PDA

View Full Version : Damning Piece Published In "DIE WELT.de", "Must Read". . .



Bigsky770
Feb 13th, 2005, 8:37 AM
. . .The following published commentary has quite literally flooded the "Forum Network", as I had googled it and found numerous entries that led me 'hither & yon', (all over the place). Going back to "Die Welt.de", one of the newspapers of Germany purported to have published said piece, wasn't much help as I could not locate an english version of which, and then search their archives in order to authenticate this commentary. This is the part where I am asking assistance of anyone who may be able to locate the actual day & date of publication and also to authenticate whether-or-not the piece was, (indeed) published in Germany, as its' content is as volatile and inflammatory to many Europeans as "Ward Churchill" is to many Americans.
. . .I will post here the content of which, only for the sake of discussion and NOT, I repeat NOT because I necessarilly agree with the ideas expressed therein. I believe THAT would be better to be judged by someone actually living in Europe than myself. Without further adoo, here is the actual piece, in its' entirety:


EUROPE - THY NAME IS COWARDICE

(Commentary by Mathias Dapfner CEO, Axel Springer, AG [Germany])
A few days ago Henry Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe - your family name is appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true.
Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to toothless agreements.
Appeasement legitimized and stabilized Communism in the Soviet Union, then East Germany, then all the rest of Eastern Europe where for decades, inhuman, suppressive, murderous governments were glorified as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities.
Appeasement crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Kosovo, and even though we had absolute proof of ongoing mass-murder, we Europeans debated and debated and debated, and were still debating when finally the Americans had to come from halfway around the world, into Europe yet again, and do our work for us
Rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, European appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word "equidistance," now countenances suicide bombings in Israel by fundamentalist Palestinians.
Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore nearly 500,000 victims of Saddam's torture and murder machinery and, motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace-movement, has the gall to issue bad grades to George Bush.. Even as it is uncovered that the loudest critics of the American action in Iraq made illicit billions, no, TENS of billions, in the corrupt U.N. Oil-for-Food program.
And now we are faced with a particularly grotesque form of appeasement... How is Germany reacting to the escalating violence by Islamic fundamentalists in Holland and elsewhere? By suggesting that we really should have a "Muslim Holiday" in Germany.
I wish I were joking, but I am not. A substantial fraction of our (German) Government, and if the polls are to be believed, the German people, actually believe that creating an Official State "Muslim Holiday" will somehow spare us from the wrath of the fanatical Islamists.
One cannot help but recall Britain's Neville Chamberlain waving the laughable treaty signed by Adolf Hitler, and declaring European "Peace in our time".
What else has to happen before the European public and its political leadership get it? There is a sort of crusade underway, an especially perfidious crusade consisting of systematic attacks by fanatic Muslims, focused on civilians, directed against our free, open Western societies, and intent upon Western Civilization's utter destruction.
It is a conflict that will most likely last longer than any of the great military conflicts of the last century - a conflict conducted by an enemy that cannot be tamed by "tolerance" and "accommodation" but is actually spurred on by such gestures, which have proven to be, and will always be taken by the Islamists for signs of weakness.
Only two recent American Presidents had the courage needed for anti-appeasement: Reagan and Bush.
His American critics may quibble over the details, but we Europeans know the truth. We saw it first hand: Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, freeing half of the German people from nearly 50 years of terror and virtual slavery. And Bush, supported only by the Social Democrat Blair, acting on moral conviction, recognized the danger in the Islamic War against democracy. His place in history will have to be evaluated after a number of years have passed.
In the meantime, Europe sits back with charismatic self-confidence in the multicultural corner, instead of defending liberal society's values and being an attractive center of power on the same playing field as the true great powers, America and China.
On the contrary - we Europeans present ourselves, in contrast to those "arrogant Americans", as the World Champions of "tolerance", which even (Germany's Interior Minister) Otto Schily justifiably criticizes. Why? Because we're so moral? I fear it's more because we're so materialistic, so devoid of a moral compass.
For his policies, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts of additional national debt, and a massive and persistent burden on the American economy - because unlike almost all of Europe, Bush realizes what is at stake - literally everything.
While we criticize the "capitalistic robber barons" of America because they seem too sure of their priorities, we timidly defend our Social Welfare systems. Stay out of it! It could get expensive! We'd rather discuss reducing our 35-hour workweek or our dental coverage, or our 4 weeks of paid vacation... Or listen to TV pastors preach about the need to "reach out to terrorists. To understand and forgive".
These days, Europe reminds me of an old woman who, with shaking hands, frantically hides her last pieces of jewelry when she notices a robber breaking into a neighbor's house.
Appeasement? Europe, thy name is Cowardice.

- - -Submitted by Joe (Bigsky770)

substand
Feb 13th, 2005, 1:17 PM
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/dapfner.asp

snopes says its true.



The editorial reproduced above, entitled "Europe, Thy Name Is Cowardice," was written by Mathias Döpfner, CEO of the large German publishing firm Axel Springer, and published in the German periodical Die Welt on 20 November 2004.

A number of readers fluent in German have pointed out that the English translation in circulation contains a passage that wasn't part of the original article; namely, "Even as it is uncovered that the loudest critics of the American action in Iraq made illicit billions, no, TENS of billions, in the corrupt U.N. Oil-for-Food program." The translation also increases the number of deaths due to Saddam's murder machinery from 300,000 to 500,000.

Bigsky770
Feb 13th, 2005, 4:14 PM
. . .Although myself (as I am sure you would agree), I take a rather dim-view of the addition or the deletion of statements, as well as changes applied to text, I think it hardly possible for one to discard the REST of the work for the statements or the gravity of the text, the words carry.

. . .Now, with that out of the way, I would like to ask what the audience of this forum [I]THINKS about the ideas as expressed.

Thoughts?

Joe (Bigsky770) :vbroll:

substand
Feb 13th, 2005, 4:24 PM
I think what he's saying is pretty much true, but I don't think it applies only to Europe. Its pretty much any democracy. You have to appease and appease until you can appease no more. And then you have to be attacked. Look what happened with Iraq: we just missed the last ingredient (being attacked) and the democratic world went nuts. It is the nature of Democracy to turn a blind eye to things of this nature, and to think that any situation can be resolved peacefully.. if we just give them stuff, maybe a little of what they want, then maybe we can stay out of war.. and it keeps going.

He cites Reagan and Bush as the only two not to do this... which is pretty much true as far as I can ascertain.

Bush of course, has tried to challenge this problem with the way we think. It's not going over too well though.

derangel
Feb 15th, 2005, 6:01 PM
What? Operation Kill'em til They Stop Complainin' didn't work? This isn't the old west. Complacency won't get you anywhere, but shooting everyone who disagrees with you will get you to hell with the blood of a lot of people on your hands. If somebody breaks into my house planning to murder me in my sleep, rape my wife, and steal everything I own, damn right I'm going to shoot him in self-defense. But you can't consider making war on someone based upon what you think they MIGHT do, because at that point all it takes is a little speculation and paranoia and suddenly you're at war with everyone. I can't walk down the street and shoot everyone who looks like they might be a burglar. I can't even shoot people who I know have been convicted of crimes, even if I assume that their past behavior will influence their future acts. Sure, if I did that, I'd probably be safer, but that doesn't make it right.

A side note: historically, not all, but several incidents where we actually did intervene were more out of enlightened self-interest than real altruism. In the case of WWII, we didn't enter the war after Hitler started killing Jews. At the time, we didn't like them either, just not enough to commit genocide. We didn't enter the war until Pearl Harbor, after we were attacked.

substand
Feb 16th, 2005, 10:44 AM
but shooting everyone who disagrees with you will get you to hell with the blood of a lot of people on your hands. If

France is still around.


But you can't consider making war on someone based upon what you think they MIGHT do, because at that point all it takes is a little speculation and paranoia and suddenly you're at war with everyone.

"we are capable of judicious selectivity."

Saddam's Iraq was not everyone.



I can't walk down the street and shoot everyone who looks like they might be a burglar. I can't even shoot people who I know have been convicted of crimes, even if I assume that their past behavior will influence their future acts.

You are not a state. And moreover, you can't go torturing and raping people as you please.

derangel
Feb 16th, 2005, 1:39 PM
You are not a state. And moreover, you can't go torturing and raping people as you please.

Neither am I the United States army nor the Catholic church. As such I don't feel inclined toward torture or rape.

Emerald_Dragon
Feb 16th, 2005, 4:25 PM
Outside of the obvious points [pro-Bush], i thought that the author [Mathias/CEO] was implying that the Euros were appeasing the U.S. by not standing up to it. Then he got into the fanatical Islam bit, where I strayed from agreeing with him. We need some European POVs on that one.


I thought fanatical Islamists were a small fraction of Islam? Like anti-abortion, doctor killing, bible thumpers? Sure, I disagree with their beliefs and they still get away with murder, but they do pay a price for their actions. Suicide bombers die. If you give people reasons to live, you take away their motivation to be a martyr for their religion. ehh, he's got a right to his opinion.

dutchie
Feb 17th, 2005, 2:35 AM
I read the article and I can safely say that this is NOT the POV of the majority of Europeans. Remember, the author is CEO of a large firm, and not Jack in the street.

Admittedly, there has been a culture of "hug the foreigners" in Europe for too long (40 years), always turning a blind eye towards what was happening (read:going wrong) in the muslim communities, through our own doing.

Because we in Europe did too little or almost nothing about integration of foreigners, these people got less and less of a chance on the labor market. We got them in in the sixties to do our dirty work for us, but we never ever expected them to actually stay. They did. They got their families into Europe. They expanded their closed communities, clinging to their native cultures and customs. But because we did nothing to make them feel as if they were actual citizens of our nations, they alienated from us more and more, and clotted together in the ghettoes we built for them. The average young Moroccan or Turkish muslim in the Netherlands stands lar less of a chance to actually become successful than the average native citizen. It's no wonder this attitude paves the way for fundamentalist factions to become a success in our countries: they give these kids a sense of belonging, of importance; a goal.

Personally I think it's a good thing not to choose sides in any conflict too soon. The Netherlands are allies to the USA in the Iraqi conflict, but already there are some voices in our government that are complaining about the role we're playing.
We're good enough to supply the US with Apache helicopters in Afghanistan, but for the rest of it we're kindly asked to STFU.. I believe the average Dutchie is not very happy with the way the USA is conducting these conflicts, not in the least where it concerns attitude towards allies.. The Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay scandals have done much damage to the US image in Europe. Of course we were all happy to see Saddam go, but we are quite upset by Bush's second term in office and what this might mean to world peace. The shift of focus towards Syria, Iran and North Korea isn't helping here. Don't forget the playground of WW2 was right here under our feet, and NOT on US soil. The last war to be fought on US soil is centuries ago. For us it's just 60 years. We do not like armed conflicts at all. We can't help wondering about why Bush sr. didn't finish business with Saddam the first time you guys went there straight away (we know the answer to that one), the more naive among us are still questioning the deep friendship between the US and Saudi Arabia - a country just as corrupted and undemocratic as Iraq.

In short: the image of the USA being "the good guys" is crumbling away fast. I know you Americans all will stumble over each other to tell me how wrong I am, but I was just trying to paint a picture of America of how it looks from the other side of the puddle.

dutchie
Feb 20th, 2005, 12:19 PM
bump

you wanted someone from Yurop to react, and now everyone"s silent?!?

Bigsky770
Feb 20th, 2005, 5:13 PM
. . ."Good food for thought" along these lines. There are always "two-sides" to every story, and the way we over here view things may not run so perfectly in tune to the way you should view them. After all, here it is, "In your Face", so-to-speak, and being that it was that Europe was "the last "Playground" to "WWII", it is not so surprising that there are many that would choose to put all of these horrors behind themselves. Still it is that we cannot help but to see the events that come daily; When a known terrorist organization, that proclaims itself to BE as a terrorist organization implements acts meant to forestall and even negate a peace process, and then takes credit for said acts, and then receives recompense FOR these acts, and then cries "foul!" for what is done to them? We are left as wondering. . .

. . .We have an expression here: "If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck. . .(further, I might add here myself IF that duck were to approach you and proclaim, "I AM A DUCK!") would you still not believe that you had a duck?

. . .Aside from having the "World's first talking Duck", :D You would still have, "a duck". (a TALKING duck, BUT a duck nonetheless). . .

Aside from which, you'd also have this, which seems to go the distance in explaining that (perhaps) Mathias Dapfner may not be so-far from the truth. . .

France nixes request to list Hezbollah as a terrorist group

By Aluf Benn

French President Jacques Chirac has turned down a request from Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom to vote in favor of placing Hezbollah on the European Union's list of terrorist organizations, telling Shalom that the timing was not right for such a move.

According to Israeli sources, the French are well-aware of the terrorist element of the Hezbollah, but they are now focusing their efforts on the success of the upcoming Lebanese elections so they don't want to strain relations with the group, which is running as a political party in the upcoming vote.

An EU committee is convening in Brussels tomorrow to discuss adding Hezbollah to the list. Israel has been conducting a diplomatic campaign ahead of that session, describing the dangers Hezbollah poses to Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

France's objections are considered the main obstacle to an EU move to add Hezbollah to the terror list.

Chirac was very critical of Syria during the meeting with Shalom, charging its influence over the various factions in Syria is undermining the democratization process there.

Only at the end of the meeting did the two get the report of the bombing in Beirut that killed former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri, a close personal friend of Chirac's.

Shalom said after the meeting that France could also play "a key role" in isolating groups set on disrupting peace efforts between Israelis and Palestinians.

"I asked the assistance of President Chirac to help us to have better relations with North African countries and the Gulf states," Shalom said, "and bring his influence among those countries in order to have better understanding between Israel" and those nations.

Shalom also said he was "very encouraged" by the French government's recent efforts to crack down on anti-Semitism, and its "determination" to curb the activities of right-wing extremists.

Story LINK:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/540242.html

And so it goes. . .Joe (Bigsky770) :vbroll:

dutchie
Feb 21st, 2005, 2:13 AM
Joe, that's all true. And it's beshaming that the government of a nation takes this stance. But... The question WAS: what does the average Joe in Europe think about these things?!? What is OUR image of the USA? I tried to paint a picture of that.

The unquestioned and sustained support of Israel by the USA, regardless of how Israel choses to treat Palestines and their fundamental human rights, is a matter that weighs heavily in determining a stance towards the present USA government (which doesn't mean other US governments did any better). In Europe we see the Palestine people as not being all terrorists, but for the large majority a people that longs for lasting peace with Israel (their vote proves that fact.). I made my POV about Hamas, the Hezbollah and other armed factions clear enough in other threads. But there is a majority of Palestinians that wants peace and quiet, and after 50 years of war they're entitled to it.

The unconditional support of (the totally undemocratical) Saudi Arabia and the waving away of the fact that this country DOES have Al Quaida links doesn't do the USA image any good. The last (local) elections in Saudi Arabia were a charade, with women not being allowed to vote.

The really patronizing way in which the USA treats their allies (we're good enough to supply equipment, but for the rest of it we're asked to shut up) doesn't help.

I guess that most Europeans have a great concern over the long term results of the American interventions in world policies. We just do not get the impression that the USA has the good of the entire western world burned on its retinas any longer, but just the protection of its own interests.

The way the USA handles environmental issues doesn't help either. There is definitely a deep need to tackle these questions on a global scale. The USA steps out of talks about this, claiming that it would burden their economy too much. That sound hypocritical, especially when you realize how much of the economy is being damaged by the billions consuming war machine. The weakest in the US society are now being sacrificed through budget cuts, while the rich benefit.

It's easy to point a finger to Europe. But when a nation choses to play World Police and is eager to be the world's most dominant Super Power, some responsibility comes with the job. The will to cooperate with others through bilateral talks and the ability to take criticism to heart is just a part of that responsibility. The USA just can't be right about everything always, now can it? It's precisely THAT question that haunts the mind of the average Yurop Joe...