The attack on Western Civilization. And a response from Hungary.

AJ begins: Western leaders (and this includes Obama and his regime) are so anti-Christian that they are willing to ally with anyone who is against Christianity. They can not win the competition of ideas without cheating. And now they want to stack the deck by changing the composition of by importing people more malleable to their ideas. Here is an excerpt (in translation) from a speech given by  PM Viktor Orban discussing this very point.

"
“Using a proper perspective we can recognize over the states the still democratic community architectonic.  We have to regard the European Union, which, with good reason, was created together by two equal constitutional subjects, one being the European citizens and the other being the European states.   It will turn out at the end whether there is any point to this.  From this perspective it is clear that the pacification of the warring nations, so not only the founding of a United Organization of Nations, but also the unification of Europe was the motivating goal forming the starting basis for a long term objective, namely the creation of political action skills that go beyond the nation-state”.  I continue.   “The states international capabilities are to be further developed as a cosmopolitan society perspective of states and world citizens.  So the states, the states international community are to be further developed as a cosmopolitan community of states and world citizens”. The politically constructed world community perspective was even referred to by Ferenc Kőszeg in some weekly paper, and in this way I came across this wonderful action plan.  “The politically construed world society perspective does not appear so utopian, if we take into consideration that human rights rhetoric and politics over the past few decades could actually become influential globally.   This cosmopolitan need means that the role of human rights does not stop at the multi-faceted world of unequal social conditions of moral judgment.  Human rights must become embodied politically in the constituted world society.”  In other words, the right of asylum, migration, movement, and going somewhere else as opposed to the Tőkéczki kind of responsibility—approach—is actually to be construed as a kind of human right.
Dear ladies and gentlemen!
We stand before a challenge that is nothing less than the gate of the realization of a deliberate, left-wing spiritual construct that wants to put the nation-states of Europe in parenthesis, and if  they can no longer prevail over Christianity and nation-state identity and the values and responsibility arising from that in the world of traditional political struggle, then they wish to do away with it on an ethnic basis.  That is the sorry truth.   A betrayal is taking place, dear ladies and gentlemen.  They have betrayed Europe, and if we do not stand up for it, then they are going to take this Europe from us.  This Europe will not long be the Europe of European citizens, but rather that of some well organized, and if the Soros Foundation comes to mind, then it is not unfounded, well organized, moving large amounts of money, activist thinking outside the framework of nation-states, and the fulfilment of the dream of a leader whom nobody elected.   Rather then a Europe of we, European citizens over the next few years.  Maybe this seems vague, maybe it seems premature, maybe it appears unjust in some elements what I am saying, but I cannot explain in any other way those events to which we are witness day by day.  What can be the cure?  The cure can be the same as it always was.
We have to ask the question, the first question of democracy.  Who authorized European leaders, and on the basis of what authorization is it happening that they do not allow, but are transporting in the hundreds of thousands groups that are foreign to European culture to the European continent?   In such a manner that soon Europe’s cultural identity can be called into question.  Who gave them an authorization?  Nobody authorized them to do this, some intellectuals wrote wonderful books about it.  I read from one of these, but the answer can only come from our side, that in opposition to this conspiracy and this betrayal, we have to turn to democracy, and we have to turn to the people, and we have to inform the European people either as Europeans or as the citizens of nation-states in some way so that these people will say that they do not want what is happening, and that they approach this differently, and interpret the developments in a different content, and that they have the right to do say yes or no in a democratic manner to what is happening now in Europe.  We have to create the methods of this.  A European discussion must be started sooner or later, and I do not want to make any public proposals now as to how to go about this, but I would like to indicate, that a big European debate in this question cannot be avoided.
It is this way, dear ladies and gentlemen, because we do not even notice how low we have fallen.  Europe does not even notice how far it has sunk.  This is the fence matter.   Look now at the good folks of Austria.  I don’t say that there was no point to our living together with them for the past few hundred years, but even then the Austrians are a decent type.   Nevertheless, this country was the most successful company after the Second World War according to all the indicators, moreover a democratic country.  And look now: the elected leader says they are not building a fence, but a gate with long wings.  Now upon first hearing this, it is a funny thing, but let us look at its pathetic nature.  Where have we come to, that the Europe about which we were proud, because this was the world of freedom of thought, freedom of speech, and freedom of opinion, is in such a spiritual state that it is not possible to say certain words, and not bad words, but the fence word.   It is not the case that the Austrian chancellor did not learn these letters at school, or that his sound forming organs do not work in the case of these few letters, but rather that he thinks that by saying certain words in Europe today there can be serious political consequences, and for this reason he does not allow himself to do so.  Is this our Europe built on freedom of speech, opinion, and thought?  That we can no longer speak about our problems, our thoughts and or proposals.
Dear ladies and gentlemen!
I think the problem is big. I would like to make one suggestion to the writers of this document, because the document indirectly deals with this question, but I would propose that a chapter entitled Europe’s future and identity should be added to the document which tries to elaborate on this issue
Dear ladies and gentlemen!
I would like to finish with thoughts indicative of the same direction as I have previously stated.  This Europe needs to have a discussion with the goal of a strong, Christian Europe emerging from the discussion.  And in this strong and Christian Europe we can live our lives in a middle-class, Christian, strong Hungary.   If someone thought this is not a European thought, I would like to remind those of Schuman, one of our founding fathers, who said that Europe will either be Christian or will cease to exist.  Today both roads stand before Europe.
Thank you for your kind attention!