The gulf between French attitudes and culture and that of the US is shown in stark relief in this morning's NY Times article re Sego and Sarko and their "private" lives. NYTimes 

Sego has children by her long time companion/roomate Francois Hollande but there is great confusion over whether or not they are a "couple". [?].  Also, it is unclear if they are still living together.  In Sarko's case, there is speculation that his wife of many years has left the marriage but no clarity on the situation.  The campaign states only that it is a "private matter".  The speculation is fueled by Mrs. Sarkozy's week-long holiday last year with a Paris public relations exec. 

Also noted in the article is the ten year concealment by Chirac of a child from an extra-marital affair.  And to think we are titillated by Bill and Rudy's missteps.  

A cute line in the article describes the nearly invisible husband of German Chancellor Angel Merkle as the "Phantom of the Opera" as he only seen with Merkle at performances of Wagner operas.

"You didn't get the money? Not a problem. Pay tax on it anyway!"

The EU's top human rights award, the Sakarov Prize, was awarded to Aleksandr Milinkevich for his efforts in opposing the dictatorial regime in Belarus. Milinkevich ran against the incumbent, Aleksandr Lukashenko, and lost in a tainted election. Milinkevich turned down the $66,000 prize money that accompanies the award asking that it go instead to "all those who continue fighting for freedom". New York Times

However, not missing a chance to harass, Lukashenko's tax man has ordered that Milinkevich pay $18,500 in tax to Belarus even though he never got the money.

I guess that's "imputed income" Belarus style.

"Rules are rules" has been the modus operandi of Rita Verdonk, The Netherlands Immigration Minister who is to leave office sometime early next year as a result of the power shift in the recent Dutch elections.

Verdonk is trying to follow that creed all the way to the end of her tenure. She continues to order the deportation of 26,000 asylum seekers who have not met Dutch qualifying criteria. The planned deportation was a major issue in the recent campaign when the victorious leftist parties promised to stop the deportation. However, lame-duck Rita was "not prepared for a suspension". "I am going to enforce the immigration law".

In one of its first acts the new leftist parliament passed a motion calling for suspension of the deportation order. Verdonk stood her ground. Parliament then passed an order condemning Minister Verdonk, an action which customarily leads to the minister's resignation. Again Verdonk was defiant, refusing to resign. New York Times

Pieter Dorsman at Peaktalk brings the latest: this morning the pressure from Parliament on the Prime Minister to rein in Verdonk continued to build.  Possibly because the PM must work in the future with this Parliament, he finally pulled Verdonk's responsibilities for immigration matters.

Dorsman, who Dutch and now living in Vancouver, blogs on Dutch politics and has proven to be an astute observer.  He notes that Verdonk's principled position re enforcing law has gained her popularity in some segments of the population.  He speculates that the incoming government may not be long-lived and that Verdonk may resurface in any subsequent election "if she can re-habilitate herself and her policies".

Looking from the outside, it seems possible to me that relations between the native Dutch and the immigrant community may continue to deteriorate and that Verdonk may look better to centrist as well as conservative voters as time goes by.  I confess, the intracacies of coalition building in a parliamentary system as well as the dynamics of the fragmentated Netherlands' body politic are beyond me.  However, it seems to me that there will be increasing friction between the "old Dutch" and the "immigrant Dutch".  Given a history of Pym Fortuyn, Van Gogh, and Hirsi Ali, I wouldn't bet on a long term softening of attitudes toward enforcement of immigration laws.   The reverse seems more likely to me.  That would set the table for Verdonk.

Pointing out that the UK pays the European Union 12B BPS each year [more than total proceeds of the UK's estate and capital gains taxes], a Member of the European Parliament [MEP], Tory Daniel Hannan, suggests scrapping the law that makes the UK subject to EU directives.

“We didn’t imagine for a moment that Brussels would become the main source of legislation in this country, decreeing what hours we work, what taxes we pay, what we plant in the ground and fish from the sea, who settles on our territory, what we buy and sell, and in what units."  Kent News

He made the suggestion as a part of the BBC's annual "Christmas Repeal" program in which listeners submit the existing law they would most like to repeal.

It seems increasingly clear that the Brits' customs, lifestyles, and businesses are really taking a beating from Brussels bureaucracy bureacracy.  But then, the French have always been very good at finding ways to hamstring their competitors. 

The magnitude of Secret Police operations in Romania up through the Ceausescu era becomes apparent in an article in the New York Times.  Ten miles of shelf space is required to hold the files the police maintained on Romanian citizens.  11,000 agents and 500,000 informants were used to collect information on their fellow citizens.

Similar operations existed in all the Soviet satellite states and since the fall of the USSR, efforts have been underway to purge the files as well as to use the data in them to identify persons who were part of these operations or who have used the data for personal gain.  In virtually every country at least a few high-flying politicians and businessmen have been toppled for past complicity with the state police.  Therein lies the rub.  Those who are involved in opening the files are in danger from those whose illicit dealings with or on behalf of the police would be revealed.  Threats, murder, and unexplained disappearances are being used to keep the files closed.   It is not a game for the faint of heart.

Clearly, the collection of data on individuals is a double-edged sword.  It is a key part of the war against terrorism.  On the other hand, the existence of literally thousands of data bases constructed with benign intent coupled with the capability we now have to mine, merge, and store huge amounts of information creates the potential for abuse.  Think, for example, of the profiles Homeland Security is building on every air traveler using nothing but existing data bases.  They plan to retain that data for 40 years.  

It will be a long time before we come to a consensus on what is legitimately needed for security and what is excessive and an unnecessary intrusion into "privacy".  At this point, I for one say "keep scanning the world for terrorists".