Monday, February 18, 2008

We're Koo-Koooo For Kosovo! Koo-Koooo For Kosovo!

Congrats are in order, it would seem, to the steadfast and determined people of the breakaway Serbian province of Kosovo. It took many decades, but they are now on the verge of achieving their dreams of an independent Albanian state, and having those dreams recognized by the international community.

Of course, ethnic Serbs both within Kosovo and beyond have always recognized those dreams. They have lived those dreams, every day, for decades. Well, nightmares are dreams too, you know.

Well, it’s their own fault, insisting on the deluded belief that Kosovo is a sacred province to them, pretending that their forefathers fought so long and hard to free it from Ottoman Turk domination. They seemed to think that their families and descendants should not have to yield to the same “oppressive” Muslim regime to which the Albanians back in the day so thoughtfully and, it would seem in retrospect, wisely surrendered.

It took many years, thankless decades, in fact, of oppression-and hey, it worked. They just migrated into Kosovo from Albania, and gradually took over, not merely by out-breeding, but by proving that nothing makes good target practice like a lower-class Serb family out for a casual stroll-or out working in their own yards and gardens.

Yep, cheers, boys and girls of Kosovo. You proved those low-class Serbs would finally break and reveal their true natures and start fighting back and oppressing you, just as you have done to them for the many long decades you have migrated onto their so-called “sacred land”. And-hee, hee, hee, hee-it worked. You tricked them into proving what utter barbarians they were. All it took was a long, extended period of doing exactly to them what you knew deep down they wished they could do to you.

Now, you have your own country. Now, Islam, that glorious religion of peace, can grow and prosper, within the hearts and minds of the remaining five percent of ethnic Serbs that remain in Kosovo-or else.

In closing, I now add my voice to that of our glorious president, King George The Dry Drunk, Bush II who, following in the footsteps of previous American monarch and NATO client king-William Jefferson The Wagging Dog, Clinton The First-has encouraged recognition of the new Islamic Albanian ethnic state of Kosovo. Welcome to the international community. For all you do-this bud’s for you.

One word of advice-now that you have your own independent Islamic Albanian state-don’t forget to kill all the pigs. (hint, hint).

15 comments:

Deni said...

Very much agree with you. And I think it was rather disgraceful that it was Afghanistan the first country to admit the independence. And that USA, after all the money and protection for Albania needed a whole day to say firmly it backs Kossovo.

What I find very troublesome is that USA is funding and protecting two muslim countries near EU.It looks too much like the situation with funding islamists in Afghanistan, just this time the target is not Russia but EU. Which is very very sad.

SecondComingOfBast said...

Denitsa-

Welcome, glad you stopped by. You have three blogs? I will link at least one of them, they all seem good. You reminded me of the caffeine study, I need to post about that.

I think though that your view that Russia is not a target of the Kosovo recognition will come as news to the Russians.

The EU is not your friend, nor is it the friend of any citizen of Europe. It is nothing but an economic security blanket that will eventually wear very thin until, like all security blankets, it is better discarded.

The EU seems very fond of insisting that each member nation take in a quota of Muslim immigrants, in addition to other heavy-handed terms of membership none of you should have to put up with. Why you do is beyond me.

sonia said...

You got it backwards. If US and EU didn't support Albanians in their fight against Serbs and Russian, then Albanians might have turn towards Islamist fundamentalism.

But right now, Albanians are the most pro-American people in Europe. Osama would find more support in Berkley than in Pristina.

Deni said...

Mmm, I don't know about that quota of muslim immigrants. We're part of EU and we don't have such quotas. True, we have some muslims around, but still, there are our own :) .

As for your opinion on EU, well, I better not comment it, because as you may see one of my blogs is on EU and I tend to get very fiery defending it. I'd just say that as long as one thing serve well to people, it is good. EU might have been a security blanket in the beginning, but now, it's much more than that and if we're lucky it will become even more!

The EU will start existing as a real political entity just after the Treaty is signed by all the governments and from then on, the new history of EU will begin. And we'll see how it will go.

And yeah, you're right, the target is partially Russia as Russia protects Serbia and it will have to let go this time, because I don't see a way back from that independence.
But! Russia has a very definitive way of dealing with terrorists and it won't be hurt by the three islamic countries so close to the EU. The EU will be. That's why for me is a mystery why EU chose to accept that independence. Well, as much as I love it, I hate that it's so weak on some issues.
It should never have allowed USA to back Albania for a start,but then, I guess relations with USA are complicated stuff.

What else...I think you're wrong about EU. Especially if people start seeing what I see (and I read recently one expert saying just the same). And then, we'll talk :)

And yeah, you should know I'm a great deal of socialist, so don't even start me on WTO (which is the first thing i think of when I hear "security blanket"). Security blanket or not, one throws out his/her blanket after he/she is strong enough to exist without it. And that will happen sooner or later. So...

As for the requirements of a membership...they are not a burden, they are a stimulus, especially for the smaller countries like mine. Because otherwise, people will just keep on stealing and the country will keep on going to nowhere. Now at least, there is no excuse for not doing what should be done.
Not to mention the projects scientists like me that would otherwise starve can get and live and work. So, not only french farmers and german car builders (**** **** ***) profit from EU. :)

Ah, see, I really do get fiery :)

As for linking, tell me which one you linked if any, and I'll link back to yours to be fair. I liked your blog anyway :) (and mostly the header :P )

Deni said...

The question is does EU needs pro-American people in Europe? I don't think it does. Lol, Sarkozy is enough for Europe:)

And you forget Sonia, that this is a part of Serbia and not from a year or two. They took it away from it. There are many albanians in Makedonia too. Is it the next? Is this a politics we want to tolerate?

SecondComingOfBast said...

Sonia-

That story I told about how Albanians have for decades opporessed Serbs in Kosovo, even going so far as to shoot at them and assault them and their families in other ways-that was not an exaggeration. That actually happened, and it happened over a course of decades. That was the true origin of the Serbian repression under Milosevic. The Albanians moved into the area and grew more and more assertive and aggressive in such ways with each passing decade.

The people finally had enough, and Milosevic merely channelled the aggression of the region that had been bottled up against the Albanians for decades. It had previously been restrained, though barely, by the Austro-Hungarians, and then by Tito. Once his Yugoslavia vanished, it was bound to erupt.

As far as I'm concerned, Clinton should have stayed out of it and let nature take it's course.

It was the European nations who wanted to rein in Milosevic, not because they gave a damn about the "poor, oppressed Albanians", but because they didn't want hundreds of thousands and potentially millions of Albanian Kosovars and Albanian Muslims in the other adjoining regions flooding into their own countries.

Yeah, they "support" the US, the same way the Saudi royal family "supports" the US. It is a marraige of convenience, and the fact they can see the potential of hundreds of millions of US aid dollars, maybe even a billion or two over time, to say nothing of strong, shall we say "encouragment" for aid from the EU and maybe even a future potential NATO membership in the not-too-distant future. All of these things of course contain the potential for even more billions in aid.

In the meantime, the Serbs have lost land that was originally theirs, which they considered sacred, through the actions of a nation of barbaric thugs that were too cowardly themselves to resist Islamic coercion.

I would like to point out that the only major European leader who seems to have the balls to oppose this unfairness is Vladimir Putin, who may in fact be the greatest European leader since Margaret Thatcher, for all his many flaws.

By the way, I don't necessarily denigrate Albania or it's people. They are not and should not be held responsible for the actions of the Albanians that migrated from their own country into Kosovo and other areas, such as Greece and Macedonia, etc., where they seem to follow the same pattern they exhibited in Kosovo.

Whatever the case, it was these immigrant Albaians who needed to be reined in, and I am very much afraid there will be other times in the future that will necessitate more actions against them. When it happens, I know whose side I will be on, regardless of who they claim to "support".

Deni said...

Yeah, what you said about Albanians in Kossovo is very right. :(

Lol, I'm not sure president Putin considers himself an European but anyway. He's my favorite president :) And he definitely have the balls.

Although people claim he supports Serbia in this only to be able to set free Osetia and was it Abhazia (?) when UN insist on accepting Kosovo's independence.

Actually Spain is not accepting the independence too because of the Basques.

As for the pro- thing, which I believe it was directed to me, yes, but it works in two directions- you get money to do something. And when the time comes and your vote counts you are likely to lobby for the one that's feeding you. Just like Saudis so far get along very well with USA. Though my prediction is that that would last no more than 10 years more.But now, they very much do as USA wants to.

I know it sounds little bit nationalist of me, but consider the case with GMo in Europe. So far, Austria bans their use. WTO (USA) requires from them to remove the ban, but EU can't vote it. Until there are enough pro-american countries around to vote it.
I know it's natural to have sympathy to one country or another, but for me, as a EU lovers, the interest of the European citizens in Europe should be the biggest concern for the EU. I'm kind of pro-russian, but when it comes to EU, its interests are on first place for me.

SecondComingOfBast said...

Denitsa-

There is nothing wrong with being nationalist. I don't see how that works insofar as the EU goes, though. You should consider yourself Bulgarian first, second, and third, and a European and EU supporter somewhere way down the line. As far as a "citizen of the world" there is no such animal, unless you consider such artificial constructs normal.

Don't get me wrong, I am sure there are valid benefits to EU membership. You would know that better than I. What I do know, however, is that there is or eventually will be a trade-off. It is up to you and your fellow citizens to decide if that trade-off is worth it. I know it wouldn't be to me, but I can only speak for myself.

sonia said...

Pagan,

There is nothing wrong with being nationalist.

There is nothing wrong with being mentally ill neither...

SecondComingOfBast said...

Sonia-

I guess it depends on how you define nationalist. I'm a strong believer in national sovereignty. I'm consistent too, I am not just speaking of US sovereignty, but of all nations. To me, that is nationalist. Perhaps you are going by a different definition, and perhaps your definition is technically the correct one.

However, even your definition of nationalist would have to be an improvement over the current movement toward a hodgepodge of internationalist committees and artificial constructs under the guise of treaties that are typically foisted off on the citizens of all nations under the pretense of establishment of peace and "the rule of law".

If Osama Bin Laden had ordered the suicide bombing of the UN, there would be a picture of him hanging on my wall right now. I hate anything that intrudes on the rights of national sovereignty of all nations, no matter the pretext or supposed need.

The bottom line, if all nations respected each others sovereignty, there would be much fewer wars (if any), and no need for international organizations such as the UN, a corrupt body that exists as a means of extortion for the benefit of the power, wealth, and influence of international elites.

Prove me wrong, if you can. I haven't heard anything yet that would come close to changing my mind, so try something original, please.

Deni said...

Hon, there's always a trade-off. You just have to know your priorities.

Yes,of course I'm first Bulgarian and well, I'm no less nationalist in that, I just think that EU is a cause that's worth some national set backs, because I see them merely as little pain for the greater cause. Mmm, I don't know where you are from, though i have my suspicions, but I personally see the EU as something truly great. I'm not old enough to remember clearly communist times, but I remember the after-math. A country, isolated from the rest of Europe. Low income, low standard of living, nothing in common with a normal European way of life. I had to travel trough Europe in bus two times before we got in EU and i can tell you- that is a real nightmare. Waiting for hours on borders, treating you like a criminal, seeing how normal people live and comparing it to the misery you call home. And that changed. Slowly but it does change. It improves. I'm sure it improves for all the new members. And we give significant economical boost to the old members (though some of them deny it like UK). It's a mutual benefit.

Yep, sometimes, there are things you won't like, but that goes for any partnership of any kind that you get in. It's normal. The point is to find the balance between the mutual benefit and the national loss. And so far, i don't see a country that has lost from being in the EU in the long run. Yes, some complain about some things, but they don't mention the things they profit from.

It's possible that what I envision for EU won't be the true future of EU. But even if this were nothing but a step to help us reconciliate our national issues, why not. Better then what we had in the past.

Sonia-should i understand you call me mentally ill? :)
I personally think it's all about balance. It's not nationalism on all cost. What I care mostly like a true socialist is people's well-being. Not only of my people, but all. And I go from there with the firm belief that there always is a solution that is maximally acceptable and profitable for all sides involved. One just have to have the patience, the will and clarity to find it.

Lol, Pagan, with all those comments, Google will truly love you :) Send it a kiss from me :)
http://myeuropeandream.blogspot.com

Deni said...

Mmm, can you tell me why you consider UN so wrong? I can tell you why I consider it wrong-for the same reason i hate WTO-because it's USA with another name most of the time.

But for me national interests are not above all, because people are people, with what your people are better than mine and vice versa? Yes, you're chosen to represent your people, not the others, but that point of view often leads to absurds. We have to be able to see the bigger picture. The world is no longer isolated. The elections in USA will have huge impact on the rest of the world. The election in France have huge impact on the world. You can't hide it and watch only in you cup. You have to be ready to see the bigger picture and deal with it.

SecondComingOfBast said...

Denitsa-

No, Sonia is not calling you mentally ill, she is just trying to push my buttons.

Like I said, the EU probably has it's advantages. In the beginning, it may have been intended as nothing more than a Pan-European mutual trade agreement with the goal of establishing a common currency and economy.

What does that have to do with a group of elites in Belgium deciding that a customer in a pub in Dublin should not be allowed to smoke cigarettes. What is the reason they give to decide what steps a person in Copenhagen might take to defend their property and families from potential intruders, and what they might own in the way of doing that?

Perhaps you are fine with all of this. Possibly, you are fine with the fact that freedom of speech seems to be limited to "approved" speech, while other forms of speech that doesn't meet the Euro seal of approval might well be deemed "hate speech", therefore rendering the proponents of said unapproved speech liable for prosecution. And, by the way, who decides what is "hate speech" and not.

In all of these things, does the common citizen have a say in it, or are they merely obliged to abide by these decisions whether they like it or not?

Again, you might be fine with this, but the problem is, these things have a habit of incremental growth. What you might be fine with today might well be joined by other things five or six years down the line you might not be so fine with. Then what will you do? What can you do?

Bear in mind, the Warsaw pact of which you spoke, and of which Bulgaria was a signatory member, was the cause of the hard times in Bulgaria. Yet, it was hardly a Bulgarian nationalist innovation. It was, like the EU, a multi-national trade and defense pact.

You have traded one based on communism for another based on what seems to be a state managed and subsidized form of socialistic capitalism. The trade off you make in regards your national sovereignty might not seem so appealing twenty years down the road.

Bear in mind, I am not opposed to mutual trade and defense agreements. I am opposed to coercion, and from what I know of the EU it seems in some regards coercive in many respects. I am afraid there are going to be more limitations and restrictions for you down the road.

Been there, done that. If it were possible that we could be having this conversation fifty years ago, I would be begging you to immigrate to America. Now, I would not, simply because I see how we have gone down the same road over the years. We haven't just gone as far down the road yet as Europe, but we are on the way. I come from the perspective of living in a country that, for all it's many faults,valued personal liberty and individual responsibility. It's easier for me to judge the trade-off because I see where we have been and it's easier to see where we are going.

As for the UN, I dislike them because they are a corrupt band of elitists who are accountable to no one. Look at the oil for food program for a prime example. What was supposed to be a program aimed at helping the Iraqi people in the face of multi-national sanctions turned into a cash cow for the benefit of the UN elites, their multi-national business partners, and, ironically, Saddam Hussein, ostendsibly the target of the sanctions. That should tell you all you need to know about the United Nations.

The EU has the potential to become the same type of organization, if you don't rein it in. The problem is, I don't see how it is possible, for the simple fact that it is, after all, not accountable, not to you or to any of the citizens of Europe. It is nothing more than an elitist country club.

Sooner or later, the bread will turn stale and the circuses will lose their luster.

Deni said...

First, ok, 10x, I'll link back to your blog, but tomorrow after my presentation is done, cuz now, I really have no time for that.
(though I have time to reply :) )

Am...ok, it's hard to argue with what you said.

First, it's not an elitist club. The decision are voted like in any parliament. Yes, the chairs are rather odd, but they are rational.
And as a non-smoker, you can figure out what I think on that ban.
I don't see what's the difference if the EU banned it or Bulgaria banned it. (and yeah, it's banned here, and still I have to leave some restaurants because they are unbreathable).
All of the decisions are being discussed and members opinions are heard. Yes, it's hard to argue with the French farmers, but if it's one country against all, it won't pass.

Your question-what right do the EU have to tell you how to live has very simple answer. The very same right that your own country has. You voted your country's government, you chose your EU deputies, you voted or delegated your vote to be a member of the EU, you ued their money for better roads or science or whatever...that gives them certain right over you.
If you don't like them, go out and tell them.
Yes, it's not easy, but it's not easy to get a government down too, but it happens. It's harder than the government but it's feasible.
Just because of that kind of attitude I made http://myeuropeandream.blogspot.com

People get very negative toward the EU, because they feel helpless. When that's not the case. I wrote something on The Death of Democracy in After the pink goat and I believe in it.
People are not helpless, they choose to believe in that however. If you don't like a decision of EU, simply gather enough like-minded and protest. Contact NGOs. Make a media fuss. Just like you would if it was a local decision. If enough people think the same, the decision is likely to be re-voted.
It's part of the democracy to have to comply with the majority. If you don't like their ideas, go ahead and change them.

Ok, I really don't have much time today. Only one more thing- the EU's constitution is about to be signed. Afterwards, you have a clear set of rules. Right now things are rather cloudy even for me. But once things get legal, you have the base which to change and to perfect. As i said this is simply the beginning. Afterwards, it's up to us to make the EU the way we want it. It could go the wrong way, but it can go the right way too. We have to make sure, it goes where we want it to be.

I don't know why you tend to divide people on elite and slaves. People can move rather freely between those two categories. It's not the elite the problem. It's the lack of control over the power of Multi-national companies over that elite.And the lack of clarity of the flow of money. And even, it's not all.
Politics is hard and dirty game. I can tell you that from my long discussions with my layer friend. And he's not old or corrupted. But he is taught that the truth doesn't exist, that words are everything, that certain set of principles are right, because they have to be right and it doesn't matter if they hurt people.
What do you expect from our politicians if a simply just-graduated lawyer thinks that way? Not to much!
That's why for me it's clear. It's all up to us, the people, to show what we like and how we like it. Just like in sex. Be nice or f*ck off :)
And yeah...
Greater structures are needed, the world is way to global so that we can rely only on tribal or local parliaments. I know many people fear globalism way too much, but for me this is irrational. If you want to be part of the politics, go on and get in, if you don't - just do what's up to you-vote and choose intelligently and make sure your rights are always protected. All that whining over the globalism and the global government and so on are useless.

As for the freedom of speech, what do you mean? Nobody banned a speech. Yes, they can use your hatred against you, but then, a speech with one goal can be managed in different ways. And hatred is an issue I'm not going to discuss. If you provoke violence it is hatred and shouldn't be on air. Such laws exist in any decent country.
sorry if something doesn't make sense, but i'm soooooo tired, I can believe I wrote even that much ...

...and yeah, you realise that it's not the UN behind the oil for food program, right? in my eyes, UN for the moment is totally useless. I don't think we even have to use its name, as it's so weak.
And on the part of accountability, the NGOs got the balls of EU rather tightly. Although some people dislike them, for me, there are the people's control in many cases....

Deni said...

I linked them :)