Constitutionless

Japan just voted for its Peacexit - or is it Democracexit? After securing a 2/3 majority in the House of Councillors, Shinzo Abe is getting closer to his lifetime dream: undoing the nation's postwar constitution and restoring the fundamentals of the imperial rule that disgraced it.

The UK doesn't have a constitution to protect, and it doesn't have a clue how to cope with the Brexit mess that left the whole political spectrum in shambles. David Cameron, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage, Jeremy Corbyn, all lost face, leaving to Mother Theresa May the tough job of caring for untouchable issues. At least, something is working in the UK this Summer: Sadiq Khan got elected, and the Chilcot Report exposed Tony Blair's responsibility in George W. Bush's Iraq imposture**.

Europe doesn't have a constitution, but it remains ruled from 101 Constitution Ave NW, Washington, DC 20001, the headquarters of Goldman Sachs, a company that gave us Draghi, and is hiring Barroso. Mario Draghi is certainly not Jean-Claude Trichet, Jose-Manuel Barroso is certainly not Jacques Delors, and Hollande is not even Giscard. Where's there's no political will...

No constitution? No problem: 101 Constitution's so easy to learn! Just dial Constitution 101, and ask for instructions from Goldman Sachs

Israel doesn't have a constitution, and it helps when you want to circumvent the rule of international law. In the 2008 and 2012 tradition (see "Deja vu all over again"), I expect Bibi Netanyahu to seize the US election year opportunity and further fuel tensions with Palestine. It would only take a few skirmishes to start the fireworks... who wants to bet?

blogules 2016
Since 2003, nonsensical posts about noncritical issues in nonenglish (get your blogules transfusion in French)
NEW: join blogules on Facebook!!! and Twitter (@stephanemot, @blogules)

Follow Us

* "Japan votes Peacexit - if not Democracexit" Seoul Village 
** reminder: "Invasion of Iraq: The Bush Legacy in 3 Impostures"

WikiLeakified

blogule's Agence Fausse Presse managed to snatch from PeepeeLeaks a few top secret cables where several US envoys deliver their impressions about key world leaders:

- Nicolas Sarkozy : "A paranoid in love with the States, or rather obsessed with the need to be loved by Tom Cruise. Instills terror into his staff : no one dares criticize him, and he's been replacing them one by one by Oompas Loompas who call him "Your Highness", "Your Greatness", or "Dear Ladder". Now Sarkozy only refers to himself in third person."

- Silvio Berlusconi : "Like many statesmen, an eternal teenager obsessed with new conquests... which in spite of compulsive plastic surgery he needs to pay for. Told us to kiss Don Vito hello, and to thank him for his last delivery of Ukrainian blondes."

- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad : "A narcissic psychopath lunatic. Likely to be good friends with our President George W. Bush."

- Tony Blair : "Very friendly but on the threshold of annoyingness. Insisted to show us his self-flagellation stigmata. Asked again for that seance with Churchill promised by the POTUS."

- Vladimir Putin : "When he enters the room, temperature drops 20 degrees. Each of his muscles is so tensed he constantly needs to tune them like piano strings... quite an experience: his face doesn't move one bit, but every five to six seconds you can hear a 'pling' or a 'plong'."

- Muammar al Gaddafi : "Couldn't meet him: the elevator got stuck between the 4th and 5th floors of his tent."

- Hu Jintao / Wen Jiabao : "The former has the sense of humor of a prison door. No wonder he wants to get rid of the latter, a brillant man with a constant smile on his face. But last time I had tea at Wen's (as usual a very pleasant afternoon), I found out back home that he'd planted about eight hundred acupuncture needles all over my back."

- Saddam Hussein : "Didn't understand why we got rid of him after all he did for us and we for him. Didn't like our farewell gift, a beautiful Lanvin hemp necktie."

blogules 2010 - initially published on blogules VF as "WikiLeakefie".

Herman van Rompuy, haikus, humor and religion

The new President of the European Council is praised for his talents as a negociator and haiku writer as well as for an undisputable sense of humor. What bothers me is the main reason why Herman van Rompuy probably got the job.

I strongly campaigned against once front runner Tony Blair. Less for his role in the invasion of Iraq than for his belonging to the clique of fundamentalists who, after ruining World peace along with their Islamist friends, are deliberately turning Europe into their new playground (see "Tony Blair : a newborn fundamentalist President of Europe ?"). But I'm afraid this man could be as dangerous for democracy in Europe.

If HVR passes for a moderate who "hates extremists", he is in favor of a fusional relationship between politics and religion.

For starters, he belongs to CD&V (Christen-Democratisch en Vlaams), Belgium's Flemmish Christian-democratic party. European-style Christian Democracy usually promotes rather balanced platforms for politics, economics and social affairs, but fundamentally, they mix religion with politics and expose a vision of politics somehow superseded by religion, which is incompatible with the concept of secular, republican democracy. Yet at this stage, mentioning fundamentalism would be more than far-fetched.

I nonetheless observe that Mr Van Rompuy, who regularly fights with Luc Van den Brande over the political future of Belgium, supports his CD&V colleague at the European level, where this ayatollah efficiently undermines democracy by promoting Intelligent Design.

Furthermore, our moderate who "hates extremists" is himself using rather radical terms, usually associated with ultra-conservative Christians in Europe. Turkish media didn't forget his outburst during the debate on Turkey's candidacy for the EU : "it's a matter of fact that the universal values which are in force in Europe, and which are also the fundamental values of Christianity, will lose vigour with the entry of a large Islamic country such as Turkey".

Everybody knows Herman Van Rompuy majored Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Catholic University of Leuven) in economics, but he also majored in philosophy. And there again, he tends to blur lines.

Van Rompuy maintains he never campaigned for the job but that's not true. On October 19, 2009, exactly one month before his nomination, he delivered a conference on the last encyclical of a certain Benedict XVI about the Church's social doctrine.

I cannot help but think about John McCain giving a conference at the Discovery Institute ahead of his own campaign, as a guarantee to US theocons (see ""Change is coming" and Mac "will fight", but for whom and for what ?").

In this conference ("Conférence de Herman Rompuy sur Caritas in Veritate", on LaCroix.com), economics / philosophy expert Van Rompuy talks about love and humanism, but also and first of all, just like Pope Benedict XVI, about politics :

. "No political regime, no social organization and no economic system can claim the realization of ultimate salvation" - all this is nothing compared to faith and religion
. "According to Social Doctrine, the political community is at the service of civil society where it originated. This civil society represents the sum of all relationships and goods, either cultural or associative, which are relatively independent from politics and economy" - politics cannot rule over everything, and a superior power somehow needs to be materialized
. "The principle of subsidiarity is binding, each human should have the opportunity to contribute to the construction of well being and prosperity. Yet, the difficult question is to know how today, we can achieve this principle within an unified Europe and in a globalized world where more and more decisions are taken at a level actual individuals cannot reach, even as they know how they condition his well being and prosperity, his work and his responsibilities" - BTW: did you notice that religions are not only relevant when it comes to essential issues, but also perfectly organized to cope with subsidiarity issues, and to reach each and every individual ?
. HvR then directly pushes Benedict's agenda, using the core message of his encyclical : "there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago." - the new President of Europe stops here his quote, but Ratzie and his followers perfectly know what comes right after that sentence : "Such an authority would need to be regulated by law, to observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, to seek to establish the common good, and to make a commitment to securing authentic integral human development inspired by the values of charity in truth" (...) It would also "require the construction of a social order that at last conforms to the moral order, to the interconnection between moral and social spheres, and to the link between politics and the economic and civil spheres, as envisaged by the Charter of the United Nations". So like Ratzinger, Van Rompuy wants the lines "between moral and social spheres" to disappear.

I already denouced the imposture of Benedict XVI, a hardcore fundamentalist undermining, beyond Evolution itself, centuries of evolution for the Church from a Medieval mob to a modern, compassionate religion. If you purge elaborate and nice sounding circonvolutions from his texts, they always come down to the same message : let's go back to the time when religion was at the center of education, science and politics, the very attributes of democracy, that corrupt system (i.e. "Le mauvais plan de Benoît XVI"). Watch him exulting at the FAO meeting the other day : the "true world political authority" he envisions welcomes religious authorities as star constituents. In this quest, he already had the support of people like Ban Ki-moon at the UNO : very discreet regarding his own faith, and always pretending to be neutral in that field, Secretary General BAN pushes inter-religious dialogs INSIDE institutions he is reponsible for. European secular organizations were likewise appalled to see similar oddities recently performed in official EU meeting places.

Now Herman van Rompuy joins Barroso, van den Brande and company as an eminent element of the wedge strategy of fundamentalists against truly democratic European institutions.

I'm curious to see if this Christian democrat will be more "democrat" or "Christian" when it will come to defend European Court of Human Rights against the next attacks from fundamentalists*...

I wish I investigated a little bit earlier to expose the Herman Achille Van Rompuy imposture.

At this stage, I didn't find anything suspect against Cathy Ashton, alias Lady Catherine, a.k.a Baroness Ashton of Upholland, the EU's first High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

blogules 2009 - initially published on blogules (V.F.) "Herman van Rompuy, les haikus, l'humour et la religion"

* see "European Court of Human Rights slams fundamentalists (a)cross Italia and Europe", "Traditions, conservatismes, obscurantismes et fondamentalismes"

European Court of Human Rights slams fundamentalists (a)cross Italia and Europe

"The State was to refrain from imposing beliefs in premises where individuals were dependent on it" : so Italy will have to stop allowing crucifixes in courts or worse, public schools.

To support its sound decision*, the European Court of Human Rights specifically mentioned arguments traditionnally used by religious conservatives : the right for the parents to educate their children according to their own beliefs, the right for the childre to freedom of religion.

The plaintiff, Mrs Soile Lautsi, a Finnish-born Italian mother, will receive EUR 5,000 in damages. But this is not about money, and all partisans of secularism across Europe should rejoice : mixing religious signs with public service clearly insults to the very essence of democracy and republican values. Judge Luigi Tosti also fought for this vital cause, putting his career in jeopardy because he refused to enter in court rooms featuring a crucifix.

Once again, this is not about atheism vs. religion, but about democracy vs. fundamentalism AND about religion vs. fundamentalism. Secularism is the only way to protect at the same time democracy AND religion from their common and most lethal enemy.

Needless to say, the Lega Nord, the Re-Reformed Church of Chief Fundamentalist Benedict XVI, and other fundamentalists from all confessions** didn't welcome such resistance before the probable inauguration of one of them at the first continental leader (see "Tony Blair : a newborn fundamentalist President of Europe ?").

Yesterday, Minister of "Education" Mariastella Gelmini tried to make crucifixes pass for "symboles of Italian tradition"... The usual neo-creationist trick : multiply smoke screens, ban from the vocabulary all religious reference, deny any hidden agenda / wedge strategy, and send coward, submarine strikes against science, education, and democracy (see cf "En finir avec l'Intelligent Design").

The battle is not over : Italy's Supreme Court revoked in 2004 a 2003 judgement banning crucifixes from schools and courts without bringing any legal justification, and the European Court of Human Rights must brace against furious attacks from fundamentalists, most likely using their usual proxies within European political spheres (i.e. Luc van den Brande).

This battle is not a new one, but it's now official and out in the open : like the US before, Europe fights for its very survival as a symbol of democracy against its worst enemies, imposters from within.


blogules 2009
also in French : "La Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme crucifie les fondamentalistes"

* "Communiqué du Greffier - Arrêt de chambre - Lautsi c. Italie (requête n° 30814/06)" - the English Version :

CRUCIFIX IN CLASSROOMS:
CONTRARY TO PARENTS’ RIGHT TO EDUCATE THEIR CHILDREN IN LINE WITH THEIR CONVICTIONS AND TO CHILDREN’S RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF RELIGION
Violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (right to education)
examined jointly with Article 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion)
of the European Convention on Human Rights
Under Article 41 (just satisfaction) of the Convention, the Court awarded the applicant 5,000 euros (EUR) in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
(...)
The State was to refrain from imposing beliefs in premises where individuals were dependent on it. In particular, it was required to observe confessional neutrality in the context of public education, where attending classes was compulsory irrespective of religion, and where the aim should be to foster critical thinking in pupils.

** I cannot imagine any better message for moderate Muslims struggling to eradicate fundamentalism across the world (i.e. most recently Al-Azhar University in Egypt banning the niqab, or the heated debate about "France, secularism and burqa").

ADDENDUM 20091104
I replaced the French version (below) by the English Version (above) :

CRUCIFIX DANS LES SALLES DE CLASSE : CONTRAIRE AU DROIT DES PARENTS D'ÉDUQUER LEURS ENFANTS SELON LEURS CONVICTIONS ET AU DROIT DES ENFANTS À LA LIBERTÉ DE RELIGION
Violation de l'article 2 du protocole n° 1 (droit à l'instruction) examiné conjointement avec l'article 9 (liberté de pensée, de conscience et de religion) de la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme.
En application de l'article 41 (satisfaction équitable) de la Convention, la Cour alloue 5 000 euros (EUR) à la requérante pour dommage moral.
(...)
"L'Etat doit s'abstenir d'imposer des croyances dans les lieux où les personnes sont dépendantes de lui. Il est notamment tenu à la neutralité confessionnelle dans le cadre de l’éducation publique où la présence aux cours est requise sans considération de religion et qui doit chercher à inculquer aux élèves une pensée critique".

Tony Blair : a newborn fundamentalist President of Europe ?

Unsurprisingly, Tony Blair came out in the open as a candidate for the Presidency of Europe.

The problem is that previously, he also came out in the open as a newly converted Catholic. Some - including yours truly - would rather say "born again fundamentalist".

After palling and praying around with a fundamentalist imposteur (George W. Bush), after courting a fundamentalist pope (Benedict XVI), The Right Honourable Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will be welcomed by people like fundamentalist Luc van den Brande, the man who a couple of years ago censored a report denouncing creationist / Intelligent Design lobbies at governmental levels across western Europe.

So this man can campaign on consensual and noble causes as much as he wants on his website (he just published "Technology for a Low Carbon Future" - tonyblairoffice.org), make no mistake : his job is to boost fundamentalism and to turn Europe into a safe haven for US style cults and megachurches.

Europe simply must not be represented by a Tony Blair - Jose Manuel Barroso ticket.

Other "political" news ? Former Solidarnosc Jerzy Buzek, the European Parliament's new President, is following the Lutherian Evangelical Church of Augsburg.

Amen.

Between reforms and indulgences - Blair and Sarkozy

I'd like to point out two key moves made by Tony Blair during his life. Two decisive acts of allegiance that may well explain a third one ; the most famous - allegiance to Bush and his suicidal crusade in Iraq. These two events didn't happen during his PM mandates but set a perfect frame around them :

- the first act of allegiance ? before taking power, and actually in order to take it : Blair made a pact with a curious devil named Ruppert Murdoch

- the second act of allegiance ? not long after leaving power : Blair clinched a deal with the most controversial Pope since WWII, to embrace the ultraconservative Roman Catholicism Benedict XVI dreams of restoring fundamentalism

As far as economy is concerned, Blair and Murdoch symbolise reforms and conservatism, but what strikes me most about Blair is the gap between his very pragmatic sense of reform and his very utopic mysticism... and Murdoch is not only obsessed by money but by the success of candidates with a messianic touch. This Citizen Kane didn't succeed with Pat Robertson in the late 80s, but earned his reputation of serial kingmaker with Tony and Dubya.

You want to keep an eye on Nicolas Sarkozy, a great admirer of Tony Blair the Reformer and Murdoch the Entrepreneur, a great friend of George W. Bush the Leader, a great echo to Ratzinger's theories about genetic determination or Europe's Christian heritage...

Di's is cast - When Harry met sandy

Prince Harry wants to fight. The boy doesn't want to end up like his dad, remembered as a ugly clumsy veggie wearing the kilt, sipping tea and playing polo. The boy loves the uniform. Any kind of uniform, as we previously noticed*.

"Wales" is allowed to join Iraq the day Tony Blair announces his withdrawal plan for the troops. As a clear message to the British Army : see, we are not gonna let you down - and with such a soft target, we sure are not gonna let your ennemies let you down either.

Princess Diana cared for the victims of landmines, his son decides to earn a different kind of respect in a sick shooting game, kicking some ass or camel in the desert.

Tu quoque, mi fili... Di's is cast.


* remember "When Harry met nazis" (20050116) ?

Red blogule to London calling... for trouble

Two days ago, 135 people were killed in a terror attack in Baghdad's Sadriya market. That one did make the headlines, unlike the other days, when terror claims only the equivalent of the 7/7 London bombings.
About the same day, many people were arrested in London in what appeared to be a plot to abduct and behead a muslim soldier. A great victory for counter terrorism being often followed by the revelation of a not so glorious news for the Government, I just sat and waited for it to pop up.
It didn't take long for UK's army to confess 15 minor soldiers had been sent to Iraq. Actually, underaged combattants happened to be one of the few disgraces lacking to Tony Blair's impressive collection. We'll have to scratch our heads to find the next one...

According to Saint Tony, 7/7 had nothing to do with Iraq and the invasion of Iraq had something to do with the war on terror.
According to me, Ruppert Murdoch had something to do with the election of Tony Blair and Fox News' broadcasting of the invasion of Iraq as "War On Terror".

Tony will leave power soon ; the next guy, either Gordon Brown or David Cameron, will also have to sign a pact with the Devil to get elected ; and the "Winner" will face a new kind of terror : a wave of youngsters trained in Iraq and ready to spread chaos across the United Kingdom and Europe.
They have the European citizenship and they are from all origins, not necessary "foreign". They won't need to strike with a bomb in a major touristic area to get their point. Any small IED (Improvised Explosing Device) or any single shot in any neighborhood will do. Random abductions and killings will make anyone feel insecure. Terror at its simplest, purest and scariest level.
Chirac and Blair gone, Merkel taking her marks, let's see what kind of leadership emerges in Europe. The fundamentalists may want to play a role in the coming elections : Europeans would be inspired not to put a Dubya look alike in front of them.

Red blogule to Dubya - "Islamo-fascists" don't enjoy a monopoly

Once again, George W. Bush uttered the "islamic fascist" expression. This time, it was all about a Heathrow plot uncovered at the most convenient time : Bush and Blair are said to have talked about this issue a couple of days earlier but didn't warn their partners, which means either they didn't care for them, or the emergency wasn't that critical. Anyway, Bush and Blair clearly needed a terror fix to go back up in the polls and to give some support to Olmert, also going down for his military failures. The message : war on terror is difficult but it has to be lead whatever the cost ; it's a noble cause, a moral one. Significantly, Jacques Chirac just used the term "immoral" to warn the US : not reaching a ceasefire agreement would be "immoral"... a clear echo to the messianic War on Terror propaganda.
This is not the first time Bush uses the "Islamic fascism" expression* ; in a typically Karlrovish move, he's counterattacking with the very words that are being relevantly** used against his Administration and now protégés.


* see "Red blogule to the first amendment - Land of Opportunity for Nazis, Land of Plenty for fascism" (20051016).
** see "Let's face it they're fascists" (20040527)

Red blogule to pro-life / pro-death pro-teges

How many black people among how many dead people down in the South ? Thousands ? Yet a fraction of the country cries over the death of one single individual in Arlington, VA. White supremacists and Christian fundamentalist expect a "good" successor to William Hubbs Rehnquist, praised by his November 2000 Protégé (and pro-life+pro-death-penalty pal*) King Dubya for "improving the delivery of justice for the American people".
John Roberts was not supposed to take the helm that soon but the US should be very careful who will replace Sandra Day O'Connor. Edith "Joy" Brown Clement, a woman from 'bama with a New Orleans pedigree, would be the perfect post-Katrina nominee but for his potential last shot and one year before key elections, W needs to send a much stronger message to his "base"**.
Besides, since she's still sitting in Louisiana, Brown may have a not so Clement word to say during the inquiry about Katrina's aftermath.

* "pro-life" people tend to be "pro-death", but there's nothing funny about it
** Speaking of which... Newsweek just published in their 20050901 edition the mild extract of my 20050708 blogule on London bombings I sent them : "President Bush keeps talking about good vs evil (...) - Tony Blair keeps talking about attacks against civilization... but such speeches are music to the ears of fundamentalists. What these leaders need to protect is not their own "way of life" but the basic rights of moderate majorities under the spell of extremist minorities."

Red blogule to deniers

Dubya doesn't mind Karl taking a leak.
Tony doesn't see any link whatsoever between Iraq and 7/7.
Ariel doesn't understand how his Gaza trick could terminate the peace process.
The fact is Rove deliberately crossed the line.
The fact is Blair deliberately betrayed his fellow citizens.
The fact is Sharon deliberately sticks to his usual hardline : he turned the Gaza strip into an unmanageable ghetto, getting rid of it will unknot the demographic dilemma for Israeli radicals, and the inevitable failure of "independant Gaza" will end all talks about Cisjordania (not to mention Jerusalem).
The fact is no one can stop them as they keep insulting History.
Shame on terrorists, but furthermore shame on those who were supposed to eradicate terror.

Red blogule to Bush's terrorist training camps

Even if, this time again, the bombs didn't strike the US, the landscape looks terrible : propaganda, torture, gulags, illegal abductions on foreign soil and now journalists in prison... George W. Bush's Amerika looks everyday more like Kim Il-Sung's North Korea.
As terror strikes London like Baghdad any given day, as Bosnia / Chechnya veteran fighters start messing with what's left of Afghanistan, one can only imagine how long the World will pay for the US historical suicide in Iraq. Thanks to Uncle Sam, today Iraq is a much easier training camp for foreign terrorists than 1980s Afghanistan, 1990s Bosnia or 2000s Chechnya.
Bush keeps talking about good vs evil and the use of force to retaliate - Blair keeps talking about attacks against civilization... but such speeches are music to the ears of fundamentalists. What these leaders need to protect is not their own "way of life" but the basic rights of moderate majorities under the spell of extremist minorities.
After this awful wake up call in the deadest middle of the G8 meeting, will the World eventually admit how wrong that war was ? Back then, Iraq had nothing to do with terror, and Saddam was more under stronger control than ever (even he wouldn't have performed that much destruction that quickly) - a smarter approach was possible and almost under way. The US is not only wasting people and key ressources in Iraq ; it keeps fueling the extremists with more energy. Off course Iraq shouldn't be abandoned now, but the World would be safer without this unnecessary front.
Removing the Talibans was a true war on terror, but the right way to fight terror was and still remains at its very roots : solving the Palestine issue (following the footprints and roadmaps of moderate 1995 leaders), supporting the moderates versus the fanatics and moreover eradicating the very world poverty G8 members were supposed to meet for...

White blogule to "Paris 2020"

The year of the Trafalgar bicentennial, the year when Saint Tony reached the European throne, the year France said merde to Europe, how could Paris win over London for the 2012 Olympics ?
Paris has to wait at least after New York 2016 : (ex-) Europe can't possibly get two Olympic Games in a row and the Lords of the Rings cannot offer more than three consecutive gifts to non-US televorus popcornicum vulgaris. Dubya's successor is a sure winner in 2009, but he'll also need a second mandate to fully enjoy the show... and if Hillary is not that one, she can always claim part of the success (exhibit A : a token for attending Singapore 2005 board meeting).
If Paris were eventually awarded the 2032 Games, Chirac could be celebrated for the centennial of his birth as a turn of the millenium Coubertin breathing to his last gasp the spirit of Olympism : "the important thing in the Baghdad 2028 Olympic Games is not to win, but to participate", citius, altius, fortius, fabius...