Schmidt Mária

An Egg Without a Shell, a Country Without Borders

European history is a history of invasions


Hans Peter Schwarz, one of the most renowned representatives of German historiography who authored the authoritative and the official biographies of scores of CDU luminaries has devoted his latest book to the mass migration threatening Europe. The retired scholar was born in 1934 and has achieved everything – ranks, medals, influence – that a historian can achieve in Germany. I am emphasising all this because this work of his that I am about to review and that has prompted me further considerations [1], is characterised by a kind of courageous forthrightness and bluntness which is increasingly uncharacteristic of Germans. Unlike Schwarz, for the time being they content themselves with using the proven method of silencing the other side and have not so far launched the kind of character assassination offensive against him another giant of German historiography, the recently deceased Ernst Nolte was the victim of at the hands of „progressives” whose names even then were not worth remembering. The title of Schwarz’s book is a provocation in itself, as rather than using the mandatory term ‘refugee’ the press and the public are expected to abide by, Schwarz consistently writes ‘Völkerwanderung’, that is ‘migration of peoples,’ using an expression that nobody has had the courage to pronounce in Europe with the sole exception of Viktor Orbán. The book is in fact entitled The new Völkerwanderung towards Europe. About the Loss of Political Control and of Moral Certainties. (Die neue Völkerwanderung nach Europa. Über den Verlust politischer Kontrolle und moraslischer Gewissheiten, Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 2017, München)

Schwarz starts out with pointing out that the European continent, which is inhabited by half a billion people cannot afford losing control over its borders and falling hostage to a misconceived foreign policy. Out of the authors of that misconceived policy he specifically mentions the various decision-makers of the European Union, the legal framework adopted by the Union and the courts enforcing it as well as the national leaders who are unable to gauge the weight or the consequences of their decisions. He points out the responsibility of Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany whose mistaken analysis and inexplicably amateurish behaviour is putting the already hardly challenged European Union to an extreme test. The European Union had been taken hostage by a utopian way of thinking which had heavily weighed for half a century over the eastern half of our continent. It is an empire-like entity which had never been tested by anyone anywhere and whose founding fathers wanted to found the future on the most noble principles hedging it about with goodwill. Therefore its fate and role increasingly remind one to the defunct League of Nations or its successor, the UN which also excelled and still excel in interpreting selectively the values they are meant to spread and represent. What are then those common European or Union values to be more precise that the advocates never stop referring to? Democracy, checks and balances, peace, freedom, inviolable and ever more boundless human rights, the rule of law, supranationality, progress, tolerance, nonviolence etc. Yes, all this is quite reminiscent of the offer that was made to justify the new order set up after the two world wars, which was allegedly not a reflection of the balance of power of the given moment but was to guarantee a world made moral at last. Peaceful dialogue instead of armed conflict; peaceful settlement of controversies being imposed by the peaceloving people of the world. Instead, the 20th century resulted in an interminable series of wars as well as a Cold War that lasted almost half a century. This may be one reason why the unconditional supporters of the European Union consider the peacemaking mission of the Union as their supreme argument. In reality however, if armed conflicts have been avoided since the 1951 agreement on the establishment of the Coal and Steel Community, it was thanks to the two superpowers of the bipolar world – the United States of America and the Soviet Union. But since the time when the world became unipolar first and then multipolar, Europe became a war theatre in the Balkans, in Georgia, Ukraine, Crimea and a civil war is about to break out right now in Macedonia. The promise of the European Union to replace power politics and national egoism with cooperation and joint decision-making was put in doubt as early as during the financial crunch of 2008 and then doing the migration emergency which is still underway.

Hooray, we’re on holiday

„The murder of a beautiful theory by a gang of brutal facts.”

Walter Lippman

Citizens live within the boundaries of nation states. Their democratic rights are linked therefore to a given territory. In the first period of the life of the European Union until the second half of the 80s, there was mutual rapprochement among Western European democracies politically, economically and culturally speaking, but the borders between them remained intact. Border controls between France and West Germany were abolished in 1984 and one year later, the Schengen agreement was signed on abolishing internal border controls which were thereafter confined to screening criminals. Dismantling borders also meant giving up defence capabilities, as border protection is a substantial element of national defence and therefore of national sovereignty. Schengen quickly became popular among holidaymakers, businessmen and of course drug dealer gangs, human traffickers, pimps and international terrorists. Warnings by law enforcement fell on deaf ears. For federalists, who were gaining ever increasing influence in Europe, Schengen meant an irreversible and therefore decisive step towards creating a supranational federal state. At the time, a simple declaration was sufficient for member countries to leave the Schengen system but by now it has become an integral part of the European system of covenants and therefore it would be practically impossible for nationstates to terminate their membership. Meanwhile, the transborder activities of international terrorism and criminality prompted European leaders to set up Frontex in 2004, a border protection agency whose mandate is confined to observation without extending to intervention. This is why even after 10 years, it still only employs 318 people! In 2016, after Europe had been reached by the first wave of mass immigration, Frontex was assigned new missions and the number of its employees reached the record level of 1500! (Wikipedia only knows about a target figure of 1000, to be reached by 2020!) Given the scope and the character of the challenge, it is obvious therefore that Frontex is an authentic alibi organisation which reminds Hungarians of a saying by the heroine of one of their volk-tales who ‘brought a present to the king without bringing one’.

By now Schengen means that European borders are not under control and are freely trespassable. According to the directives of the European commission, the European Parliament and the European Council, the outer borders must be secured by the member countries concerned. The migration pressure was an especially tough challenge for Greece and Italy with their long and articulate seashores as well as to the countries along the Balkan route. Since early 2017, over 45 thousand migrants have landed on Italian shores, 44 per cent up from the same period last year.1222 people have lost their lives during the attempted crossing so far this year. Over 200 thousand migrants are expected to make it from Libya to Italy by the end of the year. Their numbers amounted to 170 thousand in 2015 and 180 thousand last year.

Moamer Kadhafi (Libya’s dictator from September 1, 1969 to 20 August 2011) agreed with Prime Minister Berlusconi of Italy (Forza Italia) not to let through migrants to Europe. Since the days when the states of the region were destroyed and the dictators were overthrown by Western powers specialising in exporting democracy, human traffickers and NGOs intertwined with them have transported several million illegal migrants to Europe. They still continue to put them through to the Italian shores by the thousands every day – some of them remain in Italy, while the rest goes on to Austria and Germany.

Nor does Greece, under left-winger Alexis Tsipras since January 2015, make great efforts in order to contain migration. While his Conservative predecessor, Antonis Samaras built a fence in defence against the influx from Turkey, Tsipras hurled hundreds of thousands of migrants onto the Balkans route, perhaps in an effort to blackmail Greece’s creditors, the Germans, in the first place, while continuously referring to European values and human right.

The European Court of Human Rights – an Important Link in the Chain

„The immigration issue in Europe is a very rare historic eventwhere a region does not defend its borders, but instead has opened its borders.”


An intolerable situation has come about with some European decision-makers not only making the protection of borders more difficult but making it simply impossible by invoking the human rights of the new immigrants in order to prevent borders from being sealed. Those are the same human rights purported as European values that were among the reasons why the draft Constitution of the European Union was rejected by French and Dutch citizens at the referenda held in 2004. That does in no way prevent Union bureaucrats from pretending as if there existed a European Constitution stipulating those rights, accepted by everyone and thus being mandatory. This is something like the invisible constitution that was only visible for the constitutional court presided over byLászló Sólyomwho invoked it every so often whenever he extended his competence to new and new areas. It is worthwhile to quote at this point Jean-ClaudeJuncker, the powerful President of the European Commission: ‘Yes, the EU Constitution would lead to ‘transfers of sovereignty’ from individual nations to the EU, ‘but would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?’, he once asked. Sometimes EU deal-making must be protected from public scrutiny, he said. ‘When it becomes serious, you have to lie’.

The main supporter and guardian of the principle of the priority of migrants’ human rights is the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which is the favourite organisation of the Federalists for whom more Europe means first of all more human rights. In today’s strongly Americanised Europe, the decision between right and wrong, good and evil is readily confided by the elite to the courts. Judges are presented as infallible and the elite’s media and opinion makers caution everyone from even criticising their verdicts. Some even talk about the advent of juristocracy. TheECHR has by now grown into one of the protagonists of the migration crisis and is playing an important role in deepening of the Union’s crisis which is a result of the failure of the Schengen system. Its idiotic sentences that have hit Hungary several times, have turned it into an instrument of the escalating migration crisis. According to Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004, the rights of immigrants supersede those of the individual countries to protect their outer borders! It was this principle and the practice built upon it that opened and even exposed Europe to mass migration. In 2011, the European Union made matters worse by adopting a series of rules making it easier for refugees to remain in Europe.

On this basis, the ECHR declared in a verdict in 2011 that migrants could not be sent back to Greece because ‘conditions there are unworthy of human beings’. In 2017 it condemned Hungary for refusing to grant asylum to two Bangladeshi migrants; not providing interpreters in their mother tongue; handing them over the sentence in writing which was a particular violation of their human rights, since they were illiterate. Such verdicts by the European Court of Human Rights will kill the last drops of respect in those who still harbour illusions about courts! Let’s have a look at the map to see where exactly Bangladesh is. No matter how you turn the map, you will have a hard time finding that we are the nearest country obliged under the Geneva Convention to grant Bangladeshis asylum. What is all this about then? The Soros funded deeply humanitarian Hungarian Helsinki Committee filed the case Ilias and Ahmed versus Hungary because the two Bangladeshi citizens were held in a transit zone for 23 days before being expelled back to Serbia. In its verdict of March 14, 2017, the court declared that the procedure adopted by the Hungarian authorities was in violation with paragraphs 1 and 4 of article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which stipulate the right to freedom and security, as well as articles number three and 13 because conditions in the transit zones are inhumane and finally as because the plaintiffs could not make their case about that. Expelling them to Serbia was also inhumane, because they were not given guarantees of being treated humanely over there! The court also found that Hungary did not abide by the rule according to which each case had to be judged individually and interpreted schematically the issue of safe third countries, when disregarding country reports and further evidence submitted by the asylum seekers which contained information about what kind of countries could seriously be considered to be safe! The Hungarian authorities also laid superfluous burden on the poor migrants by expecting them to prove that they would find themselves in danger were they to be sent back home through a chain of successive expulsions. In other terms, we were not even supposed to ask them whether they would actually find themselves in actual danger by being expelled to Serbia, then from there to Greece. We should know, because as the court had already established several times, migrants in Greece find themselves in inhumane and humiliating conditions. We have thus come full circle. According to the ECHR, the transit zones are also trouble spots because basic human rights of asylum seekers are being violated there. (Never mind that according to the German court, airport transit zones in Germany are in full compliance with the rules.) In its first instance ruling, the ECHR ordered Hungary to pay €18,705 to each of the two Bangladeshis in compensation, in addition to paying for court expenses.

In a small bonus, the independent, nonpolitical and very non-governmental organisation mentioned above threaten the Hungarian government with dragging it into bankruptcy by filing a series of similar complaints.

This is what happens when judges who are not answerable to or accountable by anyone become policymakers by reinterpreting their competence and their profession. They brand Union member countries as non-safe or providing inhumane treatment and by doing so they claim that new immigrants have an inalienable right to the welfare and the services Germans or Swedes are able and willing to offer. They find that several union member countries or countries waiting for accession to not offer living conditions of that level, although migrants supposedly facing life-threatening danger are entitled to those conditions. Italy was also found guilty because 24 passengers of a ship transporting Eritreans were turned back to Libya under Kadhafi. The ECHR examined the case for a full two years before ordering Italy to pay €50,000 in compensation to each of the passengers on the basis of arguments very similar to the ones employed in our case. That amount was sufficient to pay in advance for their journeys to Europe. As these cases prove, human rights judges want to prevent countries from turning back migrants and are intent on assuring that even if human traffickers fail in their job, they could get access to their fees which are at their disposal upon delivery. The ECHR thus became the most important and most reliable ally of human traffickers! European citizens have to stand up against the ECHR that has been acting as if it were a political actor. It is in fact intolerable to claim that migrants intending to invade our continent should enjoy priority over Hungarian, Greek or Serbian citizens who according to the judges live under inhumane conditions. All citizens who earn less than those human rights judges whose salaries are exorbitantly high, should sue them, hoping that perhaps we will be awarded the same pay they are getting free of tax.

We are facing a vicious circle. Human traffickers make money by guiding migrants to the borders of Europe. From thereon, it is the European countries that pay for their bed and board. Whenever they get stuck, the very non-governmental organisations deployed by Soros appear on the scene and help them proceed, like in the Italian waters where they ‘give a helping hand to stranded vessels’ before the coastguard arrives, because somehow they always are the first ones on the spot. And of course, they never take them back to Libyan ports. They always reach the Italian shores.

(MTI. 2017.04. 29. Embercsempészettel gyanúsítja a migránsmentő szervezeteket egy szicíliai ügyész. – Migrant saving organisations suspected of human trafficking by a Sicilian prosecutor.) Whenever that process gets stuck too, Soros-funded watchdogs arrive and sue noncomplying states for the money indispensable to continue the operation without hindrances. All in all, in one way or another, it is the European citizen’s that have two settle the bill of the migrants and of the human traffickers who get them moving. Either paying a fine or giving welfare subsidies. The organisers, the human traffickers and the humanitarian souls co-operating with them make good money, whether their stakes are small or big, like Soros’.

For the bigger part of today’s European leaders, alleged human rights of each and every illegal migrant have priority over the will of European citizens.Brussels, Berlin and Strasbourg versus Budapest, Bratislava and Warsaw. That is what is tearing Europe apart. At a time when Europe is directed by a tax evading drunkard whose activities are confined to speaking gibberish; kissing whomever comes across; grinning like an idiot and pulling his guests’ ears or neckties.

Geneva, Geneva, you wonderful

„A nation that cannot control its borders isn’t really a nation.”

Ronald Reagan

All union member countries are signatories to the 1951 Geneva agreements and thus committed themselves to granting temporary asylum to political refugees under the conditions specified in para 2 of point 16. That asylum is due in cases of emergency, when people have to leave their homelands because their lives are in danger on account of a civil war or other forms of political emergency (persecution because if belonging to given religious, ethnic or social communities.) The duty to grant asylum falls upon the first safe country, but only to the extent that the asylum seeker does not jeopardise its internal security. Just like it originally was in the case of the Schengen treaty, the Geneva agreement can also be renounced without any justification acquired, giving one-year notice. (Turkey, for instance, joined under the condition that it would only grant asylum to refugees from European countries.) By now however, refugee rights are interpreted by certain European countries including the Germans extensively as if they meant that anybody, including economic migrants had an inalienable right to live wherever and however they want to.

International refugee regulations have obviously become obsolete, for they were born in a previous century and under very different conditions. At present, the Earth is inhabited by over 6 billion people. It is impossible to grant each of them a right to asylum that can only be refused after thorough evaluation and as a result of individual proceedings, with intricate and elaborate juridical justifications which would imply years of tedious trials and with the right to successive appeals, making it impossible to expel them and confiding the right to determine which countries are safe to the whim of human rights judges. If things are to remain as they are, they will mean the death sentence of the European Union.

The Anatomy of a Mistaken Decision

„A whole industry has been built on »migrant caressing«”.


A perhaps well-meant but certainly unthoughtful and mistaken decision in the autumn of 2015 unleashed over 1 million new migrants onto Germany, although by then over 400,000 migrants had been recorded by the German authorities whose asylum requests had been rejected five years before but whom they had been unable to deport.

Schengen, as we know, was a German idea. Enthusiasm towards Europe had become by then a compulsory exercise for the German elite, just like the argument ‘I want a European solution’ had become an irresistible excuse for governing forces in Germany. Hiding behind Europe, using it as a cover became an established escape strategy for the German élite which is still unable to get rid of its inferiority complex and guilt compensation fixation. In a similar way, they daydream about the end of nation states and the federalised Europe, hoping thus to finally leave Hitler behind, because they have obviously forgotten that a new German-led United Europe was Hitler’s darling project. In 2015, that distorted world outlook of the German elite was matched with the adulation of the Third World that had become a fixation of leftist newsmen for decades and which was projected into support for the migrants. Socialism, as we know, was born on German soil and its nationalist and internationalist variants are both deeply rooted in German public thought. ‘Immigration is, rather than a burden, a gain’– that keynote was struck by federal president Joachim Gauck, a former East German pastor in January 2013, who at the same time forged the notion of Willkommenskultur which was to become official policy two years later. Then, in 2015, virtually the entire German élite, led by their Chancellor, nearly fainted from the sense of its own goodness and graciousness. They were infinitely fond of being on the right side of history at last – it was them who were the goodhearted, the magnanimous, the ones helping those in need. They were happy of being what they are – not only goodhearted but also rich enough to afford that luxury. They illuded themselves into believing that once they would prove to be pro-Europeans to the extent that their own nation is nothing more than just a burden and a shame for them, then they could finally turn the corner after the Second World War.

They were also confident that their protégés would be grateful and at least they would not remind them so often of Adolf. Germans tend to be in fact infinitely sentimental and romantic and dissimulate those traits by expressing arrogance and cynicism. They know no way in between. Once they are turned and sent into one given direction, no matter what happens they will not stop before reaching ‘the bunker’. This is precisely what happened this time. They were unable to correct their bad decision in time. Because once the directive was that ‘we will manage’ (wir schaffen das), then no matter what the consequences, it was only they had to follow the order. Who are the new arrivals and where do they come from? What are their intentions? Are they economic migrants? Or are they running for their lives? It didn’t matter. What mattered was that they were supposed to be good and even better than anyone else.

The New German Wonder Weapon: the Quota

„Politicians are like bad horsemen who are so preoccupied with staying in the saddle that they can't bother about where they're going.”

                                                                                              Joseph A. Schumpeter

The decision-makers of the Union are lunged by the Germans. The Union has by now become incapable of taking decisions or reacting due to its reluctance to move, the practice of sitting it out and procrastinating, that is the tactics of Merkeling. Its leadership has by now become completely Merkel-compatible.

Since July 2012 until the end of the year, 300,000 migrants landed in Europe through Greek and Italian territorial waters. Another 125,000 arrived in the first half of 2014 through Italy alone. About 35,000 of them asked for refugee status in Italy, while the rest went on towards Austria Germany and Sweden. There was a similar amount of pressure coming from Greece. Thus, Europe could prepare and should have prepared for the year 2015. In fact it had become obvious to anyone that the Union had lost control over its own borders!

Most political leaders nevertheless never even twitched their ears. What’s more, whenViktor Orbán launched a poster campaign and a national consultation to warn about a huge wave of mass migration threatening Europe, he was called all kinds of names. He was accused of inciting, alarming people without any reason and without knowing what he was talking about. He was creating the image of an enemy that only existed in his head and so on. He was poked fun at for weeks on end and derided by omniscient insiders, the ‘experts’, ‘the independent thinkers’, ‘the European minded’, ‘the depositories of objectivity ‘. Never mind that one month later Frontex director Fabrice Leggeri warned about 500,000 to 1 million migrants being ready in Libya to embark on the journey to Europe. When hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants rushed through our country in militant and well trained groups, European bureaucrats started routinely imitating action and quickly found their wonder weapon – the quota. They intended to relocate 160 thousand people among the member countries according to a certain mathematical formula. There was no decision on protecting the borders or countering the activity of human traffickers. Instead, an authentic expert solution was found – a quota system which was beautiful on paper and irreproachable in book-keeping terms. Never mind that it doesn’t work; never mind that the idea itself was unrealistic, as the migrants wanted to avail themselves of the welfare systems of Germany, Sweden, Holland, France and Great Britain and enjoy the living standards and the migrant-caressing treatment of those countries. Which according to the ECHR they are entitled to! And although many of them have darker skins than the average European, they are not as simpleminded as it would take to content themselves with Hungarian unemployment subsidies plus mandatory public work. Therefore, they take the first opportunity to leave any of the countries of the region towards the West. However, despite the obvious failure of the first experimental quota, the Germans and the European leaders in their wake not only insiston that system, but want to develop it into an automatic distribution mechanism. Do they believe once more to have a ’wonder weapon’ at hand?

Accepting the quota would compel us to live together with people who have been settled by others without consulting us. That would violate our national sovereignty and ignore the obvious intention of Hungary’s citizenry to preserve it exclusive right to decide whom it intends to grant asylum to or confer citizenship on.

In what is just a cherry on top of the cake, the political élites and public opinion are masterfully manipulated by the West European media. It is sufficient for them and ’civil society’ to show the photo of a dead child to put decision-makers under strong enough pressure to make them shed the remnants of their sobriety and survival instinct and join those who have a vested interest in ‘the life-saving business’. This was the simple but effective method they used to induce European decision-makers to take the right decision which was expressed in the 10 point action plan adopted by the European Council in April 2015. It was declared in fact that it was the most important task of the Union to prevent people from drowning in the sea. The priority was by no means to contain the flow of migrants but rather that of saving lives. The fleet dispatched by the European Union to the Mediterranean had thus been given the primordial task of easing the job of human traffickers, as it became sufficient for them to lead boats filled with migrants into the open sea, where they would be promptly rescued by the Union fleet or even more frequently by ‘relief organisations’ who would then safely and comfortably transport them onto European shores.

Let’s see things clearly: some of the leading politicians of Western governments, along with some of the leaders of the European Union, as well as the courts behaving like loose cannons and the NGOs exerting pressure on them cooperate with organised crime in destabilising Europe and undermine order on the continent. Invoking humaneness and human rights, bathing in the light of their supposed moral superiority, they promote organised human and drug trafficking as well as the free flow of trained terrorist fighters into Europe! (In January 2016, 77% of the 91,671 illegal migrants had no travel documents whatsoever!) Hopefully, we are not expected to believe that the well-oiled human trafficking and smuggling network that has been given a unique chance by the ‘humanitarian’ organisations, will not make full use of this opportunity. Among the unidentified and unscreened migrants there were people trained for terror attacks. Their luggage must have been full of weapons, drugs and who knows what else. It is inexplicable why they could not be checked just like our luggage is checked at airports, not excluding bodily search, in which case it would not have been necessary for enthusiastic volunteers to show a ‘sample’ gym bag amid the rattling about refugees luggage containing nothing but diapers, handkerchiefs, thermos flasks and panties. (It was that ‘spontaneous’ show that made me sniff that something was rotten there.) It is rare for a political leadership to create such chaos voluntarily in its own country, but that was precisely what the Germans did not only to their own country but to the continent as a whole! 13 September 2015 will go down to history as the starting date of the collapse of Germany and of the European Union in its wake, Schwarz notes.

Fake News Media

Thefake news media is also the enemy of European citizens.

„The fake news media is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American people.”

Donald Trump, Twitter, 02/17/2017

The political élite led by Germany’s irresponsible Chancellor Angela Merkel, her dumb and rude Austrian colleague Werner Faymann (2008-2016) and some of the utterly cynical European decision-makers have put themselves onto a kind of moral pedestal and are still unwilling to get off. As usual, they excoriate and dismiss as fascists anyone refusing to join them along their fatal path. Anyone who reminds them that they are bound by their oaths to serve their nation and Europe rather than the remaining 5 ½ billion inhabitants of this globe or even Soros’ NGOs. Austrians and other Westerners, accompanied by the admiration of their media transported migrants from Hungary by train, bus or taxi, to make their journeys towards their destinations as comfortable and safe as possible. Triumphant reports flooded the advanced world about all their acts of disregard towards the Hungarian authorities, coupled with absurd slanders about Hungary, accusing all of us of inhumaneness and cruelty. In September 2015, Austrians came across, thumbing their noses at the Hungarians while smuggling people across the border, demonstrating that as Western citizens they were above the law and could afford doing anything. After all, they were the goodhearted ones who were on the side of the poor migrants against Fascist, Nazi Hungarians!

Later on, when the Hungarian government completed the first fence along the Hungarian Serbian border, our country was subjected to a co-ordinated offensive by the whole Western political and media world.án became once again the chief enemy of progressive Europe. On September 16, migrants encouraged to break through the border seal at Röszke and in fact attempting to do so in a trained and coordinated fashion had to be repelled by our border guards using tear gas and water cannons, which was judged by pro-migrants as brutal and intolerable Fascism itself. We’d better not forget that what was defended there was Hungarian statehood. Our country, our birthplace.

The world was flooded by fake news proving that the ’independent’ actors of the mainstream media who were acting in unison intended to deny the right of the sovereign Hungarian state to control its borders and defend its territory.

We will not forget that when we erected a fence in order to stop the flow of migrants, we were being judged with haughty arrogance by many Germans, Austrians and other Westerners, their lackey media, including the ’authoritative’ American press. Forged photos, films, stories that would fit real horror novels were used in a slander campaign against us.

Therefore, whenever the same people who have been doing that to us again and again make bewildered comments about the Russians trying their skills in information campaigns and fake news, we just wave it all away. We already went across that double training a long time ago. We learnt Soviet propaganda under Communism, and since then we have taken several courses, including the one during the migration crisis on how the free press of the free world works. The faint illusions that we had still kept after the past few years melted away during the crazy flow of lies and slander of the autumn of 2015. Although we saw in live broadcasts on the TV screens that 85 to 90% of the migrant army rushing through our country was made up by young, strong men of military age, Western newscasts and on the spot reports would almost exclusively show children and women. So much for authenticity and credibility.

Austria would soon set up ‘winged gates’ and close down our borders, just like the Germans did. And the Germans were compelled to ask Turkey for help, which was, needless to say, morally, juridically and geopolitically in full conformity to the rules. As always.

As far as we’re concerned, we had another experience suggesting that it is advisable to interpret German aggressiveness expressed by pointing a scolding finger in token of moral superiority as a potential threat, the kind of which we have seen in the past on several occasions. And still, arrogance stemming from moral superiority even if supported by legal arguments, has never made anyone attractive. Germany has been and has remained the most problematic country in Europe.

The autumn of 2015 also proved that Germany and the Union leadership commandeered by it are unfit for handling crises. German politicians started coming to their senses only in the wake of the scandal of New Year’s Eve in Cologne, after the facts of mass sexual violence could not after all be kept secret. They secretly asked the Austrian government which was inclined to do so under pressure by the local public opinion which was increasingly showing signs of vitality, to propose the Balkan route to be closed down. In February 2016, ten countries affected (all of them except Greece), met in Vienna to seal Europe’s border in Macedonia. They also pledged to treat the Macedonian border as the outer border of the European Union and to jointly defend it. In March 2016, the Balkan route was thus closed. By that time, the countries of the region had aligned themselves with Budapest and expressed that they had had enough of Westerners’ haughty impotence and took the protection of their borders into their own hands, temporarily at first, but then for a longer future. Let’s make it clear that if that hadn’t happened, the European Union would have crumbled by now.

The reason why destabilizing Macedonia or putting in place a government there that is under his control has become so important for philanthropist George Soros who has a stake in the migration business is that this is how he could reopen the Balkan route, that he has been unable to use for a year now.

By now, the same top politicians in Germany and in Austria who in September 2015 excoriated Orbán from the moral height of their migrant-caressing positions and were daydreaming about an imaginary European solution, have become spokesmen for the cause Orbán had represented. They are tabling one after the other his proposals that were angrily rejected but which suddenly have become apt to manage the situation.

Schengen was killed by the migrant crisis and can only be resuscitated at the price of bolstering Europe’s outer borders. Europe’s sense of security has evaporated, along with public trust in the European institutions and their leaders. On June 23, 2016, Britons suddenly turned their backs on all that and opted for Brexit. While we have made our southern border impenetrable.

No strategy in sight

„The Western man is defined by his place in the productive rather than in the self-reproductive process.”


The saddest thing of all is that neither the European Union nor Germany have any kind of strategy about what to do with the migrants already here and the ones intending to come. Over the past 18 months, the migrants described by the independent media as a mass of brain surgeons, artists and nuclear physicists have often turned out to be illiterate, with one third having had elementary education only and only 10% having some kind of degree.

The terror danger they represent is also common knowledge. (Paris, November 23, 2015; Brussels, March 22, 2016; Nice, July 14, 2016; Cologne, December 31, 2015; Berlin, December 2016, etc.) Less than 100 managed/wanted to find a job on the labour market, while crime statistics increased and grave integration problems appeared everywhere.

By now, it is even admitted by the German press which was so famous for its migrant caressing attitude that a lot more criminals have landed in Germany than it had been originally expected. Over 1 million uncontrolled migrants have been attracted to Germany from regions under jihadist control in Libya, Iraq and Syria – a degree of irresponsibility hard to comprehend on the part of an elected government. People disappeared from the sight of the authorities by the hundreds of thousands before the requests of many of them could be processed. But the authorities are unable to deport even those whose requests have been rejected. What did they expect? At present, 5 million Muslims live in Germany to the authorities’ knowledge. Almost 10% of the populations of Austria, Sweden, Spain and Greece are Muslim. And I haven’t even mentioned their right to family reunion. This is why rather than coming forth with a strategy, the Germans and the Union bureaucrats directed by them talk about migrant quotas – devised by their Chancellor as a solution helping her to free herself from the trap she jumped so irresponsibly head on into. The quotas would mean a standing relocation automatism which would make it possible for those interested in the migrant business to continue importing aliens with the compulsory participation of all member countries.

That would shortly result in general destabilisation and situations of civil war which would make the intervention of NGOs and relief organisations indispensable in order to find a settlement. Was this possibly one of the topics at Soros’ and Junker’s chatting party? I would be surprised if they turned out to have only exchanged their views about CEU, the situation of Hungarian NGOs and Ukraine (!).

It is not worthwhile or necessary to deny that powerful financiers and politicians meet and discuss from time to time. Those meetings however are not usually widely publicised perhaps in order to prevent influence from becoming apparent. ‘I’m ready to be insulted as being insufficiently democratic… I am for [having] secret, dark debates’, Juncker once said.

The scene of George Soros and Juncker publicly that is demonstratively exchanging kisses in late April 2017 carries therefore a specific message. Then, in an unprecedented series of events, Soros was received by five, that is five Union commissioners. No politician on earth, not even the president of China himself could achieve that much! The message is that Soros is feeding the leaders of the Union from his hands and the latter must certainly guarantee that Soros’ migrant-supporting, helping at patronising organisations can count on unhindered further cooperation with the European Union.

Ceterum censeo:

   „Liberalism is the ideology of western suicide”

James Burnham

We share this continent with about half a billion European citizens. We have sufficient strength and experience to take back control from the hands of those who have produced this catastrophic situation. We cannot afford losing control over our borders, or becoming hostage to a misconceived foreign policy. In 2015 we were reached by the advanced party of the first wave of a great migration. (Ludger Kühnhardt: Die Flüchtlingsfrage als Weltordnungproblem. Massenzuwanderungen in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Abhandlungen zu Flüchtlingsfragen, Band, XVII. Wien. 1984.) We haven’t come over very well. The new immigrants have no reason to try their luck elsewhere.

We have to be ready for a new invasion.


[1.] Sources of my remarks are being referred to in the text, while the rest of the data and of the statements is drawn from the book under review itself.