Peter throws around wild accusations and does little to disguise what is his unadulterated vitriol. One would be hard pressed to find any sophistication whatsoever in what he says.

He casts President Ilves in the role of traitor for leading the way to Estonia’s joining the European Union and NATO (when Ilves was Foreign Minister).

He claims that Estonia is now a province and not an independent country.

I would say Peter lives somewhere in a parallel universe, where Estonia regained independence in 1991 and chose to remain totally unaligned. Where Russia then implemented a policy of creeping re-annexation, much as it is now implementing in, say, Kyrgyzstan. In that parallel universe I might have no quarrel with Peter.

But enough of Science Fiction.

Thankfully Estonia was able to successfully join the EU and NATO.

To Peter independence was lost. To Peter I say BS. Let me explain by way of example: The fiercely independent Swiss have not joined the EU but they have voluntarily adopted its standards. They have agreed to be bound by the restrictions required to be members of the WTO. And they have signed-on to a countless number of other international treaty obligations. All of which severely limit their total freedom of action. They are not an independent nation, Peter might say, adding that those who are in the EU are provinces and not even nations.

Tell that to the Germans or the Finns, Peter!

But oh! I totally concede that being in the EU does not mean that things can’t go wrong. They will go wrong. You can bet on that. However, I’d much rather have things sorted out in concert with a group of democratic Western partners than say within the Russian dominated CIS.

Peter maintains anonymity. I’d love to discuss things with him because I am always willing to concede I’m wrong when presented with a compelling counterargument. But Peter wishes to spit vitriol from the shadows; he wishes to hide in the bushes. I wonder why.

In your opinion, what is then the difference between a country and a province? An independent country has control over it's borders, internal affairs and foreign policy and has it's own currency. How can you possibly say that Estonia is independent any more?
At one time I actually supported the idea of the EU but that was before it became a bureaucratic monster dominated by power hungry empire-building leftist fanatics.
Joining NATO may also have been a mistake since the ideological war between the western and communist countries no longer exists and the USA, which is now more leftist that the USSR was, is just using this military alliance to get their share of this planet's ever-dwindling supply of crude oil.
I am optimistic that the EU will not last for very long and the euro will probably be dead in a few short years so I am baffled by why the Estonian politicians would even want anything to do with this currency that they may have to replace soon, at vast cost to the country's citizens and businesses, in a time of great economic hardship.
Lastly, it is disappointing that the Estonian people were never asked if they wanted to scrap one of their most precious symbols of independence, the kroon. This really shows what the EU is, an undemocratic empire that cares nothing about what it's subjects want.

Peter now claims that Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and so on are all provinces. In addition, because Switzerland is part of the Schengen Area which has no internal borders with most of the EU (i.e. no ground based customs), he now would assign it too to the status of province.

Way to go, Peter! Your razor sharp intellect is insprational.

Oh Peter: You're a bit like the fish in the barrel.

Peter is right on a few points!
1. it (EU) became a bureaucratic monster dominated by power hungry empire-building leftist fanatics
2. disappointing that the Estonian people were never asked if they wanted to scrap one of their most precious symbols of independence, the kroon. This really shows what the EU is, an undemocratic empire

I don't agree with you Toomas. Even Canadian provinces and American states have more control over their internal affairs than EU member states.

Toomas-unfortunately your grasp on the situation in Estonia is considerably out of kilter. I am certain that Latvia and Lithuania will improve their economic condition before Estonia (after the Euro in 2010). You are unable to supply the linchpin as to why Switzerland will not join the EU. I will tell you why-because the EU is corrupt and will certainly remove any last vestige of independence if the Swiss were stupid enough to go down that path. Estonia did-I hope to God the Swiss don't. Let's get Mati Klaar's view on all of this. I imagine he would make mince meat of TM.

"He casts President Ilves in the role of traitor for leading the way to Estonia’s joining the European Union and NATO (when Ilves was Foreign Minister)."

Ilves gets his marching orders from the Trilateral Commission, and usually his travels are coordinated to make those meetings.
Are the Trilaterals global objectives the same as those of the "Eesti Vabariik"?

http://www.trilateral.org/down...

Here we go again… the kooks come out of the woodwork. For those of you that don’t know, the Trilateral Commission is a private organization, established to promote closer cooperation between Europe, the USA, and Japan. David Rockefeller established this organization in 1973. He was the chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in the USA at that time. The CFR was/is an American not-for-profit, non-partisan organization, publisher, and think-tank specializing in U.S. foreign policy and international affairs.

But there are those among us, who subscribe to the view that this is but one of those Free Mason organizations intent on controlling the world… no, not intent on, but already controlling the world. Free Masons, in their view, are goat worshipping Satanists (I’ve got e-mail from one of these Conspiracy Kooks in my archives), who espouse a one world government to better control us.

Ilves, Mart Laar, Eerik Niiles Kross, among a multitude of others, are considered traitors by many of them, for going over to this “Dark Side”.

We live in a tolerant society, so I’ll leave them alone. However, I find their views illogical, loony, and divisive. They also contribute nothing to any informed debate on anything.

And, oh yes, Ilves is a former member of the Trilateral Commission. And yes, the fostering of better relations between the USA, Europe and Japan are indeed in the interests of the Eesti Vabariik. Duh?

The issue of secret societies and their role in politics has been brought up here before. I am personally sceptical of many of the claims made by conspiracy theorists but it is a historical fact that these organizations have been involved in the affairs of many countries in the past. I personally believe that such societies are obsolete and have no place in a modern democratic society. In my opinion, any politician who belongs to such a society should not be legally allowed to run for public office.
Toomas, I am still waiting for an opinion on why you believe that the euro should be imposed on Estonia, Soviet style, and why the people of this formerly free country should not have been given the right to vote on such an important issue.

The Estonian public is too ignorant of global financial issues and therefore can't add value to the discussion.
Therefore whether right or wrong the politicians are a slightly better bet to decide best.

I thought that difference and lack of understanding are precisely what a shared space would overcome. But as always, I guess our big Finnish brothers know better! Why aspire to a bold new world of friendship and understanding when timid isolation will do? How silly.
Not sure why I'm even bothering to engage these nutters but . . . Peter when you say these societies should be outlawed, do you mean any society/organization or just the societies you don't like (or that you haven't been invited to become a member of)?
Regarding the Euro - do you have any real concerns beyond those that are based on emotion, nostalgia or a bizarre anti-Semitic worldview?: Because I’m not seeing any of them here. Conversely, Merilo has done a superb job of outlining the real economic benefits and some of the real threats of adopting the Euro.

First of all to Peter, I would bring up the fact that during the Euro-zone’s recent crisis, they had no appetite whatsoever for accepting any new members. Eesti fought an uphill battle to even come under consideration (much like it did to get into the EU and NATO).

Even when under consideration, there was fierce opposition by some in the current Euro-zone to any expansion, i.e. admitting Eesti.

But Eesti prevailed, by presenting fact after economic fact showing its fiscal competence and resting its case on how well it had weathered (albeit painfully) the current world crisis, in contradistinction to even most old-world economies. It got in over a razor’s edge, literally.

Which brings me to the point of “windows of opportunity”. This window opened, but for how long was anyone’s guess – if not seized, it might not reappear. Eesti’s government knew that. So it opted not to go for a referendum.

This was entirely within the government’s competence, but some like Peter don’t like that.

“So why not just keep the clone and be happy with it and get on with your business doing other things and not worry about all these bureaucratic and political tangles that it involves?”

Prime Minister Andrus Ansip has said euro adoption would spur foreign investment and boost economic recovery by removing investors’ fears about a possible devaluation.
So as Peter has previously indicated, the non-democratic estonian government wants estonians to be subserviant to foreign capital.

http://www.businessweek.com/ne...

What a load of crap with which you've managed to pollut cyberspace this time round Toomas! How on earth can you seriously have us believe that Estonia's passage to the Eurozone was ever in doubt? Please support your hypothesis by naming who was for and who was against Estonia during this historical decision making process? No names have been thus far made public at any time, although in the worst case scenario the Estonian people have largely been left in the dark. At at best we have had the plaudits of Jürgen Ligi to fall back on (as if that ever really gave anyone reason for comfort coming from such a dismal finance minister) . Neivelt has questioned why the ground rules for running the Eurozone were changed significantly on the very same weekend that Estonia was admitted to the Eurozone. Why? Neivelt indicates that there is reason to be very wary of decisions being taken by Brussels. This can all be read in EPL.

how easy it is to argue back and forth.

the vote was democratic! everyone had the chance to vote. Because you did not agree with it, does not mean that the world is not a democracy. Unfortunately, what people tend to forget, democracy means...majority wins! You don't always get your way, and that is what pisses me off about my parents woodstock hippy generation that stand on their pedestals preaching democracy when something doesn't go to YOUR particular thought process. Give me a break. It's either communism, facism, some other authoritarian rule, or democracy.....people make cases and arguments for their position, and the majority rule.

Funny thing is, I bet you Peeter, had the government of Estonia for example, denied the opportunity to Estonians joining the EU and adopting the Euro, you wouldn't see that as being non-democratic would you?

Either you are trying to falsify information to mislead the 2 readers on this article, or you need to re-evaluate your philosophy on what democracy means.

Lopetage see targutamine.
Kanadas on tehtud head "ajupesu"
Mulle tehti seda 30. aastat ,nouka-ajal.
Euroliit ei ole midagi muud ,kui 'Deutseland yber alles"
70. aastat tagasi tulid tankidega nyyd majandusega suruvad eestlasi ja vaikeriike oma mantli alla. Oodake veel, varsti tuleb naftajuhe baltimerest labi.
Vene laevad hakkavd valvama ja Euroliit ei tee tuhkagi.

Väga õige vastus! Lollid ja lilled tagasi kasti. Päikest!!

aga ma elan eestis ja ma tean kuidas seda hääletati. eestlased ei taha euro, aga nad tahavad olla nagu europlased. nad tahavad olla independent aga naad tahavad elada ainult ilmselt teised. eesti on liiga väike riik. nad peavad euro adoptima. see ei saa ola teist moodi...ainult kui oleks rootsiga või soomlega (kellel on juba euro) või balti riikid võibolla.....the other alternative on siis venemaa. ja siis mis.

peaks ütlema, et see on mõned eestlased kes ei taha euro. aga palju on positiivne, ned kes elavad siin.

Sorry... I got so excited at seeing that you're back, Maxim, that my fingers got all wobbly on the keyboard.

But seriously, why the moniker heinaturu Pets?