European Union elects to move toward a Communist Utopia

 

 

Not a ripple in the water that Germany’s influence grows as Merkel’s pal gains power. The next President of the European Commission promises to bring a Utopia that Europe may soon regret. While we focus on Britain and its Brexit problem, a more sinister plot of the E.U. moves along unabated.

Ursula von der Leyen

 

Former German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen has been narrowly confirmed as the next President of the European Commission, the powerful administrative arm of the European Union.

 

Do these policies sound familiar at all? This should give a shiver to those Brits if they still have any sense. Germany never gives up. What a war could not do, a pen will.

 

 

  • An examination of von der Leyen’s main policy proposals reveals that she is calling for a massive expansion of top-down powers of the European Commission. Her proposals would substantially increase the role of Brussels in virtually all aspects of economic and social life in Europe — all at the expense of national sovereignty.

 

  • Von der Leyen warned that Brussels would overrule EU member states opposed to her tax overhaul… She called for a comprehensive “European Rule of Law Mechanism” to ensure the primacy of EU law over the national laws of EU member states. She warned that there would be financial consequences for member states that refuse to comply…. She called for a change in rules so that the EU could act even without the unanimous consent of EU member states

 

  • “What you’ve seen from Ursula von der Leyen today is an attempt by the EU to take control of every single aspect of our lives. She wants to build a centralized, undemocratic, updated form of Communism that will render [obsolete] nation state parliaments, where the state controls everything, where nation state parliaments will cease to have any relevance at all.”

“But it is in the aspect of defense that I think people’s minds should be focused. She’s a fanatic for building a European Army, but she’s not alone. When it’s completed, NATO will cease to exist or will not have any relevance in Europe at all.”— Nigel Farage, European Parliament, July 16, 2019.

Finally, a new “Common European Asylum System” would require all EU member states to offer asylum to migrants who request it: “We all need to help each other and contribute.”

Keep reading

For the best in Conservative news. https://www.whatfinger.com/

Advertisements

New tariffs? We already have tariffs on 12,000 products

 

If we think the the US does not impose tariffs, think again. Before we get our knickers in a knot, let’s take a look back.

The Truth. We already impose over 12,000 tariffs on imports. In a story that appeared in Business Insider back in October of 2010, during the reign of Obama and Clinton, we learned that as far as tariffs are concerned, we are already knee-deep in applying tariffs to our favorite swamp benefactor businesses. Surprised? So when Congress gets on its high horse and tells us that we will have a trade war, ask them about the imposed tariffs on American products that happen to have great lobbyists, and are surviving. “Free Trade?”

Obama’s economic adviser Austan Goolsbee told CNBC a tariff “destroys more jobs than it creates.”

If so, then Obama was a prolific jobs destroyer. There was a 31% tariff on Chinese solar panels. There was a 35% tariff on Chinese tires.

That last one destroyed 100,000 jobs. In China.

“Obama’s decision may affect the employment of 100,000 tire workers in China and may bring an aggregated loss of $1 billion to China’s tire exporters,” Fan Rende, chairman of China Rubber Industry Association, said at the time.

We give presidents the power to impose tariffs.

They use it.

And they help the United States in the continuous trade wars. H/T:  Don Surber

 

25 American Products That Rely On Huge Protective Tariffs To Survive is the title of the Business Insider article. The usual suspects are the benefactors. So when the media tells you that applying tariffs to Steel and aluminum will start a trade war, and that we are sacrificing agriculture for steel and will be hit the hardest, perhaps it is because they have enjoyed and benefitted the most from the tariffs the swamp has imposed on imports. Here are a few of them:

Most vegetables — 20% tariff

Asparagus and sweet corn — 21.3% tariff

Apricot, cantaloupe, and dates — 29.8% tariff

Canned tuna — 35% tariff

Shelled peanuts — 131.8% tariff

Garlic or onion powder — 29.8% tariff

Tobacco — 350% tariff

European meats, truffles, and Roquefort cheese — 100% tariff

French jam, chocolate, and ham — 100% tariff

Most auto parts — 25% tariff

Miscellaneous ship parts — 50% tariff

Chinese tires — 35% tariff

Sneakers — 48% tariff

Brooms — 32% tariff

Here is a portion of the article written in 2010:

Congress is preparing assail China  for protectionist policies, like a 105.4% tariff on US poultry.

But anyone who thinks America is a perfect practitioner of free trade needs to wake up.

The International Trade Commission lists over 12,000 specific tariffs on imports to America. Hundreds of agricultural, textile, and manufacturing items are highly protected. So are obscure items like live foxes. (The above link of the ITC is dead) Clunky  website is  https://www.usitc.gov is  the new website.

Complete story with pics at  Business Insider

Here is the 350 page HTS Modified to Reflect Increased China 301 Tariffs just enacted:

+ View article in full

Iran’s Rouhani Makes First Visit Ever To Iraq To “Bypass Unjust US Sanctions”

 

Cable TCM’s showing of “Lawrence of Arabia” recently reminded us of the eternal quagmire of the MIddle East. When I saw this headline out of Zero Hedge I could only feel sadness. How much blood and treasure we have given.  Yet, in today’s news we hear nothing. Only the latest antics of three women plus Sarsour, roaming Congress, Muslim supporting women – who would destroy us from within. Add Israel as well. And the Kurds? We leave then to their own devices one more time.

 

Rouhani

What Iran is billing as President Hassan Rouhani’s first “historic” and landmark visit to Iraq, both the United States and Israel are seeing as a provocative move to solidify Iran’s influence over Baghdad.

Just prior to arriving in Iraq Monday, Rouhani said on state television that his country is determined to “strengthen its brotherly ties” with neighboring Iraq. It’s expected that the three-day visit will result in a wide range of economic deals in fields such as energy, transport, and agriculture; however, as Israel’s Haaretz writes based on a Reuters report:

The visit is a strong message to the United States and its regional allies that Iran still dominates Baghdad, a key arena for rising tension between Washington and Tehran.

 

Over the past year immense tension has grown between allies Baghdad and Washington over Iraq’s reliance on Iran-backed Iraqi Shiite paramilitary units to wage war against ISIS and other Sunni terror groups.

As Al Jazeera notes:

Since Rouhani’s election in 2013, Iraq has relied on Iranian paramilitary support to fight ISIL following the group’s capture of the Iraqi city of Mosul and other territories in both Iraq and Syria.

Now, with the armed fighters facing a final territorial defeat in the Syrian village of Baghouz, Iran is looking for Iraq’s continued support as it faces a maximalist pressure campaign by President Donald Trump after his decision to withdraw the United States from Tehran’s nuclear deal with world powers.

But this is ultimately the lasting legacy of Bush and Cheney’s 2003 regime change war and toppling of Saddam Hussein: they overthrew a Sunni Baath secular dictator in exchange for entrenching pro-Iran influence in Baghdad, to the delight of the Ayatollahs.

Washington can now behold the fruits of its neocon interventionist labor as Iran’s president is granted a hero’s welcome in the heart of Baghdad (this after Iran and Iraq were very recently bitter enemies)  all the while US officials in the same city will look on helplessly from the sidelines.

Zero Hedge

Bonus flashback:

Sarsour caught on camera talks about her mentor WTC terrorist Siraj Wahhaj

 

 

South Korea’s Moon over Obama

 

Moon meets with Putin

Post by Mustang

Gordon Chang’s recent article at the Gatestone Institute is nothing if not instructive.  Reading the post, titled “Will North Korea Take Over South Korea?” … one wonders how the people of South Korea, given their history over the past 70 years, can possibly accept President Moon’s treasonous behavior as their chief executive —but then, the efforts of this man to dismantle republican democracy in South Korea does sound awfully similar to the presidency of public enemy number one, Barack Obama.

I still shake my head every time I think of Obama’s election … not once, but twice.  In fact, there are so many similarities between Obama and Moon that one begins to think about conspiracies of global proportions.

You can read the article for yourself, but here are a few of his salient points:

  • ·       While visiting North Korea, President Moon went out of his way to downplay the legitimacy of the country he was elected to represent;
  • ·       Since becoming president in 2017, President Moon has undermined his country’s democracy in tangible ways, including the use of broadcast media to suppress dissenting views, while at the same time promoting those of North Korea.
  • ·    President Moon ordered the dismantling of the South Korean military, including the removal of defenses along likely invasion and infiltration routes.
  • ·       In North Korea, President Moon recently stood mute while Kim Jung Un referred to the South Korean people as “My people.”
  • ·     President Moon has long advocated unification of the Korean Peninsula; what no one expected is that he has been working overtime to make South Korea more compatible with the authoritarian nature of the North Korean state.  As but one example, Moon insists that the term “liberal” be removed from the concept of constitutional democracy.

So why are the people of South Korea standing idly by?

I suppose for the same reason our people thought that electing Barack Obama was a wise choice —on two occasions.  South Korea society today mirrors that of the United States: it is beset with social issues, which include alcoholism, substance abuse, over-fascination with social media and video games, destruction of core family values, and a sense that their nation’s policies are of no concern.  Being lulled to sleep by drugs and technology would seem to a windfall for Kim Jung Un.

Does any of this sound familiar?  Why does this matter?  Why should anyone care what South Korea does?

Does it matter because 34,000 Americans gave up their lives during the Korean War?  Does it matter because five-thousand Americans suffered as prisoners of war in North Korea and China —and that not all of them came home?  Since the Korean armistice (a peace treaty was never signed), the American taxpayer has paid billions of dollars helping to improve South Korea’s infrastructure and subsidizing South Korea’s national defense … a treaty obligation since 1950.

On the other hand, I’m not sure that there is anything the United States can do about President Moon’s treasonous behavior.  Maybe the wise course of action is to do nothing —let the Koreans decide their own fate, come hell or high water.  The American people seem incapable of dealing with their own political system much less those of another country so far from our shores … and you know, this does suggest to me that Obama achieved most of his goals as chief executive: to make fundamental changes to the United States of America.

Is it in America’s long-term interests to abandon global leadership?

Should we hit them in the old pocket book by refusing to buy Korean cars?

Well, such a remarkable repudiation of South Korea’s present leadership would suggest that we Americans have the chutzpah to act on our principles.

Or that we even have such things as principles.

 I would be interested in reader’s views.

%d bloggers like this: