There are naturally many things that the European Union should never have done and one of them was to accept Iceland’s application to join the bloc. But Brussels can be pitied up to a certain point as it was deceived to think that the Icelandic people desired membership. Nothing, however, could be further from the reality. The Icelandic people have never wished to become members of the EU and never as little as today. As much as two thirds oppose membership according to successive opinion polls by various polling companies. An eventual accession treaty, if it comes to that, will have to go through a referendum in Iceland.

Recent times have been bountifully producing noteworthy and revealing items that are, at first glance, merely a “small matter”. A number of these deserve to be classified as “absurd”. The idiocy, the lies and the confusion-generated tidbits illustrate the point that serious matters can be as entertaining as they are harmful. Furthermore, such items are proof that some unintended jokes are serious politics. As such, some of these gems deserve to be shared. 

On Saturday, the people of Iceland for a second time refused via referendum to pay for the debts of the failed private bank Landsbanki Íslands and its online branch, Icesave, which operated in Britain and the Netherlands. The result of the referendum was decisive with a turnout of 75 percent.

Almost 60 percent voted 'No' to an agreement that would have seen Icelandic taxpayers shouldering the responsibility of these debts with interests, estimated at €11,875 for each of Iceland's 320,000 inhabitants. However, no one really knows what the amount would have been in the end. This was simply an open check.

Ours is an age that would have sent Greeks to their Oracles!

Witness American waver in a land embraced by a leader whose very identity is nominally informed from Arabia.  Given his place within the pantheon of American leadership after the scourging that became Iraq, he identified alone with the impatience and false rectitude that supplies contemporary liberalism its bile.  He could not envision chance giving him a political dilemma whereby he would identity and vindicate the political winds that animated his predecessor.

Tony Blair as representative of the Middle East Quartet recently argued that understanding Islam is key to dealing with the Arab revolution that keeps rocking not only the ruling elites in the Middle East but also their relations to the West.¹ We might add that lack of religion in the West and Israel is also an issue to the extent that religion is incapable of transcending the obsolete Right-Left divide in politics. However this might be achieved by the post-secular discourse between East and West. As will become clear in the following paragraphs there are good reasons for reviewing secularism and religion and trying to get rid of political messianism that has corrupted the Enlightenment. It might also set the stage for the recovery of a souvereign human soul – the God-send arrangement that had been uprooted by the French Revolution and ever since been eclipsed by rationalist enlightenment philosophy.

Inception, the first book of a planned “Ops Populi” series, is unusual in that its plot turns on a secret cabal whose goal is a constitutional convention—certainly an unusual theme for an adventure story. Why offer an esoteric and seemingly oddball political argument as a basis for dramatic fiction? We can think of several reasons for reading a novel, but this topic is not one. Readers often turn to fiction for the intrinsic enjoyment derived from an aesthetic literary encounter. Another reason is didactic; we may learn something new, or perhaps be shown different ways to approach an already familiar topic. Whatever one's reasons, when considering the novel's form a different approach is probably required than that taken when reading non-fiction. In this context we admit from the start a questionable ability to offer much by way of an aesthetic critique. Novels are not our primary reading. At the same time, some preliminary words can be said anent the book's general format and style, while reserving a more cogent (hopefully) critique for the end. When criticizing style we must always keep a perspective. The obvious cannot be denied, nothing is ever personal, and most contemporary writing is always suspect. Likewise, if our own words are ever marked down for not being in the same league as, say, literary criticism from Ezra Pound or T.S. Eliot, how ever could we not agree, and justly accept our grade?

1. A perceptive observer has concluded that for decades the world had to dread German militarism. Today, we need to fear aggressive German pacifism. Germany’s politics are determined by elements that intend to demonstrate a bold break with the past. Tellingly, no one besides the hysterical dreads that past. This course departs from the guild of the great grandfathers and promises to avoid without much effort in the future their past mistakes. For the observer that is able to distinguish between what “has been” and what “is”, it seems that this guilt is being exploited by putting it in the service of covert contemporary agendas. The demonstrative rituals –mainly staged by the Reds and the Greens- that disown the past, is used to avoid newly arising responsibilities. Meanwhile, the restraint preached is an opportunity for moralizing lectures. They are designed to improve in theory the practical actions of those that need to perform the world’s business.

When Democrats had the majority in Congress until the end of last year, they refused to vote a budget for the year starting October 2010 until the end of September 2011. This allowed Obama, as in the previous two years, to create a yearly deficit of over 1.5 trillion dollars. This red ink amounts to 40% of the budget! As a reference: the Belgian deficit in 2010 was 4.1%, which is more than the 3% allowed by European budget rules. The Bush budget for 2007, the last year the Republicans were in charge in Congress: the shortfall was 6%. The total Federal debt in the USA grew obscenely under Obama and his fellow Democrats running Congress, and will equal the value of GNP (Gross National Product) before the end of Obama’s first term. 

The time approaches when Gaddafi might be joining his Serbian and Rwandan colleagues-in-political-crime. This comes about by becoming a full room and board guest of an international tribunal. The prediction hinges on a pre-condition. Primarily, it involves not so much “The Guide’s” ability to hold on to power – regardless of intermittent tactical successes- that appears to be increasingly unlikely. His paid goons have contracted to serve in a machinery of oppression directed against defenseless victims. To serve in that function, the quality demanded of them is the willingness to kill people to which they feel no kinship. What the deal did not include was a sincerely meant commitment to fight heroically a lost battle against insurmountable odds. Going down as the heroes of a “Götterdämmerung” in the last bunker on the side of a “Leader” might look good in a history book. However, such a role is not attractive to folks who rent themselves out on a thousand-dollars-a-day basis. In this respect, Gaddafi’s praetorians differ from the SS. A tidbit to illustrate the ideological commitment that Gaddafi does not enjoy. The last Iron Cross/Ritterkreuz of the Nazi régime was awarded during the siege of Berlin. The recipient was a French member of the Waffen SS.

To know why Islam is a mortal danger one must not only consider the Koran but also the character of Muhammad, who conceived the Koran and the entirety of Islam.

The Koran is not just a book. Muslims believe that Allah himself wrote it and that it was dictated to Muhammad in the original version, the Umm al-Kitab, which is kept on a table in heaven. Consequently one cannot argue with the contents. Who would dare to disagree with what Allah himself has written? This explains much of Muhammadan behaviour, from the violence of jihad to the hatred and persecution of Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims and apostates. What we in the West regard as abnormal, is perfectly normal for Islam.