Robert Spencer elaborates on my piece in the Washington Times on the Euro-Med partnership to, in effect, destroy Europe. Read it all.
In "Europe's looming demise" in the Washington Times today, Pamela Geller discusses a little-noticed initiative that could open the floodgates for jihad in Europe:
A Muslim population from Africa moving freely into Europe threatens America. On Christmas Day, a Nigerian Muslim flew from Amsterdam to Detroit and tried to explode a bomb on the plane - after he was allowed to board the plane without a passport. The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership will make jihad attacks like this one all the easier....
Like so many European Union initiatives, much of the EuroMed Partnership is shrouded in secrecy. For example, it's not clear what will happen, if anything, on January 1, 2010 that isn't happening already. The official website shows a thriving concern. And contrary to reports I've received that this initiative has stalled or has met widespread opposition from Arab states, the EuroMed initiative seems to be galloping along now: this ANSAmed index shows -- just in the last year -- EuroMed activities involving numerous European entities in Gaza, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, and elsewhere. The official EuroMed website lists these as the "countries concerned" -- showing a rather idiosyncratic idea of what constitutes the Mediterranean area: Albania, Algeria, Bosnia & Herzegovinia, Croatia, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, "Occupied Palestinian Territories," Syria, Tunisia, and Turkey.
The EuroMed effort is proceeding quickly. ANSAmed reported on December 4 that "the Euro-Mediterranean Regional and Local Assembly (ARLEM) has been created. Representatives of regional and local bodies in the Euro-Mediterranean area have in fact decided to meet for the first time in Barcelona, on January 21." Nor do they plan just to get acquainted: one undated but recent ANSAmed piece announces a summit meeting in Brussels of trade ministers from 43 countries in the Mediterranean area, and states: "The final objective is to adopt a road map of concrete actions that will intensify the region's economic integration and launch trade and investments, to achieve a common area of free trade with a long-term horizon beyond 2010."
That common area of free trade will, as Pamela discusses, allow for easy passage from Muslim North Africa and the Middle East into Europe -- with nary an effort made to prevent jihadists from coming into Europe. And once safely in Europe, it will not be hard for them to come to America. As Pamela points out, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, arriving in Detroit from Amsterdam on Christmas Day, could be just the first of many. And the ones who come after him may have been enabled to do so by the Euro-Med Partnership.
John Jay has his trenchant analysis of the Euro Med disaster here: "the 'sins of the nation state' do not find their origin in the nation state: they are the sins of humanity."
The euro left throws the baby of the “nation state” out with the bathwater of “war” and “human corruptibility,” which the nation state did not dirty.
What he lacks in caps, he makes up for in sagacity.
the obliteration of the european nation state.
the european left has decided that because the nation state has obviously been the cause of the destructive european warfare of the 20th century, that in order to extinguish war it is high time to obliterate the nation state.
this has been the chief aim of the designers of the euro union, that being to eliminate nationalistic antagonisms so as to engender calm, and we see it is the ever so silly hate speech legislation which prohibits europeans from saying anything nasty about muslims or other groups, apparently on the supposition that by so doing people will not have nasty thoughts, nor will violence be engendered without precipitating nasty thoughts and language: if they don’t think badly, they will not behave badly.
there seems to me several flies in the ointment. and, they both find their source in an intellectual and historical misapprehension about the cause of war and conflict, and a silly misunderstanding on the role of nations as a “source” of nationalistic tension/conflict causer in europe.
the first, is that nations do not cause wars, not in and of themselves, that is, and that those things which do cause war exist wholly and apart from the nation as an entity. look to the brief excerpt on the history of merry old england, all of which occurred before england was england. as it was occurring, it was not “english” history, it was the history of the conflict of extremely wealthy and influential families over familial possessions and baronies. [watch, if you will, “lion in winter.” ]
the second, and more egregious, error, is quite simply that european intellectuals have quite got the whole thing backwards.
John has a good deal more. Go.
UPDATE: Check out China Confidential's take on the Euro-Med disaster.