Poland elections: BBC shows its bias ever so *slightly*

October 28, 2015

Poland recently held elections in which the Right won a landslide victory: enough seats to govern on its own, and for the first time since 1989 eliminating any left-wing party from the Sejm (parliament).

I can only gather that the BBC was not happy with the results, because they headed the linked article with this image:

No. No subliminal message here.

No. No subliminal message here.

(Photo credit: AFP)

That’s Beata Szydlo, likely Poland’s next prime minister. Sure, she’s waving to the crowd, but just try to tell me —without laughing!— that the underlying message isn’t “conservatives are all neo-fascists!” a particularly egregious idea, given Poland’s recent history. I’ve little expectation that “the Beeb” would have run a similar photograph if the incumbent centrist coalition had won reelection.

At least it wasn’t The Guardian: they would have photoshopped a certain famous mustache on her.

via Alexander Macris

Advertisements

Poland Prepares for Russian Invasion

October 30, 2014

Poland has had sad experience of Russian aggression several times over the centuries, and now again they’re worried — with justification. But it’s not just Putin who worries them: read through to the end for absolutely brutal comments from Polish officials about Obama and his administration.

The XX Committee

As Vladimir Putin’s Russia continues to threaten Ukraine, having stolen Crimea in the spring and exerted de facto Kremlin control over much of the Donbas this summer, war worries are mounting on NATO’s eastern frontier. New reports of Russian troop movements on the Ukrainian border this week are not reassuring to those Atlantic Alliance members who suffered Soviet occupation for decades, and still live in Moscow’s neighborhood.

Neither are Russian air force incursions into Western airspace calming nerves with their reborn Cold War antics: yesterday, NATO fighters intercepted no less than nineteen Russian combat aircraft, including several heavy bombers. No NATO countries are more worried about Kremlin aggression than the Baltic states, with their small militaries and lack of strategic depth, which are frankly indefensible in any conventional sense without significant and timely Alliance assistance.

But Poland is the real issue when it comes to defending NATO’s exposed Eastern…

View original post 2,007 more words


He’s the Smartest President Ever, so give him easy words

January 27, 2014
Liar.

No big words, please

From Florida’s Shark Tank via Jim Geraghty’s Morning jolt, it seems we have an explanation for the “Polish death camps” kerfuffle that roiled relations between our two countries a while back.

His speechwriter was trying to protect him:

In an exclusive audio file furnished by Shark Tank reporter, Special K, the President’s $75K a year speechwriter, Kyle O’Connor, who wrote the speech in question, discussed how this gaffe really came about during a talk he had with a group of college kids in Washington, D.C.

O’Connor stated that he was concerned about the pronunciation of the name of the death camp, so he opted to remove the name from the speech, and replace it with “Polish death camp.”

According to O’Connor, all of Obama’s “Wizards of Smart” didn’t  catch the gaffe, and signed off on it, but after the political excrement hit the fan, O’Connor was told that it was not a big deal, that, “ no one could have caught it.”

Per Power Line (h/t Geraghty), the camp’s name was “Belzec.” Yep. Real toughie, there.

As for “not a big deal,” if you’ll recall, the Poles were none too happy that Nazi death camps were attributed to them, thanks to sloppy speech writing. “No one would have caught it?” Pardon me? Just how ignorant are these people? The Holocaust is one of the most horrific events in human history, and the Nazis placed many of the camps in occupied Poland. No one ran this speech by the guy on the East European desk at State? Surely, after he was done spit-taking, he would have gently informed (1) the White House they were about to gravely insult an ally. Again.

Once again, no one in this administration was held responsible for their performance. Instead, the whole thing became a standing joke involving camps where genocide took place. Read the rest for the punch line.

If the words “juvenile” and “callow” come to mind when you think of this administration, you’re not far off.

Footnote:
(1) As in screaming his lungs out.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Bill Whittle: Obama is making us a “turncoat nation”

May 27, 2011

Bill Whittle returns today with a video that absolutely savages the “Smart Diplomacy” of Barack Obama and his administration. Noting that it takes years and decades of efforts to build up trust between nations, Whittle shows with devastating clarity how, one by one, Obama is trashing those relationships and, in the process, harming our national security and turning us into a nation of turncoats:

Two things from the video I’ll point out: first, I had a feeling Bill was a big fan of Victor Davis Hanson. I am, too, and I can’t recommend his books highly enough, whether you’re interested in Military History, Ancient Greece, the decline of California, or current affairs in general. Hanson has a way of using the past to illuminate the present that few can match. Whittle points to one of his books, How The Obama Administration Threatens Our National Security, part of the Encounter Broadsides series. Not only do I second Bill’s recommendation of Hanson’s book, but I’m a fan of the entire series. They’re inexpensive, brief polemical works on important issues that will give you the arguments you need to deal with liberal co-workers and friends.

The other item Bill mentions is the stab-in-the-back betrayal of Poland and the Czech Republic in 2009 after they stuck their necks out for us by agreeing to host missile defense sites over strenuous Russian objections. At the time I was outraged and called it “appeasement and betrayal,” and my opinions haven’t changed. Barack Obama’s, amateurish, ham-handed, and ideologically driven foreign policy is wrecking America’s traditional alliances and gaining nothing —nothing— in return.

At this point, I don’t care if the Republican nominee in 2012 is Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, John Huntsman — or even Alf! We have got to vote him out of office.

RELATED: Two good articles you may want to look at. In the first, former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy describes Obama’s Middle East policy as “ObamaCare for Israel.” It’s an apt analogy, and McCarthy uses it as an example of Obama’s Alinskyism as applied to foreign relations. After that, check out Stanley Kurtz’s article on Obama’s hard-Left leanings in foreign policy: “Pro-Palestinian-in-Chief.” Kurtz wrote the brilliant Radical in Chief, a political biography of Obama chronicling his lifelong attachment to Socialism. The book discussed the implications of Obama’s radical Leftist politics for domestic policy; “Pro-Palestinian” can be considered a companion piece for foreign affairs.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Appeasement and betrayal

September 17, 2009

It’s nothing short of a national disgrace:

U.S. Shelves Eastern European Nuclear-Missile Shield

President Barack Obama Thursday shelved a Bush-era plan for an Eastern European missile-defense shield, saying a redesigned defensive system would be cheaper, quicker and more effective against the threat from Iranian missiles.

“After an extensive process, I have approved the unanimous recommendations of my secretary of defense and my joint chiefs of staff to strengthen America’s defenses against ballistic-missile attack,” Mr. Obama said in a morning address.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell Thursday said the decision was made to better protect U.S. forces and allies in Europe from Iranian missile attacks.

The U.S. is basing its move on a determination that Iran’s long-range-missile program hasn’t progressed as rapidly as previously estimated, reducing the threat to the continental U.S. and major European capitals, according to current and former U.S. officials.

Czech peace activists demonstrated in February in front of the European Parliament in Brussels against the deployment of a U.S. radar base on Czech soil.

The findings are a major reversal from the Bush administration, which pushed aggressively to begin construction of the Eastern European system before leaving office in January.

“Reversal” is putting this nicely. This is an utter, craven appeasement of Moscow, which has never wanted this system installed in its former empire, making ridiculous claims that it somehow threatened Russia. As originally conceived, the radar stations and roughly a score of interceptor missiles were to protect Europe from a growing Iranian threat. They represented no threat to Moscow. In fact, the Bush administration offered to cooperate in a partnership with the Russians on a European missile shield. Russia’s outrage was in fact a cover for their fear of a continuing loss of influence over their former subject peoples in Central and Eastern Europe.

Poland and the Czech Republic saw this in a similar manner. They cooperated with the US over Afghanistan and Iraq (even sending troops to both places) and agreed to the missile-shield proposal. This was done not just out of a sense of interests shared between fellow democracies, not just out of a sense of worry over Iranian ambitions, but out of a very real geopolitical calculation that closer military ties to the world’s remaining superpower would protect them from a resurgent Russian bear. For the last eight years they have stuck their necks out to help us, and now President Obama has made fools of them.

This is a massive, self-inflicted wound for US foreign policy. Putin and his cronies in neo-czarist Russia have stared us down and won. This is a clear signal not only to Poland and the Czech Republic, but to all of the former USSR and Warsaw Pact nations, that the United States of America cannot be counted on in a showdown, that we will, instead, react with appeasement. And they had better, too. It is a message to Moscow that we concede, that their former satrapies are still their playthings, and that the current president lacks the will Ronald Reagan showed when confronting the Soviets in a much more heated crisis in the early 1980s. And, on top of that, it whitewashes the very real near-future threat of nuclear missiles in the hands of millenarian Islamic fanatics.

In the past, I’ve referred to our dealings with Iran as a “1930s watch” as a way to draw a parallel with the foolish years of appeasement that lead up to World War II. Obama’s decision will not make us safer, but it will make the world more dangerous. In his dealings with Russia (and Venezuela, and Cuba, and North Korea, and the Palestinians), President Obama has truly showed he is the heir of Chamberlain, not Churchill.

One other thing: This news comes out on an auspicious date – the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland.

I’ll bet they’re feeling the warm fuzzies in Warsaw, right now.

LINKS: Jonathan Adler; The Weekly Standard ( here, here, here, and here); Fausta; David Riddick; Eric Cantor; Hot Air; Heritage Foundation; the London Times has a scathing analysis of what Obama got in return (hint: nothing). John Bolton calls it preemptive capitulation. Polish reaction. Gird your loins: Vice-President Biden says Iran is not a threat. The Telegraph calls it a total victory for Putin. Clifford May – “Defenseless.” The Republic of Georgia gets the shaft, too. Nancy Pelosi congratulates the Administration. The IAEA (!) makes Obama look like the fool he is. Michael Goldfarb goes on a rant. Tom Donnelly looks at the Czech reaction: “…not good news for the Czech state, for Czech freedom and independence.” Sister Toldjah calls it scary. She’s right. At Exurban League, the photo says it all.

FINALLY: It’s not as if he didn’t warn us.

EDITED: On 3/27/2012 to replace a broken video link.