II. How the anti-„coalmen“ in their uselessness found an enemy

And although the title of the first part of this publication has a negative connotation „How the „coalmen“ stole the victory from the real winners“ – theft from the sacrificial Kurgan¹ of Soviet Russia of the Victory on May 9 over fascism, behind the „coalmen“ (i.e. the pro-lifers of the European Union) I saw a peace-reviving and peace-building organization. Although it was created on May 9 (five years later than the real Victory), In the shadow of the Cold War and the already existing NATO, European countries signed the agreement to guarantee peace and future security on the continent – they sought desperately possibility an agreement after the catastrophe of World War II. Do not be surprised that the idea of salvation came from an ordinary (but not ordinary enough to be buried in the Pantheon!) official of the French Foreign Ministry – Jean Monnet. And perhaps this would have remained just an idea for the EU without the declaration of French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman. But frankly speaking, it is unpleasant when the anti-„coalmen“ (the current EU, which with its Green Deal wanted to ban the exploitation of coal) to  juxtapose themself  – Europe Day – in front of the real Victory, without which there would hardly be Europe at all! Well, the only Bulgarian associate professor with striptease-doctorate (i.e. without a doctorate) Georgi Lozanov, a dealer in all kinds of political goods, is of a different opinion: „The biggest impudence of the Russians is Victory Day. Communist Russia hurried to misappropriate victory, and war in general, thereby creating at least three historical falsifications.“ As you will see below, he is one of the witnesses that Putin killed the Dead Sea!

I once explained what these „coalmen“ are. I have allowed myself this frivolous lexical attribute attributed to the ECSC (European Coal and Steel Community), which provides for the unification of coal and steel production of the participating countries: France, West Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg. The idea is to unite coal and steel production in order to change the fate of regions doomed for a long time to the production of weapons, to which they themselves were most often victims. Moreover, solidarity in production would make war between France and Germany (the centuries-old confrontation between these two countries is known) not only unthinkable, but practically impossible. In addition, all Franco-German coal and steel production will be placed under the control of a common supreme body within the emerging organization.

So I have come to the time and place where there is no non-negative connotation: the European Union after the 12th Presidency!²

Now, without you thinking that I am testing you, I will tell you the names of the Presidents of the European Commission of the European Economic Community (EEC) and, later, of the European Union (EU): Walter Hallstein (Germany), Jean Ray (Belgium), Franco Maria Malfatti (Italy), Sico Mansholt (Netherlands), François-Xavier Ortoli (France), Roy Jenkins (Great Britain), Gaston Thorne (Luxembourg), Jacques Delors (France), Jacques Santer (Luxembourg), Manuel Marin (Spain), Romano Prodi (Italy), Jose Manuel Barroso (Portugal)…

Admit with your hand on your heart that you hear some of the names for the first time! And these are authoritative European statesmen and long-time diplomats, individuals with academic careers, authors of scientific theories and doctrines; people who have been devoted to the idea of a united Europe for years.

I will not retell you the history of the European Union, but behind these personalities are the efforts (mental, cognitive, competent, moral) to build a first-of-its-kind European supranational institution: the „step by step“ integration of post-war Western Europe instead of full and rapid integration.

One of the common cliches used to characterize the EU is that it is a one-of-a-kind organization sui generis (unique, without analogue). Indeed, it is not possible for the EU to fit into the structural political and economic categorization known to us at that time, on the one hand, and on the other hand, it is not possible to think of the EU as all other interstate organizations, in which states have fully preserved the autonomy of decision-making³. In the entire almost two-century existence of international organizations, there is no other organization that thus intertwines the interstate and national principles in the construction of the organization: some bodies have become symbols of the interstate principle (European Council, Council of Ministers, Court of Justice, Court of Auditors).

Even at the beginning, federalism had a peak („United States of Europe“, a definition attributed to Winston Churchill) ⁴ the most democratic form of government with the most dignified autonomy of its individual units. Federalism considers integration unification by analogy with the federal state (sovereign superstate). Among the most ardent supporters of this idea are the first president of the European Commission, Walter Hallstein, the founder of the Joint-Stock Committee for the creation of a United States of Europe, Jean Monnet, the founder of The Federalist Movement in Italy, Altiero Spinelli.

In the euphoria of the idea of a united Europe as a federation comes the cold shower from the failure of the draft European constitution. This is essentially the unsuccessful attempt to constitutionally validate this idea due to the negative vote on the ratification (through referendums) of the Constitution for Europe (in English: Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe) in France and the Netherlands.

But no matter how much it has been argued over the years that there is no such state as a „Federal Europe“, that the European Union is a union of sovereign states and not a federation⁵, the federalist idea persists.^.

But the integration „step by step“, without unnecessary noise, successfully continues.

In 2012, the EU was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its more than six decades of contribution to the advancement of peace and harmony, democracy and human rights in Europe. At the same time, with commendable stinginess, the Union announces its honorary citizens. Only three: Jean Monnet, Helmut Kohl and Jacques Delors.⁶

In vain did this woman survive after the Russian GPS sabotage in the flight zone and after the Bulgarian „sea filled with unrequited love“ without honorеd Volodomir Zelensky with the title of honorary citizen of Europe!ry citizen of Europe!

In those years, today’s Ukraine did not exist (I want you to capture my irony!) and the European Union recorded Africa, the continent of Africa, as its main address of aid! What about this moral political purity!

At that time, the European Union did not yet have a clearly defined enemy, although this was the time of the Cold War. And the other world power, NATO, is turning its sight to Iran: President Ronald Reagan officially declares Iran a „state sponsor of terrorism“ (1984).

However, you have to pretend not to know how Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi ambitions for nuclear power are supported by none other than the United States.

 In 1953 the two countries signed an agreement on the use of nuclear energy for civilian purposes as part of the atom for Peace program. A decade later, the United States provided Iran with a nuclear reactor and uranium for fuel (1967). This cooperation lays the ground for today’s nuclear problem. The United States recently bombed three key nuclear facilities in Iran, citing security and defence concerns Israel. Maybe their are the same ones given in the past to Iran!

So, if I return to the topic: does the EEC have a designated enemy such to NATO has, I must say that in those years the European Economic Community (EEC) looked at the Soviet Union with a mixture of apprehension and pragmatism. The EEC saw European integration as a way to counter Soviet influence and ensure stability in Western Europe, especially after the failure to create European Defence Community.

The EEC saw European integration as a way to counter Soviet influence and ensure stability in Western Europe, especially after the failure to establish a European defense community. Oh, this is not the current idea of „ReArm Europe“, but the facilitation of the unification of Europe by eliminating the risks of maintaining national armies and especially of a potential military reinforcement of the Federal Republic of Germany. However, the fear of Soviet influence exists. At that time, the „Hallstein Doctrine“ (the first president of the European Commission) appeared, ostensibly referring to the Federal Republic of Germany rather than the EU, which stated: „West Germany will not maintain diplomatic relations with any country that recognized the German Democratic Republic (East Germany), with the exception of the Soviet Union.“ In those years, the Soviet Union viewed the EEC with suspicion, seeing it as an instrument of American capitalism and a threat to the communist block, and reacted by forming the COMECON (CMEA) as a counterweight to the EEC. However, they are still not seen as enemies! Simply because an economic union cannot have an enemy unless it itself has become a military Union! Even without the foggy „military doctrine“ – the phantasmagoria of Rosen Zhelyazkov!

Yet it is more of a military alliance like NATO, and as much as I dislike Emmanuel Macron’s Oedipal complexist line, I will agree with him: „we need to know who and where our enemies are“. But this, alas, is an economic organization. And if we look (even without the need to do it carefully!) EU actions in recent years have exceeded NATO’s military aggressiveness:

• to activate the ReArm Europe plan, behind which the intention is visible „Europeans to get ready for war“; to build a new security architecture for Ukraine – to make it a „steel hedgehog“, to achieve „Peace through Force“, these are not just verbal incantations!

And behind the Ukro-canonization of the so-called Euro-Atlantic values⁷ (not recognized as a legal term by the UN) pathological Russophobia is impudently peaking… With a special rubric in the EU budget for… Ukraine!

Don’t ask yourself unnecessary questions – read the title again: „How the anti-coalmen in their uselessness found an enemy“ ⁸. And they forgot about their „baptism certificate“ of a economic union.

Not suddenly! This has been consistent, meticulous, orthodox, aggressive… for years: for example, from 2014 to 2025… (with apologies for the irony: from the time of the commissioner with the drunken sciatica to the time of the midwife of steel hedgehogs…)!

My logic may seem unconvincing to you, but the so-called „A green deal“ by the Von-der-Commission practically puts an end to the EU’s „coal start“ because the EU’s (sickly) ambition goals, alas, are starting to lead toward to … deindustrialization of an entire continent!

In case you don’t know, the European Green Deal, also known as the EU Green Deal or the Green Deal, is supposed to be a new growth strategy, policy and roadmap for the European Union (EU) that aims to transform the EU into a fair and prosperous society.

As declarative as it sounds, the European Union must renew its commitment to tackling climate and environmental challenges. The challenges are diligently written down in 9 points, but I will focus on only one: point 4: Clean energy, with a view to decarbonizing energy.

Shall I explain to you? An energy sector must be developed, which is built mainly on renewable sources, complemented by the rapid decommissioning of coal and the decarbonization of gas.

I will say it in my own words: to inhale, but not to exhale!

I overdo! The prowling fact-checkers (you might call them tinkers of facts)⁹ refute me: „nowhere in the documents describing the measures in the pact is there a limit on carbon emissions for individual consumption.“

And can you imagine that the „deal“ / The so-called The Green Deal (Trump’s „deals“ are still behind the scenes!) met with criticism from all parts of the political spectrum and society; the representatives of businesses and enterprises, farmers and workers dissatisfied with the growing bureaucracy organized protests.

Does the word bureaucracy bother you?

Don’t worry – every EU-law is called a Regulation or Directive. For example: implementing regulation (EU) 2017/2470 allows yellow worm dust and worm larvae to be food for placing on the European market. Here are good examples of „Regulations“:

• The EU bans children from inflating balloons • The European Commission bans the jumping from non-north-facing water towers because leapers can be blindedby the sun’s rays and hurt themselves • The European Commission has decided to ban restaurants from offering their customers liquid olive oil in jugs to ensure the quality of the product on offer.

But the competition for originality is the legendary provision for the curvature of cucumbers… This is perhaps the most ridiculed provision of the EU. We are talking about that legendary directive 1677/88, which doomed the crooked cucumber to death and became a symbol of the Brussels zeal to regulate and normalize everything possible. And although the Cucumber Directive was repealed back in 2009, the Cucumber Directive is deeply embedded in the collective consciousness of people as an example of overregulation.

But frankly, straight cucumbers have not caused any global economic damage – remains only the social giggle for the regulation for their awry cousins. While the Green Deal, driven by“ ideological imperatives“, ignores the engineering constraints of existing energy infrastructure, leads to deindustrialization, begins to become a barrier to energy efficiency and prosperity, leads to increased costs, reduced yields and bankruptcies of farmers.

But this is not a murder of the Green Deal, according to the Bulgarian Fact-Checkers. And they deny the headlines in the Bulgarian media after the meeting of the leaders of the EPP (the party – electoral back of Ursula von der Leyen) in Berlin, at the beginning of this year:

„The end of the Green Deal is coming!“, „The EPP is ready to ‘kill’ the Green Deal“ • „The EPP with a declaration that practically cancels the Green Deal“ • „The Green Deal is called into question“ • „The EPP with a declaration calling for the cancellation of almost everything under the European Green Deal“ • „The EPP has exploded against the Brussels bureaucracy“.

About Pilate’s crucified truth, used by fact-checkers, whatever they want to say, I’m not going to argue. Is it true that the Commission’s plans to turn the Green Deal into a „Clean industrial deal“ are not an assassination attempt? I don’t mean to be ironic – think of murder as a transformation!

An essential part of the Green Deal is the Regulation (EU) 2017/2470 (the notorious yellow dust of worms), which can be called „Novel food“ – in general, the food arriving “From bostana to  farkolitsata” (the ironical translation of „From Farm to Fork“ in Bulgarian is mine)¹⁰. The profound analysis of arc2020.eu stresses that the strategy, known as „From the field to the table“ and the Green deal, both must formally to been terminated.

Come on, turning the Green Deal into a purely industrial agreement is not the end of the deal – affirm the fanatical supporters of the EU, because these are fabrications of the party media. But the analysis arc2020.eu you said it was over. No, no!  This is a new beginning – resurrection of the worms and the Green Deal!

However, as we walked from farm to fork, the world wondered whether the European Union would end for good.

No matter how rarely I have agreed with the political stilllifes of my younger colleague Alexander Andreev ¹¹, I will agree with him about  discontent against the European project: „Objectively, the European Union is a pragmatic structure that does not have the resources to inspire the masses. The logic „United Europe is good for everyone and therefore everyone should like it“ has not worked for a long time…“

Yes, indeed, the EU is going through a deep crisis, and many are asking whether the shameful end of this European Union is coming. I emphasize „this one“ on purpose because „this one“ means „another union“! I can even go back to the earlier years of this organization, because despite my negative attitude because of the „stolen victory-May 9“, I give my personal support for the human and professional qualities of the first leaders of this pragmatic construction: worthy people who have been committed for years to the idea of a united Europe.

Oh, it’s quite infantile to say that „the fish smells from the head“, as much axiomatic  this  is  the  in the last ten years.

But to say (not from a nondescript persons like me), but from an authoritative media¹² that the decision-making processes in the EU are highly inefficient, that the public image of the EU and the self-perception of the European elite are diametrically opposed to reality are quite strong arguments. „More and more decisions are being declared ‘historic’, ‘European values’ are regularly praised as a benchmark for the whole world (although Europe itself is often accused of double standards in the implementation of these values), and its own attractiveness is measured by the number of countries willing to join the EU.“

Several times already, I disrespectfully bypass one notion – bureaucracy. But don’t think of bureaucracy only as the Babylon of employees. Although this is also true, especially for organizations such as the United Nations, NATO, the European Union.

• The UN system has 130,948 employees in 2024. (133 126 2023)¹³

• About 4,000 full-time employees working at NATO headquarters, a total of 1,500 international employees (civilian and military), 1,300 people working in NATO missions and agencies.;

• The total number of employees in all European Union (EU) institutions is just under 80 000 at the end of 2024. the European Commission alone has nearly 33,000 employees at the start of 2025.

I don’t care how you feel about these numbers, because for bureaucratic structures, order in systems and procedures is more important than the Babel throng of employees. As unpleasant as this may sound to you, bureaucracy is necessary for a system to function through the appropriate hierarchy, rules and regulations, and specialization. The ideal bureaucracy is both efficient and rational.

Unfortunately, bureaucracy often becomes cumbersome, jealously falling in love with procedures and policy rather than efficiency, without caring about the real results or the consequences.

I wasn’t going to return you back to the Green deal, because it made many „present“ on the immature continent (i.e., the green one) talk about bureaucracy as the destroyer of democracy in Europe. Vice president of the United States J. D. Vance, out of his style, put it more gently: „Europe has moved away from our common values,“ referring exactly democracy. And he added that it is not Russia and not China that are the main threats to Europe, but the problems within the European Union itself.

You may not believe it, but one of the problems is… the bureaucracy.¹⁴

The cucumber directive is long gone, but there is still no answer to the question: is not the EU overdo with regulations and directives?

The Defenders of the opposite thesis are happy to quote former European Commission President Jacques Delors, who back in 1988 predicts that one day 80% of economic legislation will belong to Brussels.

I do not know exactly what the results of this prediction are, but after my incompetent digging through the EU Legislative Website, I found that for about 20 years there are 26,584 agreements, directives, regulations, decisions in force in this European organization. How special are the regulations and directives, the beginning of which is usually associated with the straight cucumbers – I couldn’t cope. But after an an(nu)al (joke) fragmentation of my „statistics“, it turned out to this 1329 acts, which is not that many. However, I am worried about the number of dropped acts: 42,118! So much wasted work for 80,000 employees!

Oh, come let’s end the European Union, when everyday 80,000 people prove its usefulness and their own, of course!  Do you think these 80,000 employees won’t protect at all costs the Union that feeds them?

And right now I would like to talk about imitating the Vitality, usefulness and necessity of such international structures as the UN, NATO, the EU, but it seems that the place for this is not here. Although just here mimicry has some of the most striking results of the bureaucracy!

Now because of all this, I forgot my own vanity: the publication „Bureau Barbarones“^15.

„Who can claim now that the bureaucrat has only his desk and his power, when the power is on a hierarchical floor above him or is a concurrent power? When he himself – the bureaucrat – is lurking at every step with formalities, letters and paragraphs. Who can save the bureaucrat! Who? The evolution of the survival of the bureaucrat!“

Don’t challenge the bureaucrats! How do you imagine 10 divisions to defend with their army-the European Union – already with a planned EU military budget of 800 billion! The bigger problem is that even the so-called Eurosceptics (well paid!) they’re no go away. Neither the Eurosceptics from the group of European Conservatives and reformists, nor the group of „Europe of sovereign nations“ (Alternative for Germany, Bulgarian Revival). In the European Parliament they have at least one uncensored minute, and in their own countries – they send them go the devils!

Do you imagine Peter Volgin returning to radio and allowing the Ukrainian ambassador to threaten to take him off the radio air (through the Electronic Media Council, of course!) or at least renaming him Mississippin (according to an old publication). And if President Radev drops the forbidden word „peace“ again, will the Ukrainian embassy silence him again? And if the Ukrainian flag appears again on the building of Sofia municipality, will there be anyone to take it down?

Do you remember the „linguistic“ conflict between the Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky (otherwise very much touchy), invited by the Bulgarian Prime Minister, and the Bulgarian President Rumen Radev? There is no conflict in Ukraine, but war – this is what Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said after Radev several times described the Russian invasion of Ukraine as a „conflict“¹⁶. „We know extremely precisely that this is not a conflict,“ Zelensky repeated edifying to the unenlightened Rumen Radev. „The point is that Putin is not just waging a war against us. He won’t rest until he kills us. You cannot negotiate with him“, the Ukrainian president said.

Before the Trump-Putin meeting in Alaska, an angry Zelensky (the reasons for his mental state are usually many) screamed out to the world (to the part that wanted to hear him):

• Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier! • Decisions against and without Ukraine are decisions against peace! • The answer to the „territorial question“ is in the Constitution: „The Constitution of Ukraine prohibits any territorial concessions.

Even the then NATO Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, intervened, despite his KGB nickname (Steklov): „These lands belong to Ukraine!“

I am an insignificant person to interfere in such world affairs. But an answer like“ the territorial question is in the Constitution „ is much more intellectually null than my own nullity. Unless the Ukrainian Constitution is some kind of universal constitution, so that the Ukrainian territorial question to depend only on it. But why not assume that it is a conventional constitutional law (albeit a basic one) like of the other 195 existing and recognized countries in the world. Speaking of territory, do not forget the territorial lego of the construction of this territory, which began with Lenin and passed through Khrushchev’s notorious UN-shoe… But let me not bother you with territorial trifles like „the recognition of the Donetsk Basin as a territory of Ukraine“ by decision of the Central Committee of the RCP(B). Not to mention the process of „korenization“ of the Bolshevik Party, called Ukrainization ¹⁷, which took place through the inclusion of Ukrainians in the state apparatus and the governing bodies of public organizations; the introduction of the Ukrainian language into whole public life, in all state and educational institutions. Well, it is true that there is also Russification, but this was much earlier – „in Royal times“ ¹⁸.

And what are these „occupied territories“ in Eastern Ukraine (2022), which just before the SMO/the war determined by referendums their own accession to Russia: the Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhian and Kherson regions (do not be confused the referendum: in 2014 they are for independence/autonomy, and eight years after – and for accession to Russia!).

By passing the law on the persecution of the Russian language¹⁹, however formally this to registered in the constitution²⁰, the Ukrainian authorities themselves exclude part of the population from their own country and begin the disintegration of their own territory. And by sending punitive troops against these regions, they themselves violate the integrity of the state territory and undermine their right to govern the newly proclaimed republics. The part of world considers the war was started by Ukraine (not by Russia, as think wrong the others!), as an anti-terrorist operation (before the other – a special military operation)! However, you to pretend not to notice: the ATO is an operation, and the SMO is a war!

On January 18, the adviser of the Ukrainian president (Petro Poroshenko) Yuriy Biryukov wrote on his Facebook page:

„Good morning, my country. 08:01, we can already say that two hours ago our entire group of troops in Sector B received an order and opened massive fire on the known positions of the separatists… Today we will show how crash teeth… Did you think that? #We piss? No, we were just tying our shoes. Coming soon, I will inform you once an hour“…

Therefore, the problem of preserving the integrity of Ukraine no longer affects those republics that in most cases voted against the Ukrainian authorities in the referendum organized in 2022. The purpose of the war (called Operation! ²¹), declared by Ukraine as the liberation of Crimea, Donbass and Luhansk, has no legal basis according some legal flashmobes.  And they cite founding documents of the United Nations in 1945.  According to Kiev and its allies (do not ask what allies), which acquit Ukrainian ATO, return to the same year – 1945 and to the same documents, but in this case assert conversely: the results of the vote in the discontented republics are contrary to the UN Charter ²².

But don’t think of Zelensky as a villain: even before the start of hostilities, the president, with Jesuit magnanimity, urged citizens with pro-Russian consciousness and attitudes to leave Ukraine, even though he himself speaks perhaps more Russian … or English rather than Ukrainian. So, after the film „Servant of the people“ Zelensky has to study Ukrainian hard so that when he becomes president of the people, he can communicate normally with his subjects, even without to be their servant…

Yes, but the „democratic world“ (don’t forget Ukraine here!), The European Union, the „Collective West“, the „Coalition of the willing“ deafened the world that referendums (even before they took place!) have no legal force, are contrary to international law and are organized by an aggressor country… And the European Commission announces that it will sanction all citizens (God, what freedom, what democracy!) who participate or support in any way the holding of referendums in the occupied territories.

And you should not be astonished – international observers from Bulgaria ²³ (did you pay attention – Bulgaria!), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Germany, Serbia, Mozambique, France and the Central African Republic noted voter`s enthusiasm, but did not record any violations and nothing other but the threats and attacks from Ukraine.

However, there are also examples where no referendums are needed (pseudo-, kvazi-, illegals, criminal). You must face the world and declare your independence! Even if it is one-sided! What referendums? What a waste of time! You are just proclaiming your independence! And that’s it!

The example is called Kosovo (February 17, 2008).

The idea could even win a Nobel Prize. I apologize for the hyperbolic interpretation, but a year earlier, Finnish diplomat Martti Ahtisaari, the UN representative in Kosovo, have proposed exactly such the plan (see the plan above: I proclaim!) to resolve the conflict Serbia – Kosovo²⁴.

But let’s get back to the theme of war… And for the peace. I do not know whether war has its „legislation“, but peace (achieved through a peace treaty!) has its own laws. Laws that at some point may even „defiled“ the interpretation of the Ukrainian president: „the Constitution of Ukraine prohibits any territorial concessions“!

As far as is known, the most important elements of the peace treaty are the legal regulation of issues of territorial sovereignty (here Zelensky must be careful!), because this regulation can also apply to territorial concessions!²⁵ and the political conditions, according the statements of the parties to build future bilateral or

multilateral relations, the form and amount of reparations, the military consequences.

Moreover, the right to preserve territorial unity is subordinated to the right of nationalities (in multinational states) to determine their own destiny. The right of nations to determine its own destiny is superior to the sovereignty of state power.

Therefore, do not wonder why, in the face of these indisputable arguments, the „Democratic world“, the European Union, the „Collective West“, the „Coalition of the willing“ deliberately confuse concepts such as peace/peace treaty with concepts such as „truce“ or „(temporary) stop fire“ – concepts from the military mental cartridge-belt!

The truce, the „temporary“ (timelessness) is needed to make Ukraine a „steel hedgehog“, to activate the ReArm Europe plan, to build a new security architecture for Ukraine – all that ideas are degenerated by the midwife-economist Ursula von der Leyen²⁶ (don’t confuse her with the sea witch Ursula from The Little Mermaid, but don’t miss her witchcraft over Pfizer vaccines, the Green deal, the chic food from worms and insects) ²⁷… Her intellectual Everest, however, is in the maxim „Peace through Force“ – part of the idea of „Europeans to getting ready for war“… I am also seduced by the steel hedgehog“, but in order not to belittle things, I will no longer waste my bullets (the cartridge-belt is already empty) mostly because of Borisovism:  „With a bare ass to sit on a hedgehog…“²⁸…“

If you pay attention, from 2014 to 2025, the European Union, despite Victoria Nuland sending it to the devils²⁹ [31], was created as a peace-restoring organization, but in its economic impotence EU tries to turn into a European NATO, turning the fear of the Russian threat into a psychiatric problem!³⁰

In fact, Russo-phobic psychopathy has long been a political chlorophyll in Ukraine – by renaming streets named after great writers, giving them the names of Bandera, Shukhevych, Nil Husevich, Vladimir Kubiyovych and other Ukro-Nazi idols, who only because of the Volyn massacre with the murder of old people, women and children – tens of thousands of peaceful citizens of Galicia – Poles, Russians and Jews – should be cursed forever!

However, after the attack on Ukraine, Russian literature was accused of complicity in this war, was excommunicated –“ it is also the embodiment of the moral and humanitarian bankruptcy of Russian culture!“ Some Ukrainian writers have called for a boycott of Russian music, Russian films and books, explaining that around the world this culture is still mistakenly considered European and humanistic, while criminals who rape mothers together with their children were educated in school precisely in the spirit of the works of Russian classics.  What is more the road to the Bucha massacre stems from Russian literature.

After all, the enemy is Putin, not Pushkin! Do not be surprised to hear that a movement known as „Pushkinopad“ has been launched in Ukraine, as a result of which dozens of monuments to the poet have been dismantled in Ukrainian cities – Chernihiv, Uzhgorod, Ternopil, Mykolaiv. And the chatbot on Telegram (@cancel_pushkin_bot) had to identify those Russian writers,  with of whose names do not deserve need to christening anything  in Ukraine. The Ukrainian Ministry of Education recommends the removal of all works by A. Pushkin, M. Lermontov, F. Dostoevsky, L. Tolstoy, I. Turgenev and N. Nekrasov, F. Tyutchev, A. Fet, I. Bunin, all works by M. Bulgakov, fables by I. Krylov, stories by A. Chekhov…

The culmination of this Russo-phobic disgrace is the „verdict“ of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry against the American director, actor, screenwriter, playwright and musician Woody Allen, who took part in the Moscow International Film Week³¹, speaking via video link at the session „Legends of World Cinema“ on August 24, 2025. The Foreign Ministry described the virtual participation of the world-famous artist and four-time Oscar winner in the event as a „disgrace and insult“ to the victims of the Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine“. The ubiquitous „Peacemaker“ („Myrotvorets„) also added it to its punitive annals for „knowingly participating in a Russian propaganda event during the Russian-Ukrainian war and the murder of Ukrainian citizens; as a public support for Russian aggression“.

True, Woody Allen confessed his love for Russian cinema and his warm feelings for Moscow and St. Petersburg, but his political judges (creatively impossible) called this confession a disgrace to the 89-year-old legend of „Old Hollywood“. Yes, a disgrace and insult to the victims among Ukrainian actors and directors killed or wounded by Russian war criminals“ – „the atrocities that Russia is committing in Ukraine“ for which Woody Allen „deliberately turns a blind eye“!

And this had happened in front of the „open eyes“ of the president, who pretends to be an actor? Or the actor who pretends to be president. Or the successful sham of both „activities“!

But to go back to Victoria Newland. One another Yankee 11 years after that also sent the European Union to go to hell, albeit in a much more intelligent way: „The threat that worries me most is the threat from within – Europe’s retreat from some of its most fundamental values.“ At the Munich Security Conference (2025), vice president of the United States J.D. Vance accused European leaders of allowing a retreat from democracy by not listening to voters and restricting freedom of speech…]

„Some commissioners warn that certain media outlets may be prohibited to avert itself harmful calls for violence or to stop anti-feminist statements.“ Have you paid attention to the lexical yardstick „freedom of speech“.

According to this „measure“, Ukraine has long won the war… through propaganda! Often, instead of unbiased and proven facts, propaganda can present deliberately manipulated information in order to mislead the public. And sometimes this can turn out to be stronger than reality!

Denouncing Kremlin propaganda, the “Democratic world“, the „Collective West“, the “Coalition of the willing“ (behind this all to apperceives of the European Union)  banned the“ unwilling“ from watching, listening to and reading Kremlin fictions and  myths. On the other hand, from some animated (as a landmark) „Night Maidan“, otherwise nameless bunker (Ukraine’s, but with Kremlin`s malevolence) floods us with his daily speeches the last Ukrainian mandarin for another victory of Ukraine and with another raids of the killer Putin. But forgets for the Ukraine’s“ beautiful“drone attacks:

• 16 Aug. 2025: Over 120 residents of Russia were injured by the strikes of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in a week, 19 people died;

•14 Aug. 2025: Sixteen people were injured in Ukrainian drone attacks two southern Russian cities – Belgorod and Rostov-on-Don;

• July 1, 2025: A Ukrainian drone hit a Russian industrial plant about 1300 kilometers from Ukraine;

•March 17, 2025: Ukrainian drones attacked energy facilities and strategic sites in Russia’s Astrakhan region;

• March 12, 2025: Ukraine launched its most large-scale drone attack on the Russian capital, with at least 91 drones aimed at Moscow, leading to the closure of airports and the diversion of dozens of flights;

•June 24, 2024: Volodymyr Zelensky himself informs us: we have hit more than 30 Russian oil refineries and warehouses.

Alas, the EU member states ignored and continue to ignore the crimes committed by the Ukrainian security forces, the massive shelling of cities and settlements in the Donbas, as a result of which many civilians died.  But without the Bulgarian media legionnaires, without the voluntary Ukro-Janissaries, all these suggestions, all this simply  would not  work. Without them, who would have believed that the Dead Sea is dead because Putin had killed it!

If I go back to the armistice, it is simply a temporary peace in time of war by mutual (unofficial, according to international law) agreement of the two belligerents³².

Alas, the EU member states ignored the crimes committed by the Ukrainian security forces, the massive shelling of cities and settlements in Donbas, as a result of which many civilians perished.

I don’t know why (or rather, I know!) the perfidiously contrive by „Collective West“ theme about armistice brings me back to the complexities of the so-called Minsk agreements, which were considered a way to resolve the conflict in Donbass. Due to the vagueness of the wording, the uncertainty of the sequence of actions proposed in the agreements – actions contrary to their goals, the Minsk agreements were doomed and failed to bring sustainable peace to Ukraine.

In the spring of 2022, the Russian delegation³³ proposed to end the war if Ukraine refused to join NATO. Moreover, Russia was ready to leave without a fight all territories seized after February 24, 2022, in exchange for Ukraine’s neutral status.  Russia was ready to return the entire Donbas to Ukraine under the conditions of broad autonomy on the model of South Tyrol in Italy.

In an interview with Die Zeit on December 7, 2022, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated that the 2014 Minsk agreement was an attempt to buy time for Ukraine. Putin could have easily annexed Ukraine in early 2015.

… Do you see how in the attempts to gain time, they came to the notorious map in the White House, showing the occupied territories by Russia… Apart from the war and the peace/peace treaty, has its cruelties. What does it matter that „the Constitution of Ukraine prohibits any territorial concessions“!

„This map was such a powerful slap in the face that bring it to his senses all those who, for several years, detached from history, detached from geography, detached from reality, with fallacies about the battlefield, where everything would be decided without understanding what they were exactly speaking of.“34

According to US Vice President J.D. Vance in an interview with the American television NBC: „the war is not in anyone’s interest – neither Europe, nor the United States, nor Russia and Ukraine.“

However, the European Union has announced a new package of financial support for Ukraine worth €4 billion, on the occasion of the 34-th anniversary of the country’s independence. Of these the €1 billion come from income from frozen Russian assets, the European Commission said in a statement.

Well, it’s impudent!

Long live the war achieved with peace!

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Kurgan, mound, mound hill, fortress, home: a word in the Russian language with ancient Turkic roots. In addition, Kurgan is a city in the Russian Federation, located on the Ural plateau. In the war, the Soviet Union gave 8.7 million military and 19 million civilian casualties. ↩︎
2. Jean-Claude Juncker (Luxembourg), Ursula von der Leyen (Germany). ↩︎
3. Prof. Dr. Hristo Georgiev. Scientific Report: The European Union between Federalism, Functionalism and the Sacred Egoism of the Nations. ↩︎
4. One of the first proposals for the peaceful union of equal European states such as the United States of Europe was made by Victor Hugo in 1849 at the Paris Peace Congress, which he presided over. ↩︎
5. There is even a Union of European Federalists and the Bulgarian MP Andrey Kovachev (until 2018) is its deputy chairman ↩︎
6. Yes, the same Jacques Delors, the „religious French socialist“, who proposed the creation of the euro, the new single currency to replace the individual national currencies. ↩︎
7. Euro-Atlanticism (outside of the political blather) is a concept known as transatlanticism – a geopolitical philosophy of political, economic and military rapprochement of the countries of North America and Europe. Notwithstanding speculate to about that it is the same thing. ↩︎
8. And with the“ image “ above the title (collage on a frame from the film „Rzhevsky vs. Napoleon“ -a 2012 Russian-Ukrainian historical comedy. Ten years before Zelensky thought he was going to be Napoleon (thank God, Napoleon in the movie!) against Russia. ↩︎
9. Many of the so-called fact-checkers are my young colleagues, and I would respect their work if they did not use defiantly the ideological clichés: „according to Kremlin propaganda“ or other stereotype, unsupported by statistical or sociological facts. And they to put their the stamp „False“! ↩︎
10. FurkOlitsa, furkUlitsa: fork in English. It is used throughout Northern Bulgaria. It is definitely a Romanian word according to the editors of bgjargon.com. According to the Dictionary of Old and Dialect Words, it is of presumed Bulgarian origin. ↩︎
11. Al. Andreev, head of the Bulgarian editorial office of Deutsche Welle, former employee of the Bulgarian National Radio. Publication in DW, 2023 We live in the best place in today’s confused world. ↩︎
12. Die Welt: Ignorance and arrogance – is the shameful end of this European Union coming, 08.08.2025 (Springer’s „Die Welt“ is a newspaper with a conservative political bias). ↩︎
13. The term ‘UN staff’ refers to different types of staff, such as Secretariat staff (36,757 as of December 2023), uniformed peacekeepers, civilian personnel and UN Volunteers. ↩︎
14. According to the 19th-century German sociologist Max Weber, one of the first scientists to study the influence of bureaucracy. ↩︎
15. Ivan Angelov, Parable of the grain of wheaten, book: essays, features stories, travel notes.  Fleurir publishing house, 2011. ↩︎
16. By specifying that this conflict has no military solution, the Bulgarian president actually defines the conflict as military. ↩︎
17. Do not  do an association (but you can also make it) with the forced Macedonianization of the Pirin region (1946-1958), with the coercive development of „Macedonian consciousness“ among the Bulgarians in the Pirin region by opening schools in which to teach the newly created Macedonian language norm and „Macedonian“ history through the perusal of the nascent Macedonian historiography. ↩︎
18. 1764. Instruction of Catherine II on the Russification of Ukraine, Smolensk (ethnic Belarusian territory), the Baltic states and Finland; 1784. A complete ban on primary education in the Ukrainian language on the territory of the Russian Empire; 1888. Decree of Emperor Alexander III „On the prohibition of the use of the Ukrainian language in official institutions and the baptism of children with Ukrainian names“. ↩︎
19. In Ukraine, approximately 30% of the population speaks Russian as their first language, according to the 2001 census. In one of these groups, you can also put Volodomyr Zelensky … Russian as mother tongue. Choose quite alone! In 2008, after almost twenty years of independence, according to the Gallup Institute, even in central Ukraine, the vast majority of residents still prefer to communicate in Russian. ↩︎
20. Constitution of Ukraine, 1996: Article 10… In Ukraine, the free development, use and protection of the Russian language and other languages of national minorities in Ukraine is guaranteed. 2021 The Constitutional Court of Ukraine issued a ruling that „Russians as a separate national group do not exist in the country“ and they are not entitled „to legal protection as an ethnic or linguistic unit“ because they are a „political construct“. In 2025, Ukraine’s new language ombudsman, Olena Ivanovska, proposed that the Russian language be removed from the country’s constitution, describing it as an „instrument of destabilization.“ ↩︎
21. The operation was announced on 13 April 2014 and lasted until 30 April 2018, after which it was replaced by the Joint Forces Operation (JFO). The ATO format was chosen due to the need to hold elections in the context of Russian aggression, as martial law would have made them impossible (according to Ukrainian sources). ↩︎
22. This is probably a reference to the UN standing regulations, called the UN Charter, and is probably referring to Chapter VI, Peaceful Settlement of Disputes, Article 33, item 1. ↩︎
23. At the same time, Bulgaria is among the countries that condemn Russia’s „attempted illegal annexation“ of the four Ukrainian regions. Do not wonder who the Bulgarians are! ↩︎
24. In fact, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to former Finnish President Ahtisaari for „his efforts to resolve the international conflicts that he has implemented on several continents for three decades.“ Kosovo is just the latest „temptation“. ↩︎
25. Especially judging by the map hint from the „costumed“ meeting between Zelensky and Trump: the large map of Ukraine crucified in front of the two of them, on which the Russian-occupied territories were marked in pink. ↩︎
26. Ursula von der Leyen is the holder of the prestigious Ukrainian orders: the highest (until 2008) for Ukraine „Order of Prince Yaroslav the Wise I class“, 2022 (although it starts from V class) and the Medal of the Order of St. Panteleimon, 2024. Ironically, in 2022 a petition was launched in Bulgaria to the Holy Synod of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church to revoke the awarded golden order „St. Tsar Boris the Baptist“ of the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin in 2003. The authors of the petition are Nikolay Hadjigenov, Valentina Vasileva-Philadelfs, Maria Kapon, Georgi Tabakov, Arman Babikyan, Lilyana Stefanova, Dimitrina Alexandrova. ↩︎
27. Thank God, the provision for „the right cucumbers“ dates back to the presidency of José Manuel
    Barroso ↩︎
28. Boyko Borissov’s response to a remark by the Minister of Interior Boyko Rashkov (2021), who from the parliamentary rostrum replied to the GERB MPs that he regretted that he had not been able to deal with their leader in the 90s. Boyko Borissov – ex premier. ↩︎
29. On February 7, 2014, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland found herself at the epicenter of a global scandal after her private diplomatic conversation with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt was intercepted and leaked to the global network. ↩︎
30. By Emmanuel Todd (1951) – French historian, anthropologist, demographer, sociologist and political scientist at the National Institute of Demographic Research in Paris. ↩︎
31. The International Film Week, which took place last year – from August 23 to 27 at the Moscow Film Factory, aims to promote Moscow as an International Center for filmmakers and film nerds. ↩︎
32. Just as a curious detail: the armistice that ended hostilities in the Korean War (1950-1953) still continued without a Peace Treaty between the United States and North Korea. ↩︎
33. According to the leader of the Servant of the People faction in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, David Arakhamia, who leads the Kiev delegation in the negotiations with Russia ↩︎
34. Statement by Russian Foreign Ministry speacer Maria Zakharova on Radio Sputnik. ↩︎

Note:

The collages are based on footage from the Russian-Ukrainian film “Rzhevskiy vs Napoleon”, 2012 and are by the author of the text

To be continued