(Click on the image to enlarge)

Roma community members have called on EU leaders to speak out against the brutal death of Romani man Stanislav Tomáš in the Czech Republic last month, given its parallels with to the killing of George Floyd in the US.

Video footage of his arrest, which went viral on social media, shows a police officer kneeling on Stanislav’s chest and neck for around five minutes.

The Roma man later died in an ambulance called to the scene.

His death has sparked widespread criticism against discrimination faced by Roma in the Czech Republic and elsewhere, triggering protests all over Europe, which will continue this week.

Members of the Roma community wrote to EU leaders, including European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, demanding “a clear stance against antigypsyism and violence” and asking them to “publicly condemn all acts of police brutality against Roma citizens”.

They regretted that while the murder of George Floyd sparked a wave of outcry from EU officials, “in the case of its own citizens dying in similar circumstances, the EU has remained silent”.

“Though the violent police intervention was reported widely, there has been a deafening silence from EU leaders who have not said a word against the brutal act,” warned Zeljko Jovanovic, director of Roma Initiatives Office, one of the organisations involved in the peaceful protests.

“A free society is one without police brutality in which all citizens can feel safe and protected. Regretfully, we Roma do not feel safe in our own communities as long as we are endangered by law enforcement due to the colour of our skin, and the deeply-rooted prejudices, stereotypes and racism we face every day,” he added.

The NGOs are also calling on the EU institutions to exercise “firm action against police brutality… to make sure no other citizens die at the hands of the police”.

Advocacy group Amnesty International argued that the neck-restraint technique used by Czech police was “reckless, unnecessary, and disproportionate, and, therefore,, unlawful”.

Czech officials, including prime minister Andrej Babiš, have defended the police’s handling of a case.

In a statement, the police said that the preliminary autopsy reports “ruled out a connection with the operation that preceded the arrest of the suspect,” claiming that a drug overdose was the main cause of death.

As human rights activists started using the hashtag “#RomaLivesMatter” on social media, police forces tweeted that “there is no ‘Czech Floyd'”.

Meanwhile, the Strasburg-based Council of Europe has called for an “urgent, thorough, and independent investigation” into Stanislav’s death.

Romani are Europe’s largest ethnic minority – with around 6 million living in the EU.

euobserver.com

The Visegrad nations in the center of Europe are challenging the orthodoxy of the EU elite and throughout history direct challenges to enforced dogmas spark a lot of chaos, change, and empower others to stand against the status quo.

Right before the Protestant Revolution in Europe many significant players doubted the necessity of Rome and had some qualms about certain dogma, but they dared not speak heresy, at least not publicly. When Martin Luther nailed his list of complaints to that church door it instantly shifted the Overton Window just enough to make yesterday’s unspeakable blasphemy, become a possible option with many lethal consequences. Luther’s heresy (or bravery depending on your religious views) opened the door for others to follow and led to the downfall of the Catholic Church in many nations, ending Western European Christian unity. It looks like history is yet again repeating itself as certain leaders are spreading a new heresy, openly and loudly against the sacred dogma of 21st century Europe.

We have all heard about the famous Russian law that bans “homosexual propoganda”. This has been blasted by the mainstream media but it is very much an external problem from their standpoint. In the minds of today’s spineless and genderless European hipster serfdom Russia is a distant backwards realm locked eternally in the Dark Ages. The Western subconscious mind is held together by the glue of belief in its own inherent superiority. This makes the Russians eternally bad, but that bad is an “out-group” sort of bad.

Image: Viktor Orban has chosen the path of most resistance in Europe or even perhaps career martyrdom.

But now in the heartland of the EU itself, the Hungarians, under the full weight of Brussel’s bureaucratic yoke and decades of Hollywood influence, have passed a similar set of laws to those in Russia about banning LGBT propaganda. This is happening at home and in the heart of Europe by members of the in-group. At the very least the Hungarians under Orban are now spreading a heresy against the core values of the EU.

Since the end of WWII Conservatives have utterly failed on all fronts to counter the changes to society that have happened. There has really only been a Liberal Agenda at high speed vs. a slower incremental Liberal Agenda that is slowed down by the human road bumps that are the modern Right. Rather than simply resisting the “inevitable” rise of gay marriage and adoption, Hungary is actually for the first time actively pushing in the opposite direction which could be that Martin Luther or Rosa Parks moment. The Silent Majority clearly sees that it is wrong to destroy the idea of gender and the family for the sake of the feelings of a tiny percent of the population and cradle-to-the-grave propaganda has failed to change this in the former Warsaw Pact nations. The absolute majority of humanity does not want to go to the back of the bus anymore for the ability of drag queens to dance upon the centuries of culture and struggle that got humanity to where it is today.

Czech President Milos Zeman has come out vocally and openly to support the legislation made by his neighbors. While joyously smiling, he told CNN that if he were younger he would “get trains and busses full of heterosexuals to come to Prague in order to show how absurd it (LGBT) is”. That is a very blasphemous thing for an EU leader to say. Zeman, who has already been deemed a Russian agent by the Mainstream Media, perhaps simply feels he has nothing to lose as he nears the end of his life. It is easy to be bold at the end of the road.

Of course the reaction from mainstream dogmatic EU officials has been shock and horror with calls coming to excommunicate Hungary. Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte declared that because of this move by Orban, Hungary “has no place” in the European Union. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen was a bit softer, saying “This Hungarian bill is a shame”. The EU bureaucracy has also called this law and similar Polish maneuvers to be “grotesque”.

Image: The Visegrad Group has a much more “European” vision for the EU.

The Hungarians passing some bill to ever so partially block LGBT, with the Poles trying shenanigans of their own with praise from an elderly Czech president may not sound that important, especially to those living in countries that have a more normal view on gender roles. However, we cannot ignore that for the Western elites LGBT is a core inarguable dogma. This is something that the EU takes dead serious and is a core element of their agenda.

Every corporation, every embassy, every school and every advertisement over the last 10 years has become increasingly rainbow ridden. The LGBT movement is vastly louder in its promotion from the West than Capitalism or Democracy ever were during the Cold War. Gay parade promotion has become a symbols of Westernness and Globalism and are a real foreign policy objective for the USA/EU. The push is on and has been on for quite some time. As we have seen standing up against this movement in the west is essentially career suicide at the least. This article does not use the terms “heresy” and “blasphemy” to be cute, this is really the dynamic at play – a zealous and extreme hatred of the family and traditional gender roles that has zero tolerance of any thoughts or actions to the contrary.

The Visegrad nations in the center of Europe are challenging the orthodoxy of the EU elite and throughout history direct challenges to enforced dogmas spark a lot of chaos, change, and empower others to stand against the status quo.

The strategic consequences of the Visegrad nations’ moves against Euro Dogma.

• The EU could simply wait this out. Hungary is the most uppity nation but they have no border with the Russians, meaning they simply cannot leave the union. They would be surrounded and starved out like a poorly defended Medieval castle. Generation upon generation of people are becoming more liberal and perhaps in another two generations Hungary will “grow up” to be as submissive and self-loathing as Germany.
• There are no legal methods to expel Hungary from the EU. But there were not any in the Soviet Union either and look what happened there. Perhaps if you calmly remove the first domino the others will not fall. See Brexit, as a good example of controlled demolition. Even the most delusional human suits in Brussels have to see that everything to the east is full of barbarians and is Polish migrant labour really worth some future risks of a mass exodus? Perhaps it would be best for stability to just go back to exploiting Africa for cheap labour and cut the Slavs loose.
• Poland (and to an extent the rest of the Visegrad Group) is traditionally terrified of Russia, thus given the choice of being cut loose from the EU or going “gay”, there is a strong chance that Warsaw would side with even the most Satanic and self-destructive EU model rather than bow to Moscow. Ironically the threat of being expelled could actually make these nations far more compliant.
• As individual nations the Visegrad Group are nothing, as a block they are something, and their Traditionalist efforts need to be coordinated in order to be effective. The EU must keep them as divided as possible.
• Any person who is not 100% for LGBT is the enemy in the West. The Mainstream Media will try to turn Orban and other Visegrad leaders into mini-Putins in Europe’s backyard that must be stopped because of freedom. The demonization for them is only just beginning.
• Russia will somehow be blamed for this. Russia should plead guilty regardless of the truth of the accusation because it gives even more credibility to them as the “last true Christian nation”.
• If the Visegrad Group were to become more or semi-independent then the Ukraine would be divided with the Russians within a few days’ time. All parties would agree that they want certain parts of that region to come back home. A Kiev trapped between “Visegradia” and Russia would be doomed to partitioning.
• The weaker the West is, the better Russians can sleep in peace. Russia needs to expand its ideological influence deeper and deeper into the Visegrad nations on all fronts. The EU must find a new way to repackage their Liberal Agenda because out East, they are not buying it.
• A system of apologetics/argumentation for traditional families in the XXI century will become more finalized soon and will be the greatest weapon for everyone on the “wrong” side of the Berlin Wall.

Britain is fomenting a diplomatic crisis between the European Union and Russia, according to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. Evidence and precedent indicate Lavrov has his sight well-trained.

The British establishment’s notorious ability for machination and intrigue – hence the ancient moniker Perfidious Albion – can be seen as stirring the escalating row between the European Union and Russia in which diplomats are being expelled pell-mell.

This week, Russia ordered the withdrawal of representatives from Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Slovakia. That came in response to the expulsion of Russian diplomats from those countries. Russia has also ordered home more diplomats from the Czech Republic. Poland and Italy have also been caught up in diplomatic antagonism with Moscow.

The row blew up last week when the Czech Republic accused Russian state agents of being responsible for twin explosions on its territory back in 2104. The blasts caused the deaths of two workers at an ammunition depot near the village of Vrbetice close to the border with Slovakia. Until recently, the Czech authorities had concluded that the explosions were an industrial accident.

What prompted the Czechs to revise their ideas and to now blame Russia for sabotage is the interpolation of Britain in providing “new information”. Specifically, it was the MI6-sponsored media group Bellingcat (a so-called private investigatory agency) which appears to have furnished the disinformation which purports to show the involvement of Russian military intelligence (GRU). Incredibly, the British claim their “evidence” shows that two of the GRU agents were also the same individuals who were alleged to have been involved in poisoning the Russian traitor-spy Sergei Skripal in England in 2018. The British claim to have passport information to support their claims, but such methodology is rife with forgery – a black art that the British are all-too skilled at.

On leveling the accusation against Russia, the Czech Republic then ordered the expulsion of 18 Russian diplomats. Moscow responded angrily, saying that the claims of sabotage were a “dirty fabrication” and pointing out that Prague did not provide any information for verification. Russia took swift reciprocal action by banishing 20 Czech diplomats from its territory.

However, the row continues to flare with the Baltic states entering the fray by banning Russian officials in “solidarity” with the Czech Republic. The move by the Baltic states is predictable as they are supercharged by anti-Russian political sentiment. It’s a case of any excuse for them to inflame relations.

The dispute comes at a fraught time when the European Union is discussing imposing more sanctions on Russia over wider concerns about the conflict in Ukraine, the imprisonment of blogger Alexei Navalny and a Russian security crackdown on Navalny’s shadowy Western-backed “opposition” network.

The skirmishing over diplomats is a convenient way to further damage relations between the EU and Russia, especially as the strategically important Nord Stream-2 gas pipeline project nears completion – a project that Washington wants to eviscerate for its own selfish commercial reasons. Uncle Sam’s junior partner Britain may be obliging in that regard and thus trying to curry favor for garnering an American trade deal in the post-Brexit world.

Certainly, Russia’s top diplomat Sergei Lavrov is clear about the stealthy British hand in recent events. In a media interview this week, Lavrov mentioned the United Kingdom in wary terms, saying: “As far as the relations between Russia and Europe are concerned, I still believe that the UK is playing an active and a very serious subversive role. It withdrew from the European Union, but we see no decrease in its activities on this track. On the contrary, they are trying to influence EU member states’ approaches to Russia to the maximum possible extent.”

It should be recalled that Britain has played a starring duplicitous role in demonizing Russia and poisoning international relations.

It was Bellingcat (MI6) that pushed the narrative that Russia was complicit in the shooting down of the Malaysian airliner in 2014 over Eastern Ukraine with the loss of nearly 300 lives. Based on British “evidence” (which has been debunked as fabrication), a Dutch investigation into the disaster has accused Russia. That affair has hardened European prejudices against Russia which has fomented the imposition of sanctions.

It was a former British MI6 operative Christopher Steele who was instrumental in promoting the Russiagate dossier around 2016 which destroyed bilateral relations between the United States and Russia, and which continues to fuel fabrications about Moscow’s interference in American and European politics (even those Steele’s “dirty dossier” is a risible load of rubbish and has been debunked).

And it was the Skripal saga in Salisbury in March 2018 which Britain hatched to further poison international relations with Russia. That saga – with no proof against Russia – has become a concocted “standard proof” for the subsequent saga of “poisoning” the blogger conman Alexei Navalny. Western governments and media refer to the “Kremlin plot” to kill Skripal as “evidence” for another “Kremlin plot” to assassinate Navalny. This is tantamount to one fiction being used to prove another fiction. The same saga is now feeding into the Czech explosion row. And it all comes back to the devious ingenuity of Perfidious Albion.

Foreign Minister Lavrov added a further incisive comment on the role of Britain. He said: “At the same time, you know, they send us signals, they propose establishing contacts. This means, they do not shy away from communication [with Russia], but try to discourage others. Again, probably [this can be explained by] their desire to have a monopoly of these contacts and again prove that they are superior to others.”

The British establishment likes to boast that they “punch above their weight” in terms of influence beyond their territorial size. It’s not hard to see how they manage such a feat. It’s called duplicity, intrigue, lies, and dividing and ruling. Perfidious Albion par excellence.

The incendiary row between the Czech Republic, the European Union, and Russia flared last week and looked to be spinning out of control. Latest developments, however, suggest that a more sober view may prevail to tamp down unnecessary tensions. Russia’s stern response seems to have forced a “reality-Czech”.

Czech Foreign Minister Jakub Kulhanek has indicated his government is no longer insisting on further expulsions of Russian diplomatic staff from Prague. This may be the first step toward calming a torrid spat with Moscow.

The row blew up last weekend when the Czechs announced they were expelling 18 Russian diplomats. The move was said to be in response to a Czech police investigation which claimed to have found evidence implicating Russian military agents as being responsible for an explosion at an ammo depot in October 2014. The massive blast at a storage site near the village of Vrbetice on the border with Slovakia killed two male employees.

Russia promptly rejected Prague’s accusation, calling it an absurd fabrication. Moscow then announced the expulsion of 20 Czech diplomats.

Subsequently, the Czechs protested against what they called Russia’s harsh “over-reaction” and they called on other member states of the European Union and the NATO alliance to show solidarity by also ordering Russian diplomats to leave their territories.

The whole affair was teetering on an escalation of diplomatic sanctions and counter-sanctions. It came amid already-heightened tensions over the conflict in Ukraine as well as a military build-up by NATO forces in the Black Sea where Russia was holding major war drills. In recent weeks, the United States and European allies have ejected Russian diplomats to which Moscow has responded swiftly by expelling Western counterparts. As usual, the West decries Russia’s “over-reaction” as if expecting Moscow to take their provocations sitting down.

Significantly, too, the American ambassador to Russia returned to Washington this week for consultations with the Biden administration. Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. also returned in previous weeks after a series of provocative moves by Washington.

The entire geopolitical situation has become fraught. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev commented this week that the danger of war has not been as close since the 1962 Cuban missile crisis between the United States and the Soviet Union. Medvedev also appealed for a willingness to de-escalate tensions on a mutual, reasonable basis, and for the West to “reject the language of ultimatums” that only leads to disaster.

We may see such a willingness to avert disaster in the latest Czech move to step back from its demand for Moscow to withdraw dozens more of its diplomatic staff from Prague.

As with earlier sanctions, Moscow has reciprocated robustly in a way that demonstrates to the U.S. and its European allies that it will not tolerate provocations. This week, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned in his state-of-the-nation annual address that Moscow would not accept any crossing of red lines by adversaries. There is a sense that Russia has reached the end of its patience over provocations and condescending sanctions imposed unilaterally by the collective West.

The latest row between the Czech Republic and Russia has the hallmarks of an orchestrated campaign to intensify harassment. The pattern is all-too-familiar. Baseless accusations are leveled by one party, and then other parties follow up with further recriminations in a show of “solidarity”. Russia’s rapid slap-down of the accusations followed by reciprocal sanctions demonstrates that Moscow will not allow the reckless charade to escalate. That’s not just the righteous thing to do; it also may prevent the situation from cascading into a full-blown military confrontation because the antagonizers are given pause by Russia’s resoluteness. In short, a bully only gets the message when he gets a punch in the face. “Now, do you want to talk?”

In any case, what of the Czech allegations? There are several giveaways of fabrication that Prague may not be aware of. First, the Czech authorities have refused to provide their evidence for Moscow to examine the purportedly incriminating information concerning the 2014 explosion. This is the same obscure lack of due process which we have seen in other allegations of malign activity, including the alleged Russian military presence in Eastern Ukraine, the alleged Russian complicity in the shoot-down of the Malaysian civilian airliner in 2014, and the alleged Kremlin plots to poison the Skripals in England in 2018 as well as to assassinate the blogger-conman Alexei Navalny.

The West seems to think its accusations alone are sufficient to “convict” Russia of wrongdoing. That presumption only works if it is based on a premise of Russophobia. Otherwise, it is a laughable travesty.

Another indicator of fabrication is the source of Czech information on the 2014 incident. Previously, Czech investigators had concluded that the deadly blast was an industrial accident. What changed was their receipt of new information apparently a few months ago. The source of that new information can be gleaned from media reports as Bellingcat, the British media group which functions as a laundromat for British military intelligence. This so-called independent research group has peddled disinformation concerning chemical weapons in Syria to frame up the Syrian government, as well as the 2014 Malaysian airliner disaster to frame up Russia, and the poison sagas of the Skripals and Navalny.

Most bizarrely, the Bellingcat-MI6 “sleuths” informed the Czechs that the two alleged Russian agents accused of the Skripal plot were also involved in the 2014 explosions. That’s too far-fetched to be taken seriously. Indeed, it is risible.

It is notable how London was particularly quick to amplify the Czech issue. British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab declared Prague had “exposed the lengths that the Russian intelligence services will go to in their attempts to conduct dangerous and malign operations in Europe”.

This tells us that the diplomatic flare-up between Prague and Moscow was orchestrated. And the intention was for the row to blow up into a Europe-wide crisis that would compound the already critical tensions between the West and Russia.

Russia’s firm and rational response is a reality-check for those who might be dragged into a senseless and dangerous confrontation. But this spiral has to stop definitively. Each time there is an episode, there is always a risk that it may spiral out of control and into catastrophe. The only way forward is for mutual dialogue based on respect and equality, devoid of anti-Russian prejudice and paranoia. Russia will not let such a destructive mentality prevail.

The largely US government funded RFE/RL is headquartered in Prague. With this in mind, it’s a bit surprising to see that RFE/RL lagged behind the San Diego based One America News Network (OANN) and English language Czech blogger Leoš Tomíček, in covering the recent spat between some in the Czech Republic and Russia, over the legacy of the WWII era, anti-Soviet Russian Liberation Army (Russkaya Osvobitel’naya Armiya – POA, Russian Cyrillic alphabet abbreviation, with ROA being the utilized English language short form).

In the last week of November, OANN ran a segment on this matter. (Pardon me for not having an available transcript.) Within reason, Tomíček’s commentary of November 26 and 27, depicts a bombastic local Czech politician Pavel Novotný, using the ROA as a tool against the Russian government. Over the course of time, Tomíček has generally taken a pro-Russian and anti-Soviet position.

Novotný supports a monument to honor the ROA, for its contribution in liberating Prague from the Nazis. Such a commemoration (more than one) already exists in Prague as noted in a December 3, RFE/RL video.

A good number of people in post-Soviet Russia, as well as elsewhere have a negative impression of the ROA – a view which isn’t shared by some others including the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. After the Soviet dissolution, Solzhenitsyn returned to Russia, where he lived for the remainder of his life. Following the Soviet demise, the ROCOR became loosely affiliated with the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate. The latter church has expressed disagreement with the former over the ROA, while not seeking a stumbling block over this matter.

Among those non-German elements allied in one way or the other with Nazi Germany, the ROA doesn’t have the same negative baggage of committing atrocities along the lines of the Croat Ustaša and the predominately western Ukrainian situated Ukrainian Insurgent Army. Not everyone allied with the USSR in WWII was a Communist. Conversely, the Nazi allies weren’t all motivated by Nazi ideology. So there’s no misunderstanding, this observation isn’t intended to equate the USSR with Nazi Germany. Notwithstanding, the Soviet Union (especially under Stalin) had some brutal aspects, which for ethical reasons shouldn’t be glossed over.

For much of WWII, the Nazi hierarchy limited the activity of the ROA on account of sensing that the anti-Stalin/pro-Russian grouping, sought a strong Russia, which conflicted with Nazi aims. Towards the end of WWII, the Nazis out of desperation gave the ROA a freer hand. By then, the ROA realized that the Nazis would eventually lose. Regardless, the ROA were sympathetic to Czechoslovakia.

In WWI, the Germans used Lenin to benefit German war aims. During WWII, Nazi ideology came in the way of fully utilizing a Russian to help the German war effort at the time. Not everyone in Germany was so suspect of the ROA. Wilfried Strik-Strikfeldt, was a Baltic German Russophile in the Wehrmarcht, who sympathized with the ROA. Regarding present day circumstances, a loose analogy brings to mind pro-Russian/anti-Soviet/pro-American views in the US disagreeing with the anti-Russian leaning variant, having greater influence in US mass media and body politic.

In contemporary Russia, there’re different views of Lenin. As an example, Russian President Vladimir Putin on more than one occasion has been critical of him. Post-Soviet Russia has taken a more balanced overview of the anti-Communist Russian Civil War era Whites. The Andrey Vlasov led ROA doesn’t deserve greater scorn than the Ustaša and Ukrainian Insurgent Army. In Nazi captivity, the ROA didn’t express the kind of anti-Russian views evident among some of the current Russians who’ve been brought up in a much freer society than what the USSR was, especially under Stalin. This last point leads me to believe that the ROA at large wouldn’t be so openly hostile to the present situation in Russia.

Wesolowsky’s aforementioned RFE/RL piece raises some contentious issues that (for accuracy sake) should be followed up on. Czech academic Jan Šír, is uncritically quoted as saying that the Russians link the events of 1945 and 1968 as a matter of the Red Army liberating Czechoslovakia.

Contradicting Šír, post-Soviet Russians on numerous occasions, have criticized Soviet actions like what happened in Czechoslovakia in 1968, when a Soviet led Warsaw Pact military intervention thwarted reform elements in that country. Not too long ago, the BBC’s Steve Rosenberg had a lengthy documentary dealing with Warsaw Pact related issues and their impact on the present. Filled with biases against Russia, this feature had a pointed moment to the contrary. Towards the end of this documentary, Putin makes a clear condemnation of acts like the 1968 intervention in Czechoslovakia.

In 1945, the might of the Red Army had the Nazis on the run. It was Soviet strength, which primarily defeated Nazi Germany. In turn, Prague was generally positive towards the Soviet advance into that city. Between the two world wars, Czechoslovakia was the most democratic of nations that were to later become part of the Warsaw Pact. Prior to WWI, Czechs and Slovaks, weren’t known for being negative towards Russia. Although, non-Communist, pre-WWII Czechoslovakia had good relations with the USSR. During this period, Czech-Soviet relations were better than Czech relations with Germany, Poland and Hungary.

In his RFE/RL piece, Weslowsky notes the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement without any mention of the earlier Nazi, Polish and Hungarian activity against Czechoslovakia. The USSR offered to defend Czech territory, in conjunction with Western (specifically French) support. The good Czech-Soviet relationship and the hope that the Nazis would strike against the USSR, partly motivated the West to not militarily side with Czechoslovakia. Seeing this behavior, the USSR saw a need to reach an arrangement with Nazi Germany.

For a brief period following WWII, the USSR didn’t disrupt a politically pluralistic Czech government. At the time, there was a formidable (in popularity) Czech Communist Party, along with non-Communist Czechs, who weren’t generally antagonistic towards the USSR. By 1948, this pluralism diminished.

Despite the past Soviet behavior and post-Soviet Western supported anti-Russian advocacy in the Czech Republic, numerous Czechs aren’t ingrained with such a noticeable animosity towards Russia. Some prominent Czech ice hockey players have played for Russian teams in the Kontinental Hockey League without regret. Jaromír Jágr, arguably the greatest Czech player in that sport, played for a Russian team, wearing number 68 in honor of the 1968 reform movement known as the Prague Spring. Along with Tomíček, Czech political figures Václav Klaus and Miloš Zeman, have exhibited a stance towards Russia which isn’t overtly antagonistic.

In September 2015, the EU committed to relocating up to 160,000 refugees from the two countries within two years. However, not all EU states have found the measures acceptable, saying that the migrant crisis cannot be solved through obligatory quotas. Hungary and Slovakia are currently challenging the decision in the EU Court of Justice, and an advocate-general of the court will issue an opinion on July 26. Slovakia was able to avoid legal action against it by responding to EU warnings and opening its doors to a small group of migrants.

Only 20,869 of the 160,000 refugees have so far been relocated in the EU. More than 1.6 million asylum seekers have arrived in Europe since the start of the refugee crisis in 2014.

Now the Commission has launched infringement procedures against the three nations refusing to comply, before possibly referring them to the top European court. The legal battle could last many months or, even, years. As a result, the three states could be imposed financial penalties.

The very fact of launching legal procedures heats up tensions inside the EU at the time the bloc is going through a period of instability and uncertainty, with its unity tested by Brexit, weak economies and growing support for Eurosceptic and nationalist-minded parties.

Perhaps, it’s easier to pay fines than take in refugees and face grave security problems as a result. Going to the bottom of it – it’s not fines that really matter. All the countries opposing the EU migration policy are net beneficiaries of EU funding. A mood is developing among the older EU members to withhold cohesion funds from countries that oppose the relocation of refugees, although no legal basis for this actually exists. But if it starts, the EU will become a battlefield to make the vaunted unity a pipedream. If the events turn this way, the EU will become very much different from what it is today.

The Visegrád countries (V4) – Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary – have found common ground in recent years opposing the EU’s relocation policy and rejecting the idea of a two-speed Europe, but also in advocating the preservation of the Union’s cohesion policy. Indeed, why should East Europeans share the burden of the immigration crisis, especially in view that security policy is a national, not European, competence? These countries call for strengthening of the national states in EU decision-making process.

Poland and Hungary have joined together recently to oppose Brussels stance on human rights.

The V4 also oppose the two-speed» and «multi-speed» concepts supported by EU founders. They believe that the idea would turn them into «second class» members of the bloc.

The «East European revolt» is just part of a bigger process with deepening EU divisions and alliances being formed inside the alliance.

Prospect for the future? The situation inside the EU has bleak prospects for improvement. It calls for a closer look at the recent developments inside the EU. In February, the European Parliament backed three resolutions on strengthening centralization of the bloc. One of the resolutions proposes limiting or even totally abolishing the right of individual member states not to comply with collective decisions – just exactly what the East European members oppose so vehemently. The adoption of the resolutions may be the first step towards a fundamental change in the EU Treaty.

In February, leaders of the lower chambers of parliaments of Germany, Italy, France, and Luxembourg published a letter demanding a «Federal Union» be implemented without delay. It was published by Italian La Stampa on February 27. They call for «closer political integration — the Federal Union of States with broad powers. «Those who believe in European ideals, should be able to give them a new life instead of helplessly observing its slow sunset», the paper reads.

The idea to create a «common European defense» is a dubious endeavor; it presupposes additional financial burden at the time the US increases pressure to make Europeans raise NATO expenditure. Add to this the need to pay more for the migrants against the background of stagnating economy to see how unrealistic all these plans are. Europeans have already been made pay more for US liquefied gas for political reasons, while Russia can offer supplies at much lower prices.

Guy Verhofstadt, the former Belgian Prime Minister and European Parliament’s chief Brexit negotiator, believes that the European Union must reform, or face the risk of collapse as a result of internal and external challenges. Noam Chomsky, a prominent US scholar, has predicted that the EU will disintegrate. The EU will collapse in 2017, predicts Mark Blyth, a lecturer in political economy at Brown University in the US, known for forecasts to come true.

The event marks a turning point in EU history. This is the first time EU members will face legal procedures for non-compliance with the rules established by Brussels. It shows how the migration crisis has divided the bloc. The process will not die away, migrants will continue their route north to the wealthier countries and the tensions inside the EU will grow. Rival blocs and perpetuate divisions will not disappear, turning the EU into a patchwork of blocs within blocs. The project of European integration does not look viable anymore. Legal actions cannot bridge the differences dividing its members.

So what exactly is multiculturalism? Here is one definition: «Multiculturalism is a policy aimed at developing and preserving cultural differences in a single country and the world as a whole. Within the framework of multiculturalism, various cultural groups exercise collective rights and can act as a single subject in the sphere of politics, culture and education».

This definition of multiculturalism shows that those who came up with the idea based it on notions of relations between peoples that are just too idealistic.

But perhaps the doctrine of multiculturalism was an act of provocation aimed at undermining the foundations of a united Europe from the very beginning. Surely its authors were aware that the hatred towards Europeans that has accumulated over hundreds of years of colonialism has not disappeared and that the decline of Christian culture in Europe has turned into an anti-culture and any kind of peaceful coexistence is doomed to failure.

The European Romani affair seems to be rather indicative.

The ‘Romani problem’ came to light after Slovakia, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania joined the EU and opened its borders. All told, this area of Europe is home to up to ten million Romani (Roma) who, more often than not, are at the very bottom of the social ladder. Naturally, they saw the opening of the borders as their chance and rushed into Old Europe. This particularly affected France, which saw thousands of Roma flocking in from Romania.

The reality of life in France, however, forced many Roma to resort to begging and stealing. After this, they began to be deported back to Romania. And what did the Roma do then? They returned to France, of course, as part of new caravan camps.

The same crackdown on Roma has been going on throughout the whole of the Schengen area. They have even been evicted from the cradle of European democracy – Great Britain – to Ireland.

Europe did not learn from the Roma experience, however, and decided to try again by initially opening its doors to refugees from troubled Muslim countries.

What came of that is well known.

It turns out that many migrants regard ‘indigenous’ Europeans as second-class people.

It also turns out that many Muslim men view mini-skirts on women as a statement of their lost virginity, a danger signal for families, and a risk of bad inheritance. Those Europeans who have had the chance to visit Iran know how pure-blooded Persians are. In comparison, British aristocracy looks genetically disadvantaged to put it mildly. To newcomers, ‘multicultural’ Europe with its prostitutes and sexual minorities comes across as a corrupt place and their reaction to this materialised on New Year’s Eve in Cologne.

In addition, Europe has not always been that kind to its new residents. As a result, the refugees have responded with aggression.

What kind of multiculturalism can we talk about? Faced with a force it has been unable to overcome, Europe has started pushing the new arrivals into the hands of the Turkish authorities.

This is the perfect time to recall the barbed wire that the countries of Europe have started to wrap around their borders separating them from the refugees. 

Barriers are not just being erected along the Hungarian and Austrian borders, they are also appearing in the minds of Europeans.

The saddest thing for the failed multiculturalists is the realisation that terrorism is a result of their own policy. After all, huge amounts of people in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia and other countries have been driven from their homelands by the descendants of European colonisers. Terrorism will always grow where societies have been destroyed.

So what can we expect following the agreement signed between the EU and Turkey on the refugee problem? Those creating the new political map of the Greater Middle East will continue pushing new hordes of unfortunates from their homelands, these will try and seek refuge in Europe, the Europeans will forcibly return them to Turkey, Europe’s image as a bulwark of human rights will crumble, and the information war that the West launched against Russia under the slogan of human rights will vanish into the void where it belongs.

The US Air Force study called for the «systematic destruction» of such major population centers as Warsaw, East Berlin, Prague, Bucharest, Tallinn, and others, as well as Peiping (Beijing), Leningrad (St. Petersburg), and Moscow.

Atomic bombs eight times to destructive force of that dropped by the United States on Hiroshima were trained on a number of targets in Moscow and St. Petersburg. There were 179 «designated ground zeros» for atomic bombs in Moscow and 145 in St. Petersburg. 

US atomic weapons would have laid waste to Wittstock, just upwind of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s hometown of Templin in Brandenburg in the former East Germany. It is most certain that had the US launched an atomic attack on Europe, Merkel, her parents Horst and Herlind Kasner, and brother Marcus would have been vaporized in the massive pre-targeted strike on East Berlin and the regions surrounding it.

George Soros’s hometown of Budapest would have been completely destroyed after the US hit the Tokol military airfield on the banks of the Danube River with one of its «city-busting» nuclear weapons. The blast would have rendered the Danube a radioactive drainage ditch and anyone exposed to the poisonous Danube waters downriver would have succumbed to an agonizing death from radiation sickness. Adding to the misery of anyone living alongside the Danube was the fact that Bratislava, also on the banks of the Danube, was also targeted for nuclear annihilation. The first major urban center casualties outside of Hungary and then-Czechoslovakia from the radioactive Danube would have been in Belgrade, the capital of neutral Yugoslavia. 

The nuclear targeting of Vyborg on the Finnish border would have brought death and destruction to the border region of neutral Finland. Four atomic bombs were targeted on the former Finnish city: Koyvisto, Uras, Rempeti airfield, and Vyborg East.

Nuclear weapons, as the United States knew in 1959 and very well knows today, are not «precision-guided munitions».

For all of its propaganda beamed to Eastern Europe on Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty, the United States was willing to sacrifice the very peoples it proclaimed to want to «free» from the Soviet bloc. America’s «mutually assured destruction» policy was based on increasing the «mega-death» count around the world by having the ability to hit the enemy with more nuclear «throw weight».

Increasing the mega-death count was why the United States targeted such large population centers as Peiping (Beijing), Shanghai, Mukden (Shenyang), and Tientsin in China. The pummeling of metro Moscow with atomic bombs was also designed to increase body count. The formerly Top Secret nuclear targeting document lists the following areas of Moscow for nuclear bombardment: Bykovo airport, central Moscow, Chertanovo, Fili, Izmaylovo, Khimki, Kuchino, Lyubertsy, Myachkovo airport, Orlovo, Salarevo, Shchelkovo, and Vnukovo airport.

Eighteen nuclear targets were programmed for Leningrad: Central Leningrad (including the historic Hermitage), Alexandrovskaya, Beloostrov, Gorelovo, Gorskaya, Kamenka North, Kasimovo, Kolomyagi, Kolpino, Krasnaya Polyana, Kudrovo, Lesnoy, Levashovo, Mishutkino, Myachkovo, Petrodvorets, Pushkin, Sablino, Sestroretsk, Tomilino, Uglovo, and Yanino.

Bucharest, Romania, was the target for three city busters aimed at Baneasa, Otopeni airport, and Pipera. Ulan Bator, the capital of the present America-idolizing Mongolia, would not have been spared. The Pentagon nuclear target list does not even list Mongolia as a separate country. The entry for the nuclear strike reads: «Ulaan Baatar, China».

Two uncomforting facts stand out from the disclosure of the targeting list. First, the United States remains as the only country in history that used nuclear weapons in warfare – hitting the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Second, some Pentagon officials, notably Air Force Chief of Staff Curtis LeMay and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Lemnitzer, called for a nuclear first strike on the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies. In fact, while the USSR, China, and France rejected the first use of nuclear weapons, NATO and the United States, on the other hand, chiseled in stone the first use of tactical nuclear weapons in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe. But, as seen with the wishes of LeMay, Lemnitzer, and others, a massive pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Soviet Union and its allies, including China, was on the wish list of the Pentagon’s top brass. 

Because the Soviet Union had virtually no intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in 1959 and hinged its nuclear warfare capabilities on strategic bombers, the Pentagon brass wanted to hit the Soviet Union in a pre-emptive strike before they reached missile parity with the United States. At the heart of the crazed Pentagon reasoning was what the nuclear warfare champions called the «missile gap». 

There is not much of a leap from the «black comedy» nuclear Armageddon film «Dr Strangelove» to actual Cold War era meetings on pre-emptive nuclear strikes held in the White House and Pentagon. Attorney General Robert Kennedy walked out of one such meeting in disgust while Secretary of State Dean Rusk later wrote: «Under no circumstances would I have participated in an order to launch a first strike». In 1961, President John F Kennedy questioned the motives of his generals and admirals after one such nuclear war pep talk from the Pentagon brass by stating, «And we call ourselves the human race».

Kennedy and his brother Robert had every reason to be fearful that the Pentagon would circumvent civilian authority and launch a nuclear strike either against Cuba, the Soviet Union, or both during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. According to Nikita Khrushchev’s memoirs, Robert Kennedy told Soviet ambassador to Washington Anatoly Dobrynin during the height of the crisis that «the President is not sure that the military will not overthrow him and seize power. The American military could get out of control».

Today, the peoples of Central and Eastern Europe continue having their love affair with NATO and the Americans. Yet, it was the same NATO and the forefathers of the present gung ho military interventionists in Washington who once wanted to rain nuclear fire upon the cities of Warsaw (six ground zeroes: Ozarow, Piastow, Pruszkow, Boernerowo, Modlin, and Okecie), Prague (14 designated ground zeroes at Beroun, Kladno, Kralupy nad Vltavou, Kraluv Dvor, Neratovice, Psary, Radotin, Roztoky, Slaky, Stechovice, Velvary, Kbely, Ryzyne, and Vodochody), Budapest, Bucharest, Sofia (three ground zeroes: Bozhurishte, Kumaritsa, and Vrazhdebna),  Bratislava, Kiev (three nuclear targets: Bortnichi, Post-Volynskiy airport, and Svyatoshino airport), Leipzig (where seven atomic bombs were targeted on Altenhain, Boehlen, Delitzsche, Grimma, Pegau, Wurzen, and Brandis), Weimar, and Wittenberg. 

Also not to be spared nuclear annihilation were Potsdam, Vilnius (five nuclear ground zeroes: Novo Vilnya, Novaya Vileyka, Vilnyus (Center), Vilnyus East, and Vilnyus Southwest), Lepaya (Latvia), Leninakan (Gyumri) in Armenia, Alma Ata (Kazakhstan), Poznan, Lvov (three ground zeroes: Gorodok, Lvov Northwest, and Sknilov), Brno, Plovdiv in Bulgaria, Riga (four ground zeroes: Salaspils, Skirotava, Spilve, and Riga West), Ventspils in Latvia (two targets: Ventspils South and Targale), Tallinn (two ground zeroes: Lasnamae and Ulemiste), Tartu, Tirana, Vlone (Albania), Berat/Kucove (Albania), Kherson (Ukraine), Baku/Zabrat, Birobidzhan in the Jewish Autonomous Republic, Syktyvkar in the Komi Autonomous Republic, Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic on the Iranian border, Osh in Kyrgyzstan, Stalinabad (Dushanbe) in Tajikistan, Tashkent in Uzbekistan, and Tbilisi (seven ground zeroes at: Tbilisi central, Agtaglya, Orkhevi, Sandar, Sartichala, Soganlug, and Vaziani).

NATO and neo-conservative propagandists continue to paint Russia as an enemy of the peoples of central and eastern Europe. However, it was not Russia that had nuclear weapons once trained on the cities of the Eurasian land mass but the United States. Had the Pentagon generals and admirals had their way, today the eastern front of a rapidly expanding NATO would have been nothing more than a smoldering and radioactive nuclear wasteland, all courtesy of Uncle Sam’s nuclear arsenal.