter) any ideas for new (and realistically good) catastrophic movies.

Anyhow, that’s where we’re at right now, and we should thank God, whoever and wherever she may be, for the warning the North Koreans have given us.

A notepad and a piece of pencil, anyone?

Russia quite open about its Ukrainian “final solution”

 

Nothing beats giving away things that aren’t yours in the first place.

The Polish government has received a letter the other day. It came from Russian Duma (lower house of Russian parliament). It offered Poland five western Ukrainian regions: dear brothers, you’re free to go and get them.

To be precise: Russian Duma’s Deputy Speaker Vladimir Zhirinovskii has offered that Poland might as well annex the five western-most regions of Ukraine.

Not that such sentiment was unexpected: Zhirinovskii has been talking about the idea since the beginning of March.

But that he would send such a blatant invitation to the Polish government, on his office letterhead, to boot, to make sure the Poles treat it as an official offer, that’s what shocked the Poles no end.

Tomasz Nałęcz, advisor to Polish president Bronisław Komorowski, told the web site gazeta.pl his boss thought this must have come from a particularly sick mind.

Polish foreign affairs ministry spokesman Marcin Wojciechowski confirmed to the TVP network that, indeed, the letter had been received.

“It’s so weird nobody is taking it seriously,” Wojciechowski added.

Asked what reply might Zhirinovskii expect from the Poles, Wojciechowski told TVP that it would be a polite receipt that wouldn’t mention the topic at all.

Something like this:

Dear Sir,

Yours of … (fill in the date) at hand.

Thanks for your communication.

Sincerely, etc.

Here are the regions that Zhirinovskii describes as “non-Ukrainian”: Volyn, Lviv, Ternpyl, Ivano-Frankivsk, Rivno. All of them in Western Ukraine, all of them bound to other countries throughout their history.

A joke about these parts used to make rounds. Here’s how it went: there was a census going on, and officials knocked on an old guy’s door. Where were you born? Austro-Hungarian Empire. Where did you go to school? Czechoslovakia. Where did you get your apprenticeship papers? Poland. Which pension are you receiving now? Soviet. Man, said one of the census officials, you must have been moving all over the place, right? Me? asked the old guy. Not at all, I’ve never left Mukachevo in my life!

Call to vote

But, to get back to Zhirinovskii: in his letter, he suggested that Polish citizens ought to have a referendum to decide whether they want to annex those five regions. Not one word about asking the people who actually live there.

Democracy in action, so to speak.

According to Russian sources, Zhirinovskii didn’t stop there. He offered two other parts of Ukraine to Romania (Chernovtsy) and Hungary (Transcarpathian Mountains).

That would leave eastern Ukraine that would be annexed by Russia, and a basic rump that Zhirinovskii called “central Ukraine.”

Presidential advisor Nałęcz said Zhirinovskii’s letter is cause enough to have him thoroughly checked by a psychiatrist.

Of course, Poland is rather sensitive about any talk about annexations and redistributions. Her history is rich with such occurrences. The last one came courtesy Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. When Donald Tusk, Poland’s prime minister, had the gall to mention this in the presence of Russian president Vladimir Putin, he was in for a surprise: Putin went ballistic. He yelled, and publicly, too, that the Poles should keep their mouths shut, that they tore a piece of Czechoslovakia off on the day the Nazis invaded it. He bullied Tusk like nobody’s business.

So, it seems, the Russians are quite sensitive about this point, too, except, they take a dim view of anyone who reminds them of their past sins.

All of this follows, of course, on the heels of Russia’s annexation of Crimea. The official explanation, one that resembled Adolf Hitler’s explanations about his annexation of the so-called Sudetenland areas of former Czechoslovakia, said Russia just wanted to keep the poor Russians who live in Crimea safe.

The funniest part?

Crimea , if the Russians want to pull rank based on their view of history, hasn’t been Russian in the first place. It was annexed in the 18th by Russian Tsars.

An excursion into history

For all we know, Crimea used to be known as Tauric Khersonese (Peninsula) and it used to be part of Greece. Note, for example, that even today many of its local names remind all and sundry of their Greek origins: Sevastopol, Simferopol, for instance.

It became a multicultural paradise by the Middle Ages: its population consisted of Scythians (Scytho-Cimmerians, Tauri), Greeks, Romans, Goths, Huns, Bulgars, Kipchaks and Khazars.

Following these happy times, Crimea fell to Kievan Rus and partly, to a remarkable degree, to Byzantium. It became victim to the Mongol invasions afterwards (remember the Golden Horde, anyone?).

The Venetians and the Genovese would enter the picture in the 13th century, only to be replaced by the Crimean Khanate and the Ottoman Empire in the 15th to 18th centuries.

Have you detected any Russian presence yet?

It would come only with the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Empire in 1783.

Uneasy locals

People in these areas remember their history as if it was happening today. So, no wonder Crimean Tatars want a referendum about their future in the region. After all, one of the new Crimean government’s first steps was to ask the Tatars to move from some of the areas they had traditionally considered theirs.

Considering the Tatars had been living in Crimea long before any Russians even heard of the peninsula, no wonder.

No wonder, either, that the Tatars recalled what Josif Stalin did to them, deporting them to some of the harshest parts of the Soviet Union (in the deserts of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan). Stalin suspected some of them might have collaborated with the Nazis when the Germans got to Crimea during the Second World War.

Proof? Who needs proof? The Vozhdj (Leader) said so. Proof enough.

So, even less wonder, then, that the Tatars want some reassurances. President Putin’s recent admission that what Stalin had done to them wasn’t really cricket does not sound like reassurance enough.

A photograph has been making rounds on the web in recent days. It shows Russia’s Putin and U.S. president Barack Hussein Obama in conversation. Obama asks his Russian counterpart: “So, what are your plans now that you have annexed Crimea?” And Putin replies: “Well, come to think of it, Alaska used to be Russian, too.”

Scared yet?

And does that Zhirinovskii letter still come as a shock out of clear blue sky?

Weapon maker’s passing provokes strange memories

It took Mikhail Kalashnikov almost 60 years of his life to concede at long last that had he invented a lawnmower, his legacy would have been more acceptable.

As it is, he invented a submachine gun, named AK-47 (Avtomat Kalashnikova, and the two digits signify the year of the weapon’s creation).

Kalashnikov died recently, aged 94, and loving obituaries filled Russian media beyond comprehension. Not only that: even media in other countries, in places where they should have known better, were shedding bitter tears.

Is it Kalashnikov’s fault that his weapons became more than his country’s army’s arms of choice? Is it his fault that pictures of pre-teens holding his submachine guns have shown the world Muslim terrorism in action? Is it Kalashnikov’s fault that AK-47s have become weapons of choice for all and sundry terrorist groups all over the world? Is he guilty of the fact that Russian army is now looking for something better and has been selling these wonderful killing machines to anyone who pays cash, including firms in the U.S. that sell the AK-47 under the name of Saiga?

Is it Kalashnikov’s fault he was born in Russia and lived most of his life in the Soviet Union?

The answer to all these questions is a resolute no.

But here’s another question: is it becoming to mourn a guy who invented this kind of weapon in the first place?

The answer is not and should not be a straightforward yes, or a straightforward no. After all, how can we feel about scientists who developed the world’s first nuclear weapons? They thought they were saving humanity. Were they? Again, it’s neither yes, nor no.

But while asking these questions, one can’t help but expand them.

For example: was it becoming for the entire world to go into a frenzy of deeply-felt mourning upon the passing of Nelson Mandela?

The guy was a terrorist, after all. He never renounced violence against civilians. He acted upon his Marxist-Leninist beliefs with a vengeance. One of his closest associates, one Joe Slovo, had been a KGB colonel, hailing from the Baltic republics that, at the time, belonged to the Soviet Union. When apartheid in South Africa collapsed, it wasn’t due to Mandela’s efforts or, precisely, not due to his efforts only. The other guy who would get the Nobel Prize for the end of the regime, Frederik Willem de Klerk, South Africa’s last white president, seems to have become a persona non grata in the politically correct circles. One wonders if all world leaders and other members of the “lumpenintelligentsia” (see “lumpenproletariat” for explanation of the meaning of this word) will hurry to Johannesburg for HIS funeral once the inevitable happens. (He’s 77 now, after all.)

And yet, without de Klerk, who knows how it all would have ended.

Which doesn’t change the basic facts. Such as that de Klerk decided to deal with Mandela even though he was perfectly aware that the guy had been arrested and sentenced perfectly legally under every standard of the law for planning and operating actions of indiscriminate violence, including killings of innocent bystanders.

One should only speak well of the deceased?

Are you suggesting one should speak well of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the two guys who developed one of the most deadliest and dangerous ideologies under the sun?

Are you suggesting one should speak well of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin or Josef Vissarionovich Stalin, the two guys who changed the theories by Marx and Engels into living hell for hundreds of millions of people?

Are you suggesting one should speak well of Benito Mussolini or Adolf Hitler, the two guys who used the same basic ideology as Lenin and Stalin, only approaching it from different angles?

That Mandela changed his views and mellowed with time?

Would Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini or Hitler have changed their views and mellowed had they lived longer?

South Africa today is a much more dangerous place to live in (or, indeed, just visit) than it used to be. Criminal records say so. This just happens to be one of Nelson Mandela’s legacies.

The entire regime in that poor country is based on lies.

One wonders what’s going to happen when the inevitable happens and Desmond Tutu, another part of today’s South African regime, goes to hell at long last. He should, because he’s been lying through his teeth most of his life.

Want an example?

Here’s a personal experience from a news conference given by Tutu. Somebody asked whether he wasn’t afraid that Soviet-led troops (Cubans, with East German security advisers and Soviet commanders), currently in Angola, might make the relatively short trek to South Africa. It would have made geopolitical sense at the time because of South Africa’s geographic location.

The Archbishop didn’t hesitate to say South African people would be ecstatic to welcome Soviet-led troops and would display at least as much enthusiasm as people in Czechoslovakia displayed following the 1968 Soviet-led invasion of their country.

There were two people in the room who had experienced the exemplary lack of enthusiasm of the people of Czechoslovakia those days. So, we immediately questioned how dare a man of cloth lie like this. Whereupon Desmond Tutu stormed out of the room. His secretary would approach us as we were leaving. To apologize? Not in this world. To warn us to never try question his master again, and to tell us neither of us would be ever invited to a Desmond Tutu news conference again.

Still, one anticipates an outpouring of sympathy and whatnot once his days are numbered. Whether those sympathies would be sincere or not would be irrelevant.

What this is to say is we now live in a perfectly twisted world. Our social values have gone upside-down. Not as individuals, perhaps. But as societies we are perfectly willing to honour mass killers. As societies we frown upon all who dare question the Nobel Committee for bestowing its prizes on such murderers like Yassir Arafat or such nobodies like Al Gore or, Heavens forbid, Barack Hussein Obama.

What’s the world coming to?

Have a Merry Christmas, eh?