November 4, 2009

Merkel addresses a joint session of Congress

THE HOUSE CHAMBER, WASH., D.C. NOVEMBER 3, 2009

CHANCELLOR MERKEL: Thank you. Thank you very much. It’s — it’s very moving, I must say.

Madame Speaker, Mr. Vice President, distinguished members of Congress — (through interpreter) — thank you for the great honor and privilege to address you today, shortly before the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall,

I am the second German chancellor on whom this great honor is bestowed. Konrad Adenauer was the first when in 1957 he addressed both houses of Congress, albeit one after the other.

Our lives could not have been more different. In 1957 I was a small child of 3 years. I lived in Brandenburg, together with my parents, a region that at the time belonged to the German Democratic Republic, the part of Germany that was not free. My father worked as a Protestant pastor. My mother, who had studied English and Latin to become a teacher, was not allowed to work in her chosen profession in the GDR.

In 1957 Konrad Adenauer was already 81 years old. He had witnessed the German Empire, the First World War, the Weimar Republic and the Second World War. The National Socialists ousted him from his office as lord mayor of the city of Cologne. After the war he was one of the men and women who built the free and democratic Federal Republic of Germany.

There is nothing more symbolic of this Federal Republic of Germany than its constitution, the Basic Law, the “Grundgesetz.” It was adopted exactly 60 years ago. Article I of the Basic Law reads as follows, and I quote, “The dignity of man is inviolable.”

This short and simple sentence, “The dignity of man is inviolable,” was the response to the catastrophe of the Second World War, to the murder of 6 million Jews in the Holocaust, to the hatred, destruction and annihilation that Germany brought over Europe and the rest of the world.

In only a few days, we’ll mark the 9th of November. On the 9th of November, 1989, the Berlin Wall fell. (Applause.) The 9th of November, 1938, however, also left an indelible mark on German and European history. On this day, the National Socialists pillaged and destroyed synagogues, set fire to them, and killed innumerable people. It was the beginning of what later turned into the break with civilization that was the Shoah. I cannot stand before you today without remembering the victims of that very day and of the Shoah.
There is one guest in the audience today who personally experienced the horrors of Germany under National Socialism and whom I got to know personally some time ago, Professor Fritz Stern. He was born in Breslau in 1926, then a German city, today a Polish city. And in 1938, he was able to flee with his family from the Nazis in 1938, and this at the very last minute. In his autobiography, published in 2006 under the title “Five Germanys I Have Known,” Fritz Stern describes the moment he arrived in New York Harbor in 1938, reaching a haven of freedom and security.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is wonderful that history wills us, Fritz Stern, then a 12-year-old boy driven out of his native Germany, and myself, originally born in the GDR, now chancellor of today’s reunited Germany, meet here today before this august assembly under the same roof. This fills me with great pride and great gratitude.
(Applause.)

In my wildest dreams, I would not have thought this possible 20 years ago, before the fall of the wall. For at the time, it was beyond my imagination to ever even travel to the United States, let alone stand here before you one day.

The land of unlimited opportunity was for me, for a long time, impossible to reach. The wall, barbed wire and the order to shoot, at those who tried to leave, limited my access to the free world.
Therefore I had to rely on films and books, some of which were smuggled by relatives from the West, to gain an impression of the United States. What did I see and what did I read? What was it I was passionate about?

I was passionate about the American dream, the possibility for each and every one to be successful, to actually make it in life through one’s own personal effort.

And like many other teenagers, I was passionate about jeans, probably a particular brand that you could not get in the GDR and which my aunt kindly, regularly sent to me from the West.

I was passionate about the vast American landscapes that seemed to breed the very spirit of freedom and independence. And immediately in 1990, my husband and I flew to America, for the first time, to California.

We shall never forget our first glimpse of the Pacific Ocean. It was simply gorgeous. And this — even though for me America seemed completely out of reach, until 1989, then on the 9th of November 1989, the Berlin Wall fell.

And this border which had divided a nation, for decades, keeping people in two different worlds, was now open. And this is why for me, today is first and foremost a time to say thank you.
I thank all those American and Allied pilots who heard and heeded the desperate appeal of then-Mayor of Berlin Ernst Reuter, in 1948, who said, you, the nations of this world, cast your eyes towards the city.

For months, these pilots flew food to Berlin for the airlift, saving the citizens from starvation. Many of these soldiers risked their lives. Dozens lost their lives. We shall remember and honor them forever. (Extended applause.)

And I thank the 16 million Americans stationed in Germany throughout the last decades, without whose support as soldiers, diplomats, and generally, as facilitators, overcoming the division of Europe would simply not have been possible. And we will also be more than pleased not only today but also in the future to have American soldiers in Germany. You are ambassadors of your country to Germany, just as many Americans with German roots continue to be ambassadors of my country over here in the United States of America.

I think of John F. Kennedy, who won the hearts of the Berliners, when, during his visit in 1961, after the wall had been built, he reached out to the desperate citizens of Berlin by saying, “Ich bin ein Berliner.” I think of Ronald Reagan, who, far earlier than most, clearly saw the sign of the times and, standing in front of the Brandenburg Gate, already in 1987, called out, “Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” (Extended applause.) This appeal shall remain forever in my heart.

I thank George Herbert Walker Bush for the trust he placed in Germany and then-Chancellor Helmut Kohl, offering something of immeasurable value to us Germans already in May 1989: partnership in leadership. What a generous offer 40 years after the end of the Second World War.

It was actually only last Saturday that we met again in Berlin, incidentally together with Mikhail Gorbachev. And to him, too, we owe a debt of gratitude.

Ladies and gentlemen, to put it in just one sentence, I know — we Germans know how much we owe to you, our American friends, and we shall never — I personally shall never, ever forget this. (Applause.)

The common quest for freedom released incredible forces all over Europe: the trade union Solidarnosc in Poland, the reformers around Vaclav Havel in Czechoslovakia, the first opening of the Iron Curtain in Hungary and the demonstrations in the GDR every Monday. Where there used to be a dark wall, a door suddenly opened, and we all walked through it, out into the streets, into the churches, across borders. Each and everyone was suddenly given the chance to build something new, to help shape things, to dare a new beginning.

I, too, sought a new beginning. I left my work as a physicist in the Academy of Science in East Berlin behind me and went into politics, because I was finally able to do something to make a difference, because I had gained the impression now things can be changed; now you can do something.

Ladies and gentlemen, 20 years have gone by since we were given this incredible gift of freedom, but still, nothing keeps me more enthralled, nothing spurs me on as much, nothing fills me with stronger positive feelings than the force of freedom.
Whoever has been so positively surprised in his or her lifetime holds many things to be possible.

Or, to borrow the words of Bill Clinton when he was in Berlin in 1994, and I quote, “Nothing will stop us. All things are possible.”
Yes, everything is possible. It is possible for a woman like myself to be here today. It is possible for a man like Arnold Vaatz, a dissident in Dresden during GDR times who spent time in prison because of this, to be present here today; a member of the German Bundestag, the German parliament, and a member of my delegation. Yes — (applause) — yes, everything is possible, also in our century, the 21st century, the age of globalization.

Back home in Germany, just as here in America, many people are afraid of globalization. We don’t simply pass over this fact and these fears; we do see the difficulties. And yet, it is up to us to convince people that globalization is the great global opportunity for each and every continent; for it forces all of us to work together with others.
The alternative to globalization would mean shutting ourselves off against others. But instead of being a viable alternative, this would only lead into isolation and misery. Thinking in terms of alliances, thinking in terms of partnerships, however, this will take us into a good future.

Ladies and gentlemen, America and Europe have certainly had their share of disagreements. Some may sometimes consider the others to be too hesitant or too fearful; or from the opposite perspective, too headstrong and too pushy. And yet, I am deeply convinced that Europe will not find a better partner than America; nor will America find a better partner than Europe. (Applause.)

For what brings the Europeans and Americans together and keeps them together is not only a common history. What brings Europeans and Americans together and keeps them there are not only shared interests and common global challenges, which exist among all regions of the world. This alone would not be sufficient to forge this very special partnership between Europe and America, and to make it last. There is more to it. What brings Europeans and Americans together and keeps them close is a common basis of shared values. It is a common idea of the individual and its inalienable dignity. It is a common understanding of freedom and responsibility. This is what we stand up for in this unique transatlantic partnership and in this community of shared values that is NATO.

Thus partnership and leadership is filled with life, ladies and gentlemen. (Applause.)

It was this basis of values that ended the Cold War, and it is this basis of values that enables us now to stand the test of our time. And we need to stand the test of our time. Germany is united. Europe is united. That is something that we’ve been able to do. Now today’s generation needs to prove that it is able to meet the challenges of the 21st century and that, in a sense, we are able to tear down walls of today.

What does this mean? Well, it means create freedom and security. It means create prosperity and justice. And it means protecting our planet.

And here again America and Europe are called upon in a very special way to do their bit. Even after the end of the Cold War, therefore, what is important is to see to it that we tear down walls in the minds of people and walls that separate different concepts of life, that make it difficult time and again for us to understand each other all over the world.

And this is why the ability to show tolerance towards others is so important. For us, our way of life is the best possible way, but others do not necessarily feel that way or think that way. There are different solutions to create peaceful coexistence. Tolerance and showing tolerance means showing respect for the history, the tradition, the religion and the cultural identity of others.

But let there be no misunderstanding. Tolerance does not mean “anything goes.” There must be zero tolerance towards all those who show no respect for the inalienable rights of the individual and who violate human rights. And zero tolerance needs to be shown when there is a risk of weapons of mass destruction falling, for example, into the hands of Iran and threatening our security. (Applause.)
Iran needs to be aware of this. Iran knows our offer, but Iran also knows where we draw a line. A nuclear bomb in the hands of an Iranian president who denies the Holocaust, threatens Israel and denies Israel the right to exist is not acceptable. (Applause.)

Security of the state of Israel is for me non-negotiable, now and forever. (Applause.) Incidentally, not only Israel is threatened, but the whole of the free world. Whoever threatens Israel also threatens us. (Applause.)

This is why the free world meets this threat head-on, if necessary through tough economic sanctions. And this is why we in Germany will do everything we can, in order to lend our support to the Middle East peace process, with the aim of establishing a two-state solution: a Jewish state of Israel and a Palestinian state living peacefully side by side. (Applause.)

We also stand up against the threat of international terrorism. We are aware of the fact that no country, no matter how strong, can do this alone. We all need partners. We are only strong if we are joined by others, in a community of partners.

Since we shared then-President George W. Bush’s view after the attacks of 9/11 that we had to prevent Afghanistan from ever harboring such a threat to the world again, Germany is present there on the ground, since 2002, with the third-largest troop contingent.
We want to make the concept of an integrated or networked security successful. This means civil and military commitment are inextricably linked. The international community’s mission in Afghanistan is without any doubt a tough one. It demands a lot from all of us. And it now needs to be transferred to the next phase, as soon as the new Afghan government is in office.

Our objective must be a strategy: the transfer of responsibility, which we intend to develop together during a joint U.N. conference, at the beginning of next year.

We will be successful if, as we have done up to now, we continue to travel this road together. Every step of the way, Germany stands ready to shoulder its responsibility. (Applause.)

There is no doubt that NATO is and remains the crucial cornerstone of our common security. Its security concept is continuously further developed and adapted, to meet the challenges of the day.
But its foundation and its clear compass for peace and freedom remain unchanged.

We Europeans, I am convinced, may contribute even more in the future, for we Europeans are currently working on giving a new contractual basis to our European Union. The last signature has just been put on this document. This will make the European Union stronger and more capable of action, and thereby turn it into a strong and reliable partner for the United States. We can build stable partnerships on this sound basis, first and foremost with Russia, China and India.

For, ladies and gentlemen, the world we live in today is both freer and more integrated than ever before. The fall of the Berlin Wall, the technological revolution in information and communication technology, the rise of China, India and other countries to become dynamic economies — all of this has changed the world of the 21st century into something completely different from what we knew in the 20th century. And this is a good thing, for freedom is the very essence of our economy and our society. Man can only be creative when he is free.

But what is also clear is that freedom does not stand alone. It is freedom in responsibility and freedom to show and shoulder responsibility. For this, the world needs an underlying order. The mere collapse of the international financial markets has shown what happens when there is none, when there is no underpinning order.
There is one — if there is one lesson the world has learned from the financial crisis of last year, it is that the globalized economy needs a global order underpinning it, a global framework of rules. Without global rules on transparency and supervision, we will not gain more freedom but rather risk the abuse of freedom, and thus risk instability. (Applause.)

In a way, this is a second wall that needs to fall, a wall standing in the way of a truly global economic order, a wall made up of regional and exclusively national thinking.

The G-20 is key to this cooperation among the most important industrialized countries and emerging economies. Here too, cooperation between the Americans and the Europeans is a crucial cornerstone. It is not an exclusive, but an inclusive cooperation. The G-20 have shown that they are capable of action. And we need to resist the pressure of those who almost led the nations of this planet to the abyss.

The long and short of it is that international economic policy needs to be more sustainable, because this crisis was also the result of a way of thinking that was too short-term. As a consequence, millions of people all over the world may lose their jobs and are threatened by poverty and hunger. To achieve prosperity and justice, we have to do everything to prevent such a crisis in the future. (Applause.)
This also means not giving in to the temptation of protectionism. And this is why the Doha negotiations and the framework of WTO are so important. A success at the Doha round would send a very important message of openness for global trade, particularly in the current crisis.
And just as much, the Transatlantic Economic Council can fulfill an important task in preventing the race for subsidies and giving incentives to reduce barriers to trade between Europe and America. Please do let us jointly work for a global economic order that is in the interest of both America and Europe. (Applause.)

Ladies and gentlemen, that global challenges can only be met by comprehensive international cooperation is also true for the third great test we need to stand in the 21st century — the wall that seemingly separates the present from the future.

This wall bars from view the needs of future generations; it prevents us from doing what is urgently necessary to preserve the basis of our very life and our climate.

We can already see now where this wasteful attitude towards our future leads: Icebergs are melting in the Arctic; in Africa, people become refugees because their environment has been destroyed; the global sea level is rising. I am delighted to note that President Obama and you, in your daily work, consider the protection of our climate to be a very important task. We all know we have no time to lose.

We need an agreement — (applause) — we need an agreement at the climate conference in Copenhagen in December; we need an agreement on one objective: Global warming must not exceed 2 degrees Celsius. To achieve this, we need the readiness of all countries to accept internationally binding obligations.

We cannot afford missing the objectives in climate protection that signs tells us have to be met. This would not only be irresponsible from an environmental point of view; it would also be technologically shortsighted, for the developments of new technologies in the field of energy offers great opportunities for growth and innovative jobs. (Applause.)

No doubt about it, in December, the world will look to us, to the Europeans and to the Americans. And it is true, there can be no agreement without China and India. (Applause.)
But I’m convinced, once we in Europe and America show ourselves ready to adopt binding agreements, we will also be able to persuade China and India to join in.

And then in Copenhagen, we shall be able to overcome this wall separating the present from the future, in the interest of our children and grandchildren and in the interest of sustainable development all over the world. (Applause.)

Ladies and gentlemen, I’m convinced, just as we found the strength in the 20th century, to bring about the fall of a wall made of concrete and barbed wire, we shall now show that necessary strength to overcome the walls of the 21st century: walls in our minds, walls of short-sighted self interest, walls between the present and the future.

Ladies and gentlemen, my confidence is nurtured and comes from a very important source, a very special sound, the sound of the liberty bell in Schoneberg town hall in Berlin.

Since 1950, a bell cast after the original American Liberty Bill hangs there in the belfry. A gift from American citizens, it is a symbol of the promise of freedom, a promise that has been fulfilled.

On the 3rd of October 1990, the liberty bell rang again signaling unification of Germany, the greatest moment of joy for the German people. On the 13th of September 2001, it tolled out again two days after 9/11, the greatest day of mourning for the American people.
(In English.) The Freedom Bell in Berlin is like the Liberty Bell in Philadelphia: a symbol which reminds us that freedom does not come about of itself. It must be struggled for, and then defended anew every day of our lives. In this endeavor, Germany and Europe will also in future remain strong and dependable partners for America.
That I promise you. (Applause.)
Thank you very much. (Cheers, applause.)

Posted by Ted Belman @ 3:26 pm |

9 Comments »


  1. Great speech. 3 concerns however:

    1. Merekl stated:

    1. There must be zero tolerance towards all those who show no respect for the inalienable rights of the individual and who violate human rights. And zero tolerance needs to be shown when there is a risk of weapons of mass destruction falling, for example, into the hands of Iran and threatening our security.

    Iran needs to be aware of this. Iran knows our offer, but Iran also knows where we draw a line. A nuclear bomb in the hands of an Iranian president who denies the Holocaust, threatens Israel and denies Israel the right to exist is not acceptable.

    Security of the state of Israel is for me non-negotiable, now and forever. Incidentally, not only Israel is threatened, but the whole of the free world. Whoever threatens Israel also threatens us.

    This is why the free world meets this threat head-on, if necessary through tough economic sanctions. And this is why we in Germany will do everything we can, in order to lend our support to the Middle East peace process, with the aim of establishing a two-state solution: a Jewish state of Israel and a Palestinian state living peacefully side by side.

    While Merkel’s words said with obvious conviction are to be applauded, her voicing continued support for the 2 state solution, reveals hers and Western blindness, excuses for or tolerance of Palestinian intractable hate filled intolerance for Jews and not just Israelis. Palestinians, be they terrorists or their Palestinian cheerleaders, in their hate driven lust for Jewish blood not only show no respect for the inalienable rights of Jews and who violate Jewish human rights, they treat their own people who might disagree with them with the same murderous savagery.

    That Jew hatred that Merkel says tolerant nations must have zero tolerance for is rampant throughout the Middle East and intensifying. Westerners whom Merkel has called on to have zero tolerance for such hate filled intolerance have done little if anything to rise up against it and put out the fires of Jew hating intolerance in the Middle East.

    One can only hope that any pressure that Merkel might bring to bear on Israel, falls far short of her promise to do all she can to establish the 2 state because in her heart of hearts she knows full well that included in the group she called for zero tolerance to be shown, are the Palestinians.

    2. the world needs an underlying order. The mere collapse of the international financial markets has shown what happens when there is none, when there is no underpinning order.
    There is one — if there is one lesson the world has learned from the financial crisis of last year, it is that the globalized economy needs a global order underpinning it, a global framework of rules. Without global rules on transparency and supervision, we will not gain more freedom but rather risk the abuse of freedom, and thus risk instability.

    In a way, this is a second wall that needs to fall, a wall standing in the way of a truly global economic order, a wall made up of regional and exclusively national thinking.

    The G-20 is key to this cooperation among the most important industrialized countries and emerging economies. Here too, cooperation between the Americans and the Europeans is a crucial cornerstone. It is not an exclusive, but an inclusive cooperation. The G-20 have shown that they are capable of action. And we need to resist the pressure of those who almost led the nations of this planet to the abyss.

    The long and short of it is that international economic policy needs to be more sustainable, because this crisis was also the result of a way of thinking that was too short-term. As a consequence, millions of people all over the world may lose their jobs and are threatened by poverty and hunger. To achieve prosperity and justice, we have to do everything to prevent such a crisis in the future.
    This also means not giving in to the temptation of protectionism.

    This comes close to a new world economic order. Though I concur with Merkel that protectionism can be self defeating, especially where the reaction of trading partners is to respond with quid pro quo protectionism, some protectionsim if it can find patriotic national support can help to restore economic sectors of a nation’s economy that strengthens the economy overall and still allows for global economic policies.

    In this regard, Canada, the States and much of the EU have lost considerable ground in the manufacturing sectors with a concurrent loss of jobs that appears not to be sufficiently made up by developing other businesses providing substantial job opportunities.

    Farming out maufacturing jobs or outsourcing as it is known to poor nations that can produce the same product much cheaper has at least thus far, made the poorer nations richer and stronger, but has not brought a commensurate benefit to the developed nations’ economies. In fact, it continues to harm developed industrialized nation’s economies to the extent it contributes to higher unemployment levels.

    Regaining a foothold in the manufacturing sectors and creating more jobs is doable, but would require society to be inspired to support such endeavour and be prepared to pay and extra buck or two for a developed nations’ products.

    Developed nations have traditionally displayed an altruistic need to help poorer nations and have throughout the decades that times have been pretty good for them.

    Times however have changed. Economic conditions being as poor as they are for a great many in developed nations should give Western leaders pause to consider whether they can still afford to be as generous as they have been in helping poorer nations by outsourcing manufacturing to them when their own societies are crying out for jobs.

    If Western developed nations were to re-establish at least some manufacturing sectors that they have abandoned for the past few decades, I doubt that would be significant enough to undermine Merkel’s global economic theories, which do hold some appeal.

    3. there can be no (anti-global warming) agreement without China and India. But I’m convinced, once we in Europe and America show ourselves ready to adopt binding agreements, we will also be able to persuade China and India to join in.

    This is more wishful thinking then anything else.

    We live in a highly competitive economic world. China has prospered largely from taking the benefit of much of our Western manufacturing sector the West handed to it and from relying upon its own state sponsored industrial espionage, theft of techologies and infringement of Western patented technologies.

    While the West is in the economic throes of instability and the suffering that goes along with it, China has the world’s fastest growing economy and could care less and will do nothing to aid its willing and unwitting Western benefactors and those from whom they stole Western technology. One cannot expect much if any help from Russia either, unless there is something in it for the Chinese and the Russians.

    India in spite of its healthy economic growth, still will not fall into line with the West over global warming out of the goodness of its heart.

    In conclusion, in spite of a number of points I have raised questions in respect of, overall, Merkel did make a great speech and one borne of sincerity and conviction.

    Comment by Bill Narvey — November 4, 2009 @ 10:34 pm



  2. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by JewPI News, Aryeh ben Avraham. Aryeh ben Avraham said: #Israpundit Merkel addresses a joint session of Congress: THE HOUSE CHAMBER, THE CAPITOL, WASHINGTON.. http://bit.ly/113Qb4 [...]

    Pingback by Tweets that mention Israpundit » Blog Archive » Merkel addresses a joint session of Congress -- Topsy.com — November 4, 2009 @ 11:28 pm



  3. And here again America and Europe are called upon in a very special way to do their bit. Even after the end of the Cold War, therefore, what is important is to see to it that we tear down walls in the minds of people and walls that separate different concepts of life, that make it difficult time and again for us to understand each other all over the world.

    And this is why the ability to show tolerance towards others is so important. For us, our way of life is the best possible way, but others do not necessarily feel that way or think that way. There are different solutions to create peaceful coexistence. Tolerance and showing tolerance means showing respect for the history, the tradition, the religion and the cultural identity of others.

    This disturbs me. We should not be tolerant of sharia and there is no peaceful coexistence to be had with muslims who’s religious doctrine commands that we submit to islam.

    We Europeans, I am convinced, may contribute even more in the future, for we Europeans are currently working on giving a new contractual basis to our European Union. The last signature has just been put on this document. This will make the European Union stronger and more capable of action, and thereby turn it into a strong and reliable partner for the United States. We can build stable partnerships on this sound basis, first and foremost with Russia, China and India.

    Again, there is no partnerships to be had with Russia and China, authoritarian regimes which cannot be trusted.

    For, ladies and gentlemen, the world we live in today is both freer and more integrated than ever before. The fall of the Berlin Wall, the technological revolution in information and communication technology, the rise of China, India and other countries to become dynamic economies — all of this has changed the world of the 21st century into something completely different from what we knew in the 20th century. And this is a good thing, for freedom is the very essence of our economy and our society. Man can only be creative when he is free.

    Actually most of the world is not free.

    But what is also clear is that freedom does not stand alone. It is freedom in responsibility and freedom to show and shoulder responsibility. For this, the world needs an underlying order. The mere collapse of the international financial markets has shown what happens when there is none, when there is no underpinning order.
    There is one — if there is one lesson the world has learned from the financial crisis of last year, it is that the globalized economy needs a global order underpinning it, a global framework of rules. Without global rules on transparency and supervision, we will not gain more freedom but rather risk the abuse of freedom, and thus risk instability. (Applause.)

    In a way, this is a second wall that needs to fall, a wall standing in the way of a truly global economic order, a wall made up of regional and exclusively national thinking.

    The G-20 is key to this cooperation among the most important industrialized countries and emerging economies. Here too, cooperation between the Americans and the Europeans is a crucial cornerstone. It is not an exclusive, but an inclusive cooperation. The G-20 have shown that they are capable of action. And we need to resist the pressure of those who almost led the nations of this planet to the abyss.

    Again, I don’t like what this statement seems to imply. It sounds like the relinquishing of our soevereignty in favor of one world government.

    Some of what she said was good, in particular about Iran.

    Comment by Laura — November 4, 2009 @ 11:54 pm



  4. Universalism is a great policy…..for Socialistic countries, but for democracies like the US, where the population considers hard work and innovation and low taxes and baseball rule the roost. There are many in the US, mostly minorities, academics, illegals and small minded people who stand to gain by redistribution of wealth. If they take what I have, they will be sadly dissappointed; however, I have worked hard all of my life to get what I do have and I’ll be damned before I give it to lazy low lifes. If they try to take it from me, be warned that I have enough fire power to hold off an army and a very mean dog.

    Comment by Ed D — November 5, 2009 @ 1:46 am



  5. Listen folks the U.N. should have taught us one thing. It stinks. I don’t want the U.N. dictating to me likewise I would not want G-20 calling the shots either.

    In either case the deck would be stacked with scumbag nations and we would be at their mercy, just ask Israel if the U.N. (worthless entity) is fair and balance.

    Comment by rongrand — November 5, 2009 @ 2:35 am



  6. The G20 is not about socialism. It is about trying to get nations on board to establish order and re-establish stability in the global economy in the hope that current economic crises amongst especially developed Western nations can be overcome and future economic instabilities are averted.

    America is not the only nation suffering an economic crisis. Other developed Western nations are in crisis as well and those individual nations’ crises have a ripple effect throughout the global economy.

    The G20 does not have a mandate to have all nations relinquish sovereignty to some new world economic government. To be sure the goals of the G 20 will not be met in full as various nations will not find those goals in keeping with their own self interests. What is hoped for is that some agreement might be reached that will assist in ending the current crises and averting future crises.

    For a better insight into the purposes and goals of the G20 the following are just some articles that give some insight.

    About the G-20 - Pittsburgh Conference - http://www.pittsburghsummit.gov/about/g20/index.htm

    About G 20 - http://www.g20.org/about_what_is_g20.aspx

    Understanding the G-20 Economic Stimulus Plans - Brookings Institute - http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2009/03_g20_stimulus_prasad.aspx

    Nations Ready Big Changes to Global Economic Policy http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125348959155226421.html

    Leaders of G-20 Vow to Reshape Global Economy (NYT) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/26/world/26summit.html

    Comment by Bill Narvey — November 5, 2009 @ 2:26 pm



  7. Bill, I really do not care what your stated purpose of the UN is, the large majority in the USA want no part in the global aim of telling us how to run our country and what to do with our wealth. Their agent in arms, Obama, is trying his hardest, along with some useful idiots in Congress, to do just that. All freedom loving countries have their patriots like the US had when they established this country and, like Israel, who had the zealots on Masada, would stand up to the evils cast upon them. We must stand up again and destroy these bastards, once and for all. Let’s beat our plowshares into swords.

    Comment by Ed D — November 5, 2009 @ 6:07 pm



  8. Ed, you are wrongly conflating the G20 with the corruptions and perversities of the UN and further confounding things by mixing in Obama’s spread the wealth economic notions which are not as he once advocated them, then throwing in for good measure the patriotic attitudes that found America and characterized the Jewish zealots on Masada.

    I am talking only about the G20 and their broad goals of global economic stability. The expression, there is more then one way to skin a cat comes to mind. How developed nations better assure global economic stability need not be acheived only through a socialist paradigm or the giving up of one’s sovereignty to some global economic government.

    Comment by Bill Narvey — November 5, 2009 @ 6:27 pm



  9. Merkel: myself, originally born in the GDR

    Merkel: My mother, who had studied English and Latin to become a teacher, was not allowed to work in her chosen profession in the GDR.

    However, see what Wikipedia is saying:

    Angela Merkel was born as Angela Dorothea Kasner in Hamburg on 17 July 1954, as the daughter of Horst Kasner (b. 6 August 1926 in Berlin-Pankow), a Lutheran pastor and his wife, Herlind (b. 8 July 1928 in Danzig, as Herlind Jentzsch), a teacher of English and Latin. Merkel’s father studied Theology in Heidelberg (then West Germany) and, afterwards, in Hamburg. In 1954 her father received a pastorate at the church in Quitzow (near Perleberg in Brandenburg) which then was in the socialist German Democratic Republic (GDR), or Communist East Germany, and the family moved to Templin. Gerd Langguth, a former senior member of Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union, states in his book[4] that the family’s ability to travel freely from East to West Germany during the following years, as well as their possession of two automobiles, leads to the conclusion that Merkel’s father had a “sympathetic” relationship with the communist regime, since such freedom and perquisites for a Christian pastor and his family would have been otherwise impossible in East Germany.
    Like most pupils, Merkel was a member of the official, Socialist-led youth movement Free German Youth (FDJ). Later she became a member of the district board and secretary for “Agitprop” (Agitation and Propaganda) at the Academy of Sciences in that organisation.[5] However, she did not take part in the secular coming of age ceremony Jugendweihe, which was common in East Germany, and was confirmed instead. Merkel herself described her FDJ youth movement years as “cultural work”.

    Merkel: In only a few days, we’ll mark the 9th of November. On the 9th of November, 1989, the Berlin Wall fell. (Applause.) The 9th of November, 1938, however, also left an indelible mark on German and European history. On this day, the National Socialists pillaged and destroyed synagogues, set fire to them, and killed innumerable people. It was the beginning of what later turned into the break with civilization that was the Shoah. I cannot stand before you today without remembering the victims of that very day and of the Shoah. … The common quest for freedom released incredible forces all over Europe: the trade union Solidarnosc in Poland, the reformers around Vaclav Havel in Czechoslovakia, the first opening of the Iron Curtain in Hungary and the demonstrations in the GDR every Monday. Where there used to be a dark wall, a door suddenly opened, and we all walked through it, out into the streets, into the churches, across borders. Each and everyone was suddenly given the chance to build something new, to help shape things, to dare a new beginning.

    Indeed, 9th of November 1938 is connected to 9th of November 1989. The revival of Great Germany (what they call “reunification” — imagine Israel would seak for such a reunification, what would then the Germans say?!), hence this Big Germany revival concluded very quickly and logically to the Balkan Wars in which Germany played the master role, again, like in WWI and WWII, this time the war lord was Genscher.

    Wikipedia: Genscher was born at Reideburg (Province of Saxony), now a part of Halle, in what later became East Germany. At a young age, Genscher joined the Hitler Youth and later served as a member of the Air Force Support Personnel (Luftwaffenhelfer) in the Army from 1943 to 1945. After reaching 18 years of age (1945) he became a member of the Nazi Party, despite regulations encouraging active duty military members to avoid holding membership in political organizations (these regulations were widely ignored in the later days of German dictator Adolf Hitler’s Germany).
    Genscher fought as a young man in the Wehrmacht at the end of the Second World War. In 1945, Genscher was a young soldier in General Walther Wenck’s 12th Army. He participated in Wenck’s ill-fated relief effort during the Battle of Berlin which Hitler saw as a last roll of the dice to save the besieged city. While Wenck’s attack was unable to relieve or save the city of Berlin, he was able to link up with the remnants of Colonel General (Generaloberst) Theodor Busse’s 9th Army. Together, they marched what was left of both armies, along with many civilians, to the American lines and surrendered. For this reason, Genscher briefly became an American and British prisoner of war. After World War II, he studied law and economics at the universities of Halle and Leipzig (1946-1949) and joined the East German Liberal Democratic Party (LDPD) in 1946. In 1952, Genscher fled to West Germany, where he joined the Free Democratic Party (FDP). In 1972, while Minister for the Interior, he rejected Israel’s offer to send an Israeli special forces unit to Germany to deal with the Black September hijacking of the 1972 Summer Olympics. This fateful decision led to the events known as the Munich massacre. The German government said they could deal with it themselves; they were wrong. It ended in a bloody shootout at Fürstenfeldbruck Air Base which left 11 hostages, 5 terrorists, and 1 German policeman dead. Genscher’s popularity with Israel declined further when he endorsed the handing over of the three captured hijackers to the Palestinians following the hijacking of a Lufthansa plane on October 29, 1972. This was widely believed to be a setup (German - Palestinian collusion) and led to further criticism of the German government for negotiating with hijackers. About this time, German relations with Israel, already strained after the Holocaust, deteroriated even further. In 1991, Genscher raced to recognize the Republic of Croatia in the Croatian War of Independence shortly after the Serbian attack on Vukovar. The rest of the European Union was pressured to follow suit soon afterward. Historically Germany has had a close collaboration with Croatia. Germany was active in putting together the coalition against Slobodan Miloševi?.

    Comment by Tar Yag — November 5, 2009 @ 8:15 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.