The three Europes - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
User avatar
By Megalommatis
#1147997
The three Europes

(first published in: http://www.tiraspoltimes.com/opinion/a_ ... ropes.html )

By Prof. Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis

Within a few days, European Union’s 27 member states’ leaders will meet in Berlin to feast in commemoration of the signature of the Treaty of Rome, on 25 March 1957. The German presidency wants to push ahead with two projects, a ringing declaration about the European values and a resuscitation of the quasi-defunct European Constitution project. What is true and what is possible for the European Union in the years ahead?

European Union: a great achievement

The progress of the European Economic Community was sterling indeed; the early 6 members (France, Germany, Italy and the Benelux) became gradually 9 (Denmark, Ireland and the UK) in 1973, 10 (Greece) in 1981, 12 (Spain and Portugal) in 1986, 15 (Finland, Sweden and Austria) in 1995, 25 (Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Malta and Cyprus) in 2004, and 27 (Bulgaria and Romania) in 2007.

The expansion was not horizontal but vertical as well. The early Customs Union turned out to become an Economic Union, as the single market is still a work in progress. It became - partly - a monetary union, with the introduction of the Euro (currency in use in 13 of the member states so far, in Andorra, in European micro-states such as Monaco, San Marino, Vatican, as well as in Montenegro and Kosovo). It formed a political union evolving around the European Parliament that is the Ovidian metamorphosis of the ‘Common Assembly’ of the European Coal and Steel Community (first established in 1952), with members elected since 1981. The European legislators expanded beyond the economy, on social affairs, environment, and welfare, gradually unifying the member states’ legal systems. Common policy is in the making, and has so far covered home affairs, security and justice; common foreign and defense policy seems to be a most problematic field but steps have been made so far in this direction too. European policy making left already an impact on global issues as diverse as Lebanon, Congo and Indonesia.


European Union: a biased project


1. A wrong economic and political model

Can we truly consider as success the materialization of the aforementioned? It depends. Most of Europeans however do not! The European economy has been the victim of highly ideologized French dirigisme, and the political prospect of a European federal state is fully rejected by numerous states across the continent. The French and Dutch referenda gave a lethal hit to the incredible and extraordinary manipulation of European History as stipulated in the disreputable Preamble of Giscard d’ Estaing’s ‘constitution’.

2. European peoples: misinformed and disoriented

European peoples have long been fed with panaceas and welfare state myths; not only will these myths lead to an unpleasant awakening but they are deeply immoral and racist of nature. The German – French economic model collapsed in front of the booming American consumerism, and the rise of great markets in China, India and soon in Brazil. The European myth composers had not taken the rise of the Global economy into consideration, and their answer has been to raise barriers, forming the legendary European fortress.

3. European Union: immoral to themselves and to others
The disastrous situation of the African continent is precisely due to this European attitude of protectionism. Furthermore, Europe has been formed through immoral negotiations, whereby the economically weak had to accept the directives of the economically and politically powerful tandem “France / Germany”, ignoring the consequences for them and for the entire continent; they only needed European funds!

4. Any nation building project imposes debates on the National Identity.


For 50 consequent years, there has never been a serious debate about the European Identity. This only would be enough to let many realize that the project was biased. In the beginning, Europe ‘meant’ Continental Europe; we have not yet forgotten Charles de Gaulle’s comical reactions to Britain’s candidacy! After France rebelled in May 68 against that paranoid, ‘democratic’ dictator, Europe got rid of the French anti-British exclusivity; under Pompidou, Britain joined the 6.

However, few analyzed how for a significant part of the French establishment, Germany was a natural partner of France and the European project, and Britain was not! It was left to be believed as a curiosity of an old statesman. Quite unfortunately, it was not!

Later on, Europe ‘signified’ Capitalist Europe, as the Iron Curtain still divided the continent. The project consisted in sheer rejection of a part of the continent only because of undemocratic practices. It sounds correct and moral, but it was not! Why? Simply because the antidemocratic practices of the Socialist bloc were not viewed as such by sizable populations of the Western European countries, namely the followers of the Communist parties, more particularly in Italy, France, Greece, and elsewhere. Let’s go back to 1973. Why should one consider Franco’s Spain as ‘European’ and Soviet Union as ‘non European’?

Spain was not accepted in the European Union until the country became a fully fledged democracy, but this is not the main point; no matter what sort of political establishment, monarchical or democratic, Japan would never be considered as a European country. This says it all; what mattered in the 60s, the 70s, the 80s, and what matters now is still the same.

Irrespective of regime, what country can/must/is to be considered European and what country cannot/must not/is not?

This clear cut question was never a matter of preoccupation among European statesmen, politicians, legislators, intellectuals and academia. Why Europeans avoid the basic question for their identity and future may take volumes to analyze, but within the limits of the present article we will try to eschew the past and foresee the future.

The First Europe – A Berlin / London axis for a Universal Europe

A European re-launching that goes beyond past dramas. A Berlin – London axis replaces the God damned Paris – Berlin ineptia. European administrations and legislators understand that the angular stone of all democratic ideas and concepts is the Right of Peoples to Self Determination. The unconditional recognition of Kosovo as an independent state triggers the welcoming of Transnistria and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus to Europe and therefore to the International Community.

Ukraine, Turkey and Russia as accepted as indispensable member states of the European Union, and a Great Chart is prepared to identify Europe as the continent of coexistence of numerous religions, Judaism, Christianity in all its denominations, Islam, and various pre-Christian religious systems, along with the faiths of the 20th century immigrants, Singh, Hindus, Buddhists and Africans. Europe is defined as equally East and West, and a European integration plan is made to provide all the states of the European continent the means to achieve economic and political unification with the European Union.

All the minorities on European soil are officially recognized a such, and offered the necessary tools for linguistic, educational, cultural, and religious survival. The existing ‘unique’ national languages are therefore abolished in countries with minorities, whereby the languages of minorities are promoted to the level of national language.

Vicar of the economic liberalism, European Union abolishes all sorts of barriers, and acknowledges the European responsibility for crimes perpetrated by the colonial practices of several European countries on African, Asiatic and American soil. Reunified, and with its various populations well integrated, Europe cancels permanently any chance of disputes, wars and conflicts either on European soil or elsewhere. With the Euro in use from Vladivostok to Lisbon, the European stock exchanges unified, and the liberalization process completed, Europe can enter into discussions with North America in view of an advanced global integration.

This Universal Europe has slim chances to become a reality.

The Second Europe – A pale and immoral power center at Brussels

With Chirac and Blair bidding farewell, with the German governmental coalition ailing, with Romano Prodi unable to bring forth imperative changes, and with Zapatero having lost his momentum, the European statesmen prove for one more time that they are political dwarfs and intellectually miserable. Without any vision, they try to find a way to sign a minimal constitution that defines nothing, let alone the European Identity, they do their best to perpetuate the problems of Kosovo, Macedonia, Voivodina, Sandjaq, Thrace, Transnistria and Cyprus. Georgia remains explosive in its opposition to Russia, Armenia is supported against Turkey, and Belarus is kept in the quarantine; Ukraine is declared as non European country, and the negotiations with Turkey end in a definite divorce. It becomes known that the Western Balkans were never European, and so they are offered special status.

Fortress Europe rejoices with the African genocides and starvation, with the American failure in Iraq, and with the Chinese socio-economic collapse; an over heated economy would end like this, sooner or later. With Iran as nuclear power, Afghanistan and Somalia out of control, and the rise of Islamists in parts of Africa, the traditional colonial diplomacies shape the European Union’s policy turning Palestinians against Israelis, Moroccans against Algerians, and Muslims against Christians in Lebanon, Syria, Nigeria, Abyssinia and Iraq.

Europe itself is devastated by the social unrest, political clashes between religious and secularists, and regional wars, Albania against Montenegro, Turkey against Cyprus and Greece, Kosovo against Macedonia, Moldova against Transnistria, etc. To keep Islamic extremists happy, Dante is banned. The treaty of Rome is still valid, and Brussels bureaucrats are happy with American isolationism. Euro was never accepted by more than 17 countries, and the anti-Euro parties in Italy represent the majority. Last but not least, Europe pays a very high political price for its dependence of Russian energy, and in this way Moscow lives in the days of a state capitalist tyrant who proved to be worse than Stalin. In a world of conflicts, Europe or a part of it still survives.

The Third Europe – The religious – political axis Berlin / Moscow


The political dwarfism of the European legislators was definitely unbearable. Several parties across Europe realized that speaking of Islam on European soil meant European disfiguration. They went on specifying that Europe or Germany could not be victimized forever because of the mistaken policy of a ruler who governed Germany only for 12 years (1933 - 45). They identified the European values as those of the Catholic Christianity and they made a pact with representatives of Orthodox Eastern Europe. They rejected secularism, gay marriages and parental adoption, abortion and nudism. Specifying that the Family is a Value, they demanded the end of civil marriages. They rejected that England could ever be European, and they demanded apologies for the Irish Genocide as they demanded the same from Turkey for the Armenian Genocide.

In the beginning, they formed a 20% minority party in most of the European countries, but when the clashes with the Islamic extremists started, they got moment and rose to power. A great leader made a pledge for a new Europe, and brought together the Roman Pope and the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Moscow. Europe was reunified first at the religious level, and then at the political. The entire continent with the exception of England and Scandinavia turned around the German – Russian axis and a war was undertaken in the Middle East to kick the Turks and the Muslims out, and to bring Constantinople and Jerusalem under Christian control again. The clash with America was therefore unavoidable. The old lesson of the Horatii and Curiatii was never learnt!

The three Europes stand before us; and it is up to us to choose as early as possible!
By SimpleRules
#1148010
How about we just accept its a continent and nothing more?

Quite frankly the EU scares me more than the picture of Putin above, and I believe I'd get better representation in the Russian government and "democracy" than I do right now in Europe ... where my views are supposedly taken to Brussels, reflect only 10% and then the Germans, French and Spain do what they want and impose it on the UK.

The United States would have probably fallen apart in the early years of the Union, had the Federal Government trumped State Government ... they understood those in the South are different than those in the North.

Here the supranational government trumps the national government, and the Eurocrats believe that we somehow believe the same, feel the same and want to live the same because we happen to share a continent ... its wrong.
User avatar
By Megalommatis
#1148022
I understand your concern, but....

have you got any guarantee that, when we leave it as just a continent, it will stay for long a .... peaceful continent?
User avatar
By droodle
#1148033
A Fourth Europe - Enlightenment Europe

A Europe based on the declaration of human rights (which is somewhat integrated into the Kopenhagen criteria) and expressed by humanitarian values such as freedom of expression, freedom of thought, nondiscrimination, equal opportunities for all and a secular federal state.
Even more, to effectively have a federal government which can guarantuee these rights some restrictions must be made on the economical level (also part of the Kopenhagen criteria).
A bigger European role in the outside world made possible by a single european army (small, but already implemented) and a single spokesman (implemented but not very successful sofar). A halt to agricultural subsidies and a stop of income tariffs from developing countries.
User avatar
By Megalommatis
#1148052
There is no fourth Europe.

Your literature reveals all the cliches of European politicians' wooden tongue.

Copenhagen criteria?

We saw them in the tents of millions of Kosovars, who were not protected because probably Kosovo is in Africa.

Human Rights?

We saw them in the disreputable acceptance of Bulgaria without the parallel recognition of its Macedonian minority.

Humanitarian values?

So brilliantly respected as in Croatia and in Bosnia!

Freedom of thought?

Yes, we attested this option in the long tyrannized Corsica and Brittany.

The most comical element of your hypocritical purpose: a secular state for Europe!

Really?

Do you really dare suggest that Europeans want a secular state?

Only the criminal and antihuman Grand Orient de France and other bogus-Free Masonic heretics want this.

Would you accept a referendum for Secular or Religious Europe?

Certainly not, so democratic you must be!
User avatar
By 87522
#1148116
Spain was not accepted in the European Union until the country became a fully fledged democracy, but this is not the main point; no matter what sort of political establishment, monarchical or democratic, Japan would never be considered as a European country. This says it all; what mattered in the 60s, the 70s, the 80s, and what matters now is still the same.

Irrespective of regime, what country can/must/is to be considered European and what country cannot/must not/is not?


Right... well, I thought Japan is not a European country because it's not in Europe. I'd guess this is still one basic criterion for becoming a EU member.

The 1st Europe

Ukraine, Turkey and Russia as accepted as indispensable member states of the European Union


This might happen someday, but those states are far from ready to be accepted as members.

Besides, I think one major opponent of your "Berlin-London axis" would in fact be London. Why would the UK want to "acknoledge its responsibility for crimes perpetrated on African, Asiatic and American soil"? Why would it want to loose its position in capital markets to a "unified European stock exchange"?

This Universal Europe has slim chances to become a reality.


Right, in fact it's hardly worth mentioning.

The 2nd "immoral" Europe

the Chinese socio-economic collapse


Huh? Didn't he/you write above that

The German – French economic model collapsed in front of the booming American consumerism, and the rise of great markets in China, India and soon in Brazil
?

regional wars, Albania against Montenegro, Turkey against Cyprus and Greece, Kosovo against Macedonia, Moldova against Transnistria, etc


Yes, and their penchant for invading and bombing each other is a reason why these countries shouldn't become members of the EU (yet).

The 3rd Europe

First you are calling it the "Berlin/Moscow axis", but later you make it sound as if Germany and Russia promoted right-wing, religious policies. This seems a little strange to me, since the latest "Berlin/Moscow axis" was formed by Putin and Schroeder, neither of whom seems like a religous rightist to me (Schroeder is a Social Democrat and rather centrist; his succesor, Christian Democrat Merkel, doesn't really seem too interested in sustaining a relationship with Russia to the same extend as Schroeder did).

I can understand that a German-Russian friendship is somewhat scary from a historical standpoint, but I don't think it would again degenerate into what it was to be last time.
By Shade2
#1148256
European Union abolishes all sorts of barriers, and acknowledges the European responsibility for crimes perpetrated by the colonial practices of several European countries on African, Asiatic and American soil.

Huh ?
What do Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland or Ukraine have to do with colonialism ? Frankly I couldn't care less as my nation was victim of colonialism from Germany and Russia.
Ukraine, Turkey and Russia as accepted as indispensable member states of the European Union

Russia as member of EU ? It would be against its nature. Besides Poland would veto it.

Europe is defined as equally East and West,

What about the idea of Central Europe as realised in Austro-Hungary for example.

Fortress Europe rejoices with the African genocides and starvation, with the American failure in Iraq,

Eh ? They are several european countries in Iraq besides Americans.

hey went on specifying that Europe or Germany could not be victimized forever because of the mistaken policy of a ruler who governed Germany only for 12 years (1933 - 45).

What about policy of ethnic cleansing made by Bismarck, Prussian militarism, discrimination and Germanisation of Poles in Germany, the idea of Lebensraum that was the goal of Germany in WW1 and plans to ethnicly cleanse Central and Eastern Europe in WW1 by Ludendorf and German leaders ?
Anybody with just a bit of history knowledge knows that German policies aren't limited to Hitler when it comes to attempts at destroying other nations.
The entire continent with the exception of England and Scandinavia turned around the German – Russian axis

Yeah right. I can already see the Poles being happy about that.
The clash with America was therefore unavoidable.

Why would Poland or Hungary fight against America ?
By SimpleRules
#1148928
I understand your concern, but....

have you got any guarantee that, when we leave it as just a continent, it will stay for long a .... peaceful continent?


Well, I don't think it could get worse ... countries are less imperial, atleast in their home continents now-a-days.

I don't see France going to war with Britain, or Poland and Germany ... the wars outside of Europe would continue.

Russia is probably the biggest threat to European peace and that would happen with the EU or not.
User avatar
By soron
#1149085
Anybody with just a bit of history knowledge knows that German policies aren't limited to Hitler when it comes to attempts at destroying other nations.


As in the Battle of Legnica when we helped to save your asses from the Mongols ?
User avatar
By Zel
#1149129
Why would Poland or Hungary fight against America ?


Why would Germany, France or any other EU member? Last I checked you all were in the same defensive alliance with US troops in most of these countries.
By Shade2
#1149243
As in the Battle of Legnica when we helped to save your asses from the Mongols ?

Huh ? Another brilliant example of German teaching system ? Not only the battle was lost by defenders but it was waged by Poles and Bohemians not by Germans. They were also French Templar Knights and some Hospitallers. They were some miners from Bavaria but I don't know what ethnic groups they were made of.
What made you say that Germans were involved ? I am truly astounded at the amount of nationalist propaganda Germans show here, not to mention laughable claim of "saving your asses". Learn history-the battle was won by Mongols.
And of course at the time of the Battle there was German nation was still almost 600 years in the future.
Mainly created by Prussia-a state made by extermination of local population, destruction of Poland, slavery of Balts, and breaking treaties.
Not a good role-model if you ask me.
User avatar
By soron
#1149257
Another brilliant example how you make your own truth :D


The Battle of Legnica (Polish: Bitwa pod Legnicą), also known as the Battle of Liegnitz (German: Schlacht von Liegnitz) or Battle of Wahlstatt (German: Schlacht bei Wahlstatt), was a battle which took place at Legnickie Pole (Wahlstatt) near the city of Legnica (Liegnitz) in Silesia on April 9, 1241.

A combined force of Poles and Germans under the command of Henry II the Pious, Duke of Silesia, supported by feudal nobility and knightly military orders sent by the Pope, attempted to halt the Mongol invasion of Europe. Despite the Mongol victory in the ensuing battle, this was the furthest west their forces reached due to political destabilization inside the Mongol Empire.


Shade2 wrote:
Not only the battle was lost by defenders but it was waged by Poles and Bohemians not by Germans. They were also French Templar Knights and some Hospitallers. They were some miners from Bavaria but I don't know what ethnic groups they were made of.


Well:
According to James Chambers, Henry's force consisted of at most 25,000 troops. Lesser trained troops included an army from Opole under Duke Mieszko II the Fat, Moravians led by the Margrave of Moravia's son Boleslav, conscripts from Greater Poland, volunteer Bavarian miners from Goldberg (Złotoryja). Henry's better trained troops were his own Silesians, mercenaries, and small contingents of French Knights Templar and Hospitallers.[2]

The historian Marek Cetwiński estimates the allied force to have been 2,000 strong, while Gerard Labuda estimates 7,000-8,000 soldiers in the Christian army


While considering whether to besiege Wrocław, Baidar and Kadan received reports that King Wenceslaus I of Bohemia was two days away with an army of 50,000. The Mongols turned from Wrocław to intercept Henry's forces before the European armies could meet. The Mongols caught up with Henry near Legnica at Legnickie Pole (Polish for "Field of Legnica"), also known as Wahlstatt (German for "battle field").


The battle took place before the Bohemians arrived, and although it is regarded as a Pyrric victory or a defeat it discouraged the Mongols from entering Bohemia.

What made you say that Germans were involved ?


The fact that they were involved ? After all the place is a mere 90 km east of our recent border.
By Shade2
#1149421
The fact that they were involved ?

Firstly I would like to ask what book you quoted ? You didn't mention the title ? Who is the author and when was it published ?
I don't see any German troops-it says miners from Bavaria.Doesn't mention their natonality

Well:

Well...No mentioning of German troops. Only miners from Bavaria among other parts of the force. Doubtfull they were essential and Bavaria was quite distinct part of Central Europe with its own identity before being absorbed by Germany.

Defeat it discouraged the Mongols from entering Bohemia.

Actually they left only because Ogodai Khan died, the battle was insignificant for their decision. Of course you revealed that now some miners from Bavaria saved Poland from Mongols. Truly there is nothing more ridiculous and pompous as German nationalism :lol:

The fact that they were involved ?

The quotes from unknown book mention some miners from Bavaria . Nothing more.

After all the place is a mere 90 km east of our recent border.

Yeah, Germany still holds some lands of West Slavic people and Poland.
http://www.jenskleemann.de/wissen/bildu ... edlung.jpg
http://www.piastowie.kei.pl/piast/mapy/2.htm
User avatar
By QatzelOk
#1149459
The only thing that European countries all share (besides a history of barbaric wars) is that they are all white.

If the people of France, Spain, Italy and Greece really wanted to project a useful political entity that represented a worldwide unity, the Arab world would be included right from the start.
By Shade2
#1149477
If the people of France, Spain, Italy and Greece really wanted to project a useful political entity that represented a worldwide unity

I don't recall anything about 'world unity' being policy of EU-reminds me of the 'world government' idiocy. A one political entity for whole world sounds awfully totalitarian.
User avatar
By droodle
#1149554
There is no fourth Europe.

Your literature reveals all the cliches of European politicians' wooden tongue.


I don't defend all of the status quo. Your proposed Europe isnt reality either.
Copenhagen criteria?

We saw them in the tents of millions of Kosovars, who were not protected because probably Kosovo is in Africa.


I'm talking about the EU. The EU indeed has responsibilities in the near abroad and they should be more active. This is exactly why a single european army and a single spokesperson based on common values are good steps.

Human Rights?

We saw them in the disreputable acceptance of Bulgaria without the parallel recognition of its Macedonian minority.


Don't know in detail about that, but I would agree.
Humanitarian values?

So brilliantly respected as in Croatia and in Bosnia!

Freedom of thought?

Yes, we attested this option in the long tyrannized Corsica and Brittany.


dito
The most comical element of your hypocritical purpose: a secular state for Europe!

Really?

Do you really dare suggest that Europeans want a secular state?

Only the criminal and antihuman Grand Orient de France and other bogus-Free Masonic heretics want this.

Would you accept a referendum for Secular or Religious Europe?

Certainly not, so democratic you must be!


Certainly I would. Why else do you think that there is no specific reference to Christianity in the Treaty establishing a Constitution? Why else do you think no major confessional parties have an absolute majority in any of the largest nations?
Luckily, following the Enlightenment (in the long run) most elements of christianity were expelled from the state apparatus. Monarchies became constitutional monarchies and in effect democracies, state preference of subsidies were stopped or evenly spread among religious denominations, and Marx's communism (which became social democrats) replaced a nation of the church's gift to the poor.
User avatar
By soron
#1149569
Your attempt at denying history is impressive indeed ... miners from Bavaria means they were Bavarian obviously. As for Germans, look at this map:
http://www.mgh-bibliothek.de/lexikothek/reich.html or Image

If your so-called knowledge of history would indeed include facts on Germany instead of mindless propaganda you'd know that Germany used to be a patchwork of small nations who's uniting factor was the German emperor. Despite your stories of historical enmity, those ministates were quiet powerless and everyone's bitch. How do you think it could happen that e.g. during the thirty years war, every European power seemed to have troops marauding in our country ? The French, the Spanish, Swedish, Austrian plus mercenaries from all countries all ravaged the land.
Our national unity we could only achieve by overcoming foreign resistance by militar means. So you see, *somebody* gave us all the opportunity to hone our war skills.
As you can see on this map, the German Reich included the Kingdoms of Bohemia (as you probably knew well, you just tried to deny it and confuse things, likewise your "Bavarian" statement). The Polish Kingdom used to be located more to the Southeast back then.
You can look that up in any decend history book or just google for it.
User avatar
By droodle
#1149586
Canossa. People did not feel any more german then than the scots felt British.
User avatar
By soron
#1149589
I understand King Richard actually didn't speak English but French, he lived there most of the time anyway :)
By Shade2
#1149597
. As for Germans, look at this map:
http://www.mgh-bibliothek.de/lexikothek/reich.html

Huh ? This is an old map, not even describing any ethnic groups.
But it is amusing to see your nationalistic posts-claims that Holy Roman Empire was "Germany" are standard dish on the German revisionist menu. I wonder though how do poor Italians and Czechs would feel about that. As a Pole I know how I feel when you point to Polish inhabited territores like Silesia which were sadly part of Holy Roman Empire with shouting "Germans !". Are you claiming Poles, Czechs and Italians are Germans ? :lol:


you'd know that Germany used to be a patchwork of small nations

You claim Italy, Poland, Czechoslovakia as Germany ? As far as I know Germany is an artificial creation of XIX century Prussian imperalism and nationalistic myths created by romantic propagandists.It would be better if it would be dissolved by Allies after WW1 and WW2-too bad it didn't happen as those natonalistic myths are highly infectious and give self-proclaimed "Germans' a disturbing fever and seizures especially towards Poles and Czechs.


Our national unity we could only achieve by overcoming foreign resistance by militar means. So you see, *somebody* gave us all the opportunity to hone our war skills.

Is this a quote from Hitler ?

The Polish Kingdom used to be located more to the Southeast back then.

Yes it lost several of its core provinces like Silesia where Poles and Czechs formed first states in existance of those territories. Happily they are back to their original states now.

You can look that up in any decend history book or just google for it.

Btw-care to name the book you quoted those funny passages about Legnica Battle-you still haven't answered that one.
Trump and Russiagate

Avenatti will probably represent himself. I can’t[…]

1st part, you are wrong. The US makes voluntary c[…]

As you say, it costs us a ton of money, because w[…]

My favorite type of MRA is the one who just waits […]