J.D. Vance's full speech in Munich, so you don't have to rely on any version

One of the reasons for the growing disrepute of much of journalism is its eagerness to twist and manipulate the facts.

Von der Leyen exhibits her idea of democracy by strengthening ties with the largest dictatorship
Europe is suffering a simultaneous attack on democracy from Moscow and Brussels

In the last few hours, the speech given by J.D. Vance, Vice President of the United States, at the Munich Security Conference in Germany, has been in the news. The following headlines have been read about this speech in various media:

• BBC: "JD Vance attacks Europe over free speech and migration."
• Politico: "JD Vance attacks Europe over migration, free speech."
• El Mundo: "The US attacks the European project."
• Abc: "Outrage in Europe over Vance's rant at Munich Conference: 'It's unacceptable'."
• El País: "Vance launches ideological attack on Europe, sparking outrage in Munich."

Years ago, before the Internet, it was easy to sell headlines like these. Unless the speech in question had been broadcast in full on radio and television, many more people would have only known about it from newspapers. Today, anyone can listen to the entire speech on YouTube, allowing them to compare what those headlines say with what Vance actually said.

As you know, I make it my custom on this blog to offer readers access to sources, so that they do not have to rely on any version of events, including the version I give them. You can listen to Vance's full speech here:

Regardless of what one thinks about Trump, Vance and their administration (I like some things and I don't like some things), after listening to their words, my conclusion is that Vance did not attack Europe, but political leaders in Europe and the US who make policies that millions of Europeans and Americans reject. To sum up:

• Vance said that the threat that worries him most does not come from Russia or China, but from within Europe, referring to threats against fundamental rights. I think that was the least fortunate point of his speech, because this European threat - which I already pointed out here in January - does not mean that the other threats are not important, and even more so when they come from a power that threatens European countries with invasion and attack with nuclear weapons.
• He criticised the cancellation of elections in Romania and the threats to do the same in Germany, something I fully agree with.
• He made a defence of freedom of speech and religious freedom, in the face of attacks on these fundamental rights in several European countries.
• He criticised the censorship that is being imposed on social media under the pretext of "hate content" and "disinformation" - pretexts often used to censor truthful information and legitimate opinions, both in Europe and in the US.
• He criticised the persecution of pro-life activists for merely praying silently near abortion centres, as has occurred in the United Kingdom.
• He called on Europeans to take more care of their own defence, something that should be reasonable for any European citizen.
• He called on European politicians to be more receptive to the opinions of their citizens, something logical from a democratic point of view, but which is increasingly less fulfilled in Europe by the European institutions, which are very far removed from the citizens and which make decisions for us without consulting us, increasingly restricting our fundamental rights and imposing increasingly intrusive and disproportionate legislation on us.
• He spoke of mass immigration as the result of "a series of conscious decisions taken by politicians across the continent", which is absolutely true, as citizens of several European countries, including Spain, can attest.
• He concluded his remarks by referring to Pope Saint John Paul II, whom he called "one of the most extraordinary champions of democracy on this continent or any other", quoting his words: "Do not be afraid." Vance added: "We should not be afraid of your people, even when they express opinions that do not agree with your leadership."

These are my conclusions. Of course, there will be those who have different conclusions, but whatever they are, they can at least be formulated after listening to the speech, and not by reading what some media outlets say Vance said.

For my part, I am clear: this is not an attack on Europe, but a defence of freedom and democracy, which are being attacked by many European and American politicians who claim to be democratic but who, at the same time, are displaying an alarming authoritarianism, attacking freedom of expression and defending censorship in a way never seen before in democratic countries. That fact does not exclude that there are equally serious or greater threats, as Russia and communist China, and I believe that Vance should have addressed them in a more critical way, taking into account that he was speaking to allied countries.

The most revealing thing was to hear the scant applause for Vance when he called for the defence of freedom of expression, a plea in which he defended that right even for those who do not agree with Trump. I confess that as a European I feel ashamed when I see the public's reaction. No less ashamed than I feel when I see the European Commission strengthening ties with the largest dictatorship in the world, communist China, to oppose the largest democracy, which is the United States. Is this not a cause for scandal, but Vance's defence of freedom of expression is?