Bloggfęrslur mįnašarins, október 2011













Alltof oft skrifar fólk og talar eins og fyrirgefning vęri skylda manns.  En fyrirgefning er alls ekki sjįlfsagšur hlutur og kemur ekki samkvęmt kröfum og skipunum.  Mašur fyrirgefur ef hann getur.  Og vill.   

Eša verš ég aš fyrirgefa nķšingi sem hefur kvališ og pķnt son minn?  Verša foreldrar yfirleitt aš fyrirgefa glępamönnum sem hafa pķnt barn žeirra eša kannski tekiš lķf žess?? 
Menn vķsa oft ķ orš ķ bķblķu eins og žar vęri skylda okkar fest ķ lög: >Ef žér fyrirgefiš mönnum misgjöršir žeirra žį mun og fašir yšar himneskur fyrirgefa yšur. En ef žér fyrirgefiš ekki öšrum mun fašir yšar ekki heldur fyrirgefa misgjöršir yšar.
Persónulega finnst mér žetta hljóma eins og mašur ętti žį bara aš fyrirgefa svo guš ķ himnum fyrirgefi manni sjįlfum.  Ekki vęri nś mikil meining ķ žeirri sjįlfselskulegu “fyrirgefningu“.  Menn mega hafa sinn guš ķ friši, en orš žeirra gušs gilda ekki fyrir alla menn.
Hvaš ętti mašur aš fyrirgefa nķšingsskap oft?  Ķ hvert sinn sem sparkaš er ķ mann og gerandinn segir endurtekiš fyrirgefšu?  Ķ hvert sinn sem mann langar aš brjóta gegn öšrum??  Liggur ekki viss spilling ķ kenningunni um aš mašur verši og ętti aš fyrirgefa???




Vladimir Bukovksy, former Soviet dissident














Vladimir Bukovsky

Vladimir Bukovksy, the 63-year old former Soviet dissident, fears that the European Union is on its way to becoming another Soviet Union. In a speech he delivered in Brussels last week Mr Bukovsky called the EU a “monster” that must be destroyed, the sooner the better, before it develops into a fullfledged totalitarian state.

Mr Bukovsky paid a visit to the European Parliament on Thursday at the invitation of Fidesz, the Hungarian Civic Forum. Fidesz, a member of the European Christian Democrat group, had invited the former Soviet dissident over from England, where he lives, on the occasion of this year’s 50th anniversary of the 1956 Hungarian Uprising. After his morning meeting with the Hungarians, Mr Bukovsky gave an afternoon speech in a Polish restaurant in the Trier straat, opposite the European Parliament, where he spoke at the invitation of the United Kingdom Independence Party, of which he is a patron.

An interview with Vladimir Bukovsky about the impending EUSSR

In his speech Mr Bukovsky referred to confidential documents from secret Soviet files which he was allowed to read in 1992. These documents confirm the existence of a “conspiracy” to turn the European Union into a socialist organization. I attended the meeting and taped the speech. A transcript, as well as the audio fragment (approx. 15 minutes) can be found below. I also had a brief interview with Mr Bukovsky (4 minutes), a transcript and audio fragment of which can also be found below. The interview about the European Union had to be cut short because Mr Bukovsky had other engagements, but it brought back some memories to me, as I had interviewed Vladimir Bukovsky twenty years ago, in 1986, when the Soviet Union, the first monster that he so valiantly fought, was still alive and thriving.

Mr Bukovsky was one of the heroes of the 20th century. As a young man he exposed the use of psychiatric imprisonment against political prisoners in the former USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 1917-1991) and spent a total of twelve years (1964-1976), from his 22nd to his 34th year, in Soviet jails, labour camps and psychiatric institutions. In 1976 the Soviets expelled him to the West. In 1992 he was invited by the Russian government to serve as an expert testifying at the trial conducted to determine whether the Soviet Communist Party had been a criminal institution. To prepare for his testimony Mr Bukovsky was granted access to a large number of documents from Soviet secret archives. He is one of the few people ever to have seen these documents because they are still classified. Using a small handheld scanner and a laptop computer, however, he managed to copy many documents (some with high security clearance), including KGB reports to the Soviet government.

An interview with Vladimir Bukovsky
Listen to it here

Paul Belien: You were a very famous Soviet dissident and now you are drawing a parallel between the European Union and the Soviet Union. Can you explain this?

Vladimir Bukovsky: I am referrring to structures, to certain ideologies being instilled, to the plans, the direction, the inevitable expansion, the obliteration of nations, which was the purpose of the Soviet Union. Most people do not understand this. They do not know it, but we do because we were raised in the Soviet Union where we had to study the Soviet ideology in school and at university. The ultimate purpose of the Soviet Union was to create a new historic entity, the Soviet people, all around the globe. The same is true in the EU today. They are trying to create a new people. They call this people “Europeans”, whatever that means.

According to Communist doctrine as well as to many forms of Socialist thinking, the state, the national state, is supposed to wither away. In Russia, however, the opposite happened. Instead of withering away the Soviet state became a very powerful state, but the nationalities were obliterated. But when the time of the Soviet collapse came these suppressed feelings of national identity came bouncing back and they nearly destroyed the country. It was so frightening.

PB: Do you think the same thing can happen when the European Union collapses?

VB: Absolutely, you can press a spring only that much, and the human psyche is very resilient you know. You can press it, you can press it, but don’t forget it is still accumulating a power to rebound. It is like a spring and it always goes to overshoot.

PB: But all these countries that joined the European Union did so voluntarily.

VB: No, they did not. Look at Denmark which voted against the Maastricht treaty twice. Look at Ireland [which voted against the Nice treaty]. Look at many other countries, they are under enormous pressure. It is almost blackmail. Switzerland was forced to vote five times in a referendum. All five times they have rejected it, but who knows what will happen the sixth time, the seventh time. It is always the same thing. It is a trick for idiots. The people have to vote in referendums until the people vote the way that is wanted. Then they have to stop voting. Why stop? Let us continue voting. The European Union is what Americans would call a shotgun marriage.

PB: What do you think young people should do about the European Union? What should they insist on, to democratize the institution or just abolish it?

VB: I think that the European Union, like the Soviet Union, cannot be democratized. Gorbachev tried to democratize it and it blew up. This kind of structures cannot be democratized.

PB: But we have a European Parliament which is chosen by the people.

VB: The European Parliament is elected on the basis of proportional representation, which is not true representation. And what does it vote on? The percentage of fat in yoghurt, that kind of thing. It is ridiculous. It is given the task of the Supreme Soviet. The average MP can speak for six minutes per year in the Chamber. That is not a real parliament.

Transcript of Mr Bukovsky’s Brussels speech
Listen to it here

In 1992 I had unprecedented access to Politburo and Central Committee secret documents which have been classified, and still are even now, for 30 years. These documents show very clearly that the whole idea of turning the European common market into a federal state was agreed between the left-wing parties of Europe and Moscow as a joint project which [Soviet leader Mikhail] Gorbachev in 1988-89 called our “common European home

The idea was very simple. It first came up in 1985-86, when the Italian Communists visited Gorbachev, followed by the German Social-Democrats. They all complained that the changes in the world, particularly after [British Prime Minister Margaret] Thatcher introduced privatisation and economic liberalisation, were threatening to wipe out the achievement (as they called it) of generations of Socialists and Social-Democrats – threatening to reverse it completely. Therefore the only way to withstand this onslaught of wild capitalism (as they called it) was to try to introduce the same socialist goals in all countries at once. Prior to that, the left-wing parties and the Soviet Union had opposed European integration very much because they perceived it as a means to block their socialist goals. From 1985 onwards they completely changed their view. The Soviets came to a conclusion and to an agreement with the left-wing parties that if they worked together they could hijack the whole European project and turn it upside down. Instead of an open market they would turn it into a federal state.

According to the [secret Soviet] documents, 1985-86 is the turning point. I have published most of these documents. You might even find them on the internet. But the conversations they had are really eye opening. For the first time you understand that there is a conspiracy – quite understandable for them, as they were trying to save their political hides. In the East the Soviets needed a change of relations with Europe because they were entering a protracted and very deep structural crisis; in the West the left-wing parties were afraid of being wiped out and losing their influence and prestige. So it was a conspiracy, quite openly made by them, agreed upon, and worked out.

In January of 1989, for example, a delegation of the Trilateral Commission came to see Gorbachev. It included [former Japanese Prime Minister Yasuhiro] Nakasone, [former French President Valéry] Giscard d’Estaing, [American banker David] Rockefeller and [former US Secretary of State Henry] Kissinger. They had a very nice conversation where they tried to explain to Gorbachev that Soviet Russia had to integrate into the financial institutions of the world, such as Gatt, the IMF and the World Bank.

In the middle of it Giscard d’Estaing suddenly takes the floor and says: “Mr President, I cannot tell you exactly when it will happen – probably within 15 years – but Europe is going to be a federal state and you have to prepare yourself for that. You have to work out with us, and the European leaders, how you would react to that, how would you allow the other Easteuropean countries to interact with it or how to become a part of it, you have to be prepared.”

This was January 1989, at a time when the [1992] Maastricht treaty had not even been drafted. How the hell did Giscard d’Estaing know what was going to happen in 15 years time? And surprise, surprise, how did he become the author of the European constitution [in 2002-03]? A very good question. It does smell of conspiracy, doesn’t it?

Luckily for us the Soviet part of this conspiracy collapsed earlier and it did not reach the point where Moscow could influence the course of events. But the original idea was to have what they called a convergency, whereby the Soviet Union would mellow somewhat and become more social-democratic, while Western Europe would become social-democratic and socialist. Then there will be convergency. The structures have to fit each other. This is why the structures of the European Union were initially built with the purpose of fitting into the Soviet structure. This is why they are so similar in functioning and in structure.

It is no accident that the European Parliament, for example, reminds me of the Supreme Soviet. It looks like the Supreme Soviet because it was designed like it. Similary, when you look at the European Commission it looks like the Politburo. I mean it does so exactly, except for the fact that the Commission now has 25 members and the Politburo usually had 13 or 15 members. Apart from that they are exactly the same, unaccountable to anyone, not directly elected by anyone at all. When you look into all this bizarre activity of the European Union with its 80,000 pages of regulations it looks like Gosplan. We used to have an organisation which was planning everything in the economy, to the last nut and bolt, five years in advance. Exactly the same thing is happening in the EU. When you look at the type of EU corruption, it is exactly the Soviet type of corruption, going from top to bottom rather than going from bottom to top.

If you go through all the structures and features of this emerging European monster you will notice that it more and more resembles the Soviet Union. Of course, it is a milder version of the Soviet Union. Please, do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that it has a Gulag. It has no KGB – not yet – but I am very carefully watching such structures as Europol for example. That really worries me a lot because this organisation will probably have powers bigger than those of the KGB. They will have diplomatic immunity. Can you imagine a KGB with diplomatic immunity? They will have to police us on 32 kinds of crimes – two of which are particularly worrying, one is called racism, another is called xenophobia. No criminal court on earth defines anything like this as a crime [this is not entirely true, as Belgium already does so – pb]. So it is a new crime, and we have already been warned. Someone from the British government told us that those who object to uncontrolled immigration from the Third World will be regarded as racist and those who oppose further European integration will be regarded as xenophobes. I think Patricia Hewitt said this publicly.

Hence, we have now been warned. Meanwhile they are introducing more and more ideology. The Soviet Union used to be a state run by ideology. Today’s ideology of the European Union is social-democratic, statist, and a big part of it is also political correctness. I watch very carefully how political correctness spreads and becomes an oppressive ideology, not to mention the fact that they forbid smoking almost everywhere now. Look at this persecution of people like the Swedish pastor who was persecuted for several months because he said that the Bible does not approve homosexuality. France passed the same law of hate speech concerning gays. Britain is passing hate speech laws concerning race relations and now religious speech, and so on and so forth. What you observe, taken into perspective, is a systematic introduction of ideology which could later be enforced with oppressive measures. Apparently that is the whole purpose of Europol. Otherwise why do we need it? To me Europol looks very suspicious. I watch very carefully who is persecuted for what and what is happening, because that is one field in which I am an expert. I know how Gulags spring up.

It looks like we are living in a period of rapid, systematic and very consistent dismantlement of democracy. Look at this Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill. It makes ministers into legislators who can introduce new laws without bothering to tell Parliament or anyone. My immediate reaction is why do we need it? Britain survived two world wars, the war with Napoleon, the Spanish Armada, not to mention the Cold War, when we were told at any moment we might have a nuclear world war, without any need for introducing this kind legislation, without the need for suspending our civil liberaties and introducing emergency powers. Why do we need it right now? This can make a dictatorship out of your country in no time.

Today’s situation is really grim. Major political parties have been completely taken in by the new EU project. None of them really opposes it. They have become very corrupt. Who is going to defend our freedoms? It looks like we are heading towards some kind of collapse, some kind of crisis. The most likely outcome is that there will be an economic collapse in Europe, which in due time is bound to happen with this growth of expenses and taxes. The inability to create a competitive environment, the overregulation of the economy, the bureaucratisation, it is going to lead to economic collapse. Particularly the introduction of the euro was a crazy idea. Currency is not supposed to be political.

I have no doubt about it. There will be a collapse of the European Union pretty much like the Soviet Union collapsed. But do not forget that when these things collapse they leave such devastation that it takes a generation to recover. Just think what will happen if it comes to an economic crisis. The recrimination between nations will be huge. It might come to blows. Look to the huge number of immigrants from Third World countries now living in Europe. This was promoted by the European Union. What will happen with them if there is an economic collapse? We will probably have, like in the Soviet Union at the end, so much ethnic strife that the mind boggles. In no other country were there such ethnic tensions as in the Soviet Union, except probably in Yugoslavia. So that is exactly what will happen here, too. We have to be prepared for that. This huge edifice of bureaucracy is going to collapse on our heads.

This is why, and I am very frank about it, the sooner we finish with the EU the better. The sooner it collapses the less damage it will have done to us and to other countries. But we have to be quick because the Eurocrats are moving very fast. It will be difficult to defeat them. Today it is still simple. If one million people march on Brussels today these guys will run away to the Bahamas. If tomorrow half of the British population refuses to pay its taxes, nothing will happen and no-one will go to jail. Today you can still do that. But I do not know what the situation will be tomorrow with a fully fledged Europol staffed by former Stasi or Securitate officers. Anything may happen.

We are losing time. We have to defeat them. We have to sit and think, work out a strategy in the shortest possible way to achieve maximum effect. Otherwise it will be too late. So what should I say? My conclusion is not optimistic. So far, despite the fact that we do have some anti-EU forces in almost every country, it is not enough. We are losing and we are wasting time.



Ķ eftirfarandi skjölum stendur aš ólżšręšisleg samsetning Evrópusambandsins eigi rętur sķnar ķ eftirstrķšs-Nazisma fyrirętlunum um undirlagša Evrópu:


The roots of the “Brussels EU”

Newly discovered documents reveal that the undemocratic structure of the “Brussels EU” has its roots in the post WWII plans of the IG Farben/Nazi-coalition in a conquered Europe.

Following are a few of the most important documents, to be used by teachers, politicians and anyone who is interested in preventing the “Brussels EU” from establishing a dictatorship of corporate interests in Europe.



Stefan Fule














Stefan Füle should not interfere with Iceland“s internal affairs in Iceland, whether publicly or otherwise.  The vast majority of Iceland voters have absolutely no intention of ever joining the EU.  This is a private issue of one political party, that of Jóhanna and Össur and their 19% of voters.  The ridiculous application into the union which was forced through the Parliament on July 16, 2009 by this same flock should never have been accepted by the EU and should be stopped no later than now.  It is not Fule“s business what we feel about the union or whether we have “delusions or fears“ about the union, per his article on October 14th in Morgunblašiš.  We do not need his education nor that of anyone else about the union.  Nor do we tolerate his interference.

















Nś er fólk śt um allan heim bśiš aš missa žolinmęšina gegn ofbeldi stjórnmįlamanna gegn almenningi og yfirrįšum 1 prósentsins, peningamanna heimsins yfir nįnast öllu.  Og fariš aš mótmęla į götum śti.

Lķka į Ķslandi, en į Lękjartorgi var haldinn samstöšufundur meš sömu mótmęlum og fóru fram vķša um heim samtķmis.  1 prósentiš ręšur yfir afkomu og lķfi fólks ķ gegnum spillta stjórnmįlamenn sem bankar og fjįrfestar og vogunarsjóšir hafa ķ vasanum. 

Nś žżšir žaš ekki aš allir fjįrsterkir menn séu hluti af eyšingaröflunum eša “vondir menn“, munum žaš allavega, en nógu stór hluti veldur eyšingu og spillingu lķfs eins og viš žekktum žaš.  Viš getum ekki sętt okkur viš žaš og ętlum ekki aš sętta okkur viš žaš.

Occupy movement goes global, turns violent

Occupy Wall Street Protest Brings Crowd to Times Square

Occupy Wall Street protests continue worldwide

Occupy Wall Street protests stepped up around the world‎  ‎‎

Occupy Wall Street Goes Global

'Occupy Wall St.' protest goes global

Occupy Wall Street Goes Global In Over 82 Countries

Occupy the World: The '99 Percent' Movement Goes Global

'Occupy Wall Street' Goes Global

99%Occupy Wall Street Goes Global






Og NEI, viš ętlum ekki aš “lenda ICESAVE“.  ICESAVE hefur veriš lent.  Žiš sem viljiš borga kśgunina geriš žaš og haldiš okkur hinum utan viš žaš.



Martin Luther King Jr.












Martin Luther King Jr.

Ķ fyrsta sinn var ég aš heyra aš Martin Luther vildi ekki vera minnst eins og hann var sem leištoga borgaralegra réttinda eša “civil rights leader“ eins og hans hefur veriš minnst, heldur sem prests.  Eins og pabbi hans og afi į undan honum.

In 1955, Martin led a year long protest against the bus laws in Montgomery. He decided to do this after a Black woman by the name of Rosa Parks was arrested for not giving up her seat for a White man on a city bus. She was sitting in the front of the bus with the White people and not in the back where the Blacks were supposed to sit. Martin asked the Blacks to not ride the buses until this law was changed. It took a whole year for this to happen, but when the law was changed there were no more "White Only" sections on the buses and Blacks were not forced to give up their seat when a White person wanted it.














Kofi Atta Annan og Ólafur Ragnar Grķmsson, forseti Ķslands.

Kofi Annan, fyrrum leištogi Sameinušu Žjóšanna (United Nations) og frišarveršlaunahafi Nóbels, kom til landsins ķ dag ķ boši forsetans og HĶ.  Hann gat ekki sagt nei og endurskipulagši fyrirętlanir sķnar, sagši hann į blašamannafundi ķ dag meš forsetanum į Bessastöšum. 

Hann sagši į sama blašamannafundi aš “persónulega finnist honum aš žeim rķkjum sem eigi fast sęti ķ öryggisrįši Sameinušu Žjóšanna beri söguleg, lagaleg og sišferšisleg skylda til aš tryggja stofnun Palestķnurķkis.  Til aš hjįlpa viš aš fullgilda įlyktun 181.  Og honum finnist aš žeir sem fjalli um mįliš hjį Sameinušu Žjóšunum ęttu aš hafa žaš ķ huga, mįlsašilarnir žurfi hjįlp, alžjóšasamfélagiš og Sameinušu Žjóširnar og fjórveldin verši aš vinna meš žeim viš aš leysa mįliš og tryggja aš sjįlfstętt rķki verši stofnaš.“ 

Meš oršum Annan: “And I personally believe that the UN - and particularly the permanent members of the security council, have a historic, legal and moral obligation to finish the work that was started in 1948, to implement - to help implement fully resolution 181.  And I think those who will discuss this issue at the UN should bear this in mind.  The parties need help, they have been at the table for 20 years and we“ve seen no real progress.  So we need to - the international community and the UN and the Quartet - it has to work with them to resolve this issue to ensure that the second state is established“.

Persónulega get ég ekki nema veriš hjartanlega sammįla honum og öllum öšrum sem vilja sjįlfstętt rķki Palestķnu.  Og vil aš öllu landi sem Ķsrael stal af Palestķnužjóšinni meš ófyrirgefanlegu ofbeldi og yfirgangi frį 1947 verši skilaš.  Meš valdi ef žarf. 

Menn sem afsaka kśgun og yfirgang Ķsrael gegn Palestķnu frį 1947 og vķsa ķ biblķu eru ekki višręšuhęfir ķ mįlinu.  Menn sem segja aš Palestķna eigi aš vera ķ tvķhliša višręšum viš kśgara sinn, męttu setja sig ķ spor hersetinna og nįnast hlekkjašra og kśgašra manna.  Hvaš mundu žeir sjįlfir gera ef žeir og börn žeirra sjįlfra vęru hlekkjuš og kśguš?  Og žaš ķ eigin landi? 

Gat ekki sagt nei

Lagaleg og sišferšisleg skylda


Ath. Vinsamlegast kveikiš į Javascript til aš hefja innskrįningu.