This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
How A Secretive Elite Created The EU To Build A World Government
Authored by Professor Alan Sked - original founder of UKIP, via The Telegraph,
Voters in Britain's referendum need to understand that the European Union was about building a federal superstate from day one
As the debate over the forthcoming EU referendum gears up, it would be wise perhaps to remember how Britain was led into membership in the first place. It seems to me that most people have little idea why one of the victors of the Second World War should have become almost desperate to join this "club". That's a shame, because answering that question is key to understanding why the EU has gone so wrong.
Most students seem to think that Britain was in dire economic straits, and that the European Economic Community – as it was then called – provided an economic engine which could revitalise our economy. Others seem to believe that after the Second World War Britain needed to recast her geopolitical position away from empire, and towards a more realistic one at the heart of Europe. Neither of these arguments, however, makes any sense at all.
The EEC in the 1960s and 1970s was in no position to regenerate anyone’s economy. It spent most of its meagre resources on agriculture and fisheries and had no means or policies to generate economic growth.
When growth did happen, it did not come from the EU. From Ludwig Erhard's supply-side reforms in West Germany in 1948 to Thatcher's privatisation of nationalised industry in the Eighties, European growth came from reforms introduced by individual countries which were were copied elsewhere. EU policy has always been either irrelevant or positively detrimental (as was the case with the euro).
Nor did British growth ever really lag behind Europe's. Sometimes it surged ahead. In the 1950s Western Europe had a growth rate of 3.5 per cent; in the 1960s, it was 4.5 per cent. But in 1959, when Harold Macmillan took office, the real annual growth rate of British GDP, according to the Office of National Statistics, was almost 6 per cent. It was again almost 6 per cent when de Gaulle vetoed our first application to join the EEC in 1963.
In 1973, when we entered the EEC, our annual national growth rate in real terms was a record 7.4 per cent. The present Chancellor would die for such figures. So the economic basket-case argument doesn’t work.
What about geopolitics? What argument in the cold light of hindsight could have been so compelling as to make us kick our Second-World-War Commonwealth allies in the teeth to join a combination of Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, Germany and Italy?
Four of these countries held no international weight whatsoever. Germany was occupied and divided. France, meanwhile, had lost one colonial war in Vietnam and another in Algeria. De Gaulle had come to power to save the country from civil war. Most realists must surely have regarded these states as a bunch of losers. De Gaulle, himself a supreme realist, pointed out that Britain had democratic political institutions, world trade links, cheap food from the Commonwealth, and was a global power. Why would it want to enter the EEC?
The answer is that Harold Macmillan and his closest advisers were part of an intellectual tradition that saw the salvation of the world in some form of world government based on regional federations. He was also a close acquaintance of Jean Monnet, who believed the same. It was therefore Macmillan who became the representative of the European federalist movement in the British cabinet.
In a speech in the House of Commons he even advocated a European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) before the real thing had been announced. He later arranged for a Treaty of Association to be signed between the UK and the ECSC, and it was he who ensured that a British representative was sent to the Brussels negotiations following the Messina Conference, which gave birth to the EEC.
In the late 1950s he pushed negotiations concerning a European Free Trade Association towards membership of the EEC. Then, when General de Gaulle began to turn the EEC into a less federalist body, he took the risk of submitting a full British membership application in the hope of frustrating Gaullist ambitions.
His aim, in alliance with US and European proponents of a federalist world order, was to frustrate the emerging Franco-German alliance which was seen as one of French and German nationalism.
The French statesman Jean Monnet, (1888 - 1979), who in 1956 was appointed president of the Action Committee for the United States of Europe
Monnet met secretly with Heath and Macmillan on innumerable occasions to facilitate British entry. Indeed, he was informed before the British Parliament of the terms in which the British approach to Europe would be framed.
Despite advice from the Lord Chancellor, Lord Kilmuir, that membership would mean the end of British parliamentary sovereignty, Macmillan deliberately misled the House of Commons — and practically everyone else, from Commonwealth statesmen to cabinet colleagues and the public — that merely minor commercial negotiations were involved. He even tried to deceive de Gaulle that he was an anti-federalist and a close friend who would arrange for France, like Britain, to receive Polaris missiles from the Americans. De Gaulle saw completely through him and vetoed the British bid to enter.
Macmillan left Edward Heath to take matters forward, and Heath, along with Douglas Hurd, arranged — according to the Monnet papers — for the Tory Party to become a (secret) corporate member of Monnet’s Action Committee for a United States of Europe.
According to Monnet’s chief aide and biographer, Francois Duchene, both the Labour and Liberal Parties later did the same. Meanwhile the Earl of Gosford, one of Macmillan’s foreign policy ministers in the House of Lords, actually informed the House that the aim of the government’s foreign policy was world government.
Monnet’s Action Committee was also given financial backing by the CIA and the US State Department. The Anglo-American establishment was now committed to the creation of a federal United States of Europe.
Today, this is still the case. Powerful international lobbies are already at work attempting to prove that any return to democratic self-government on the part of Britain will spell doom. American officials have already been primed to state that such a Britain would be excluded from any free trade deal with the USA and that the world needs the TTIP trade treaty which is predicated on the survival of the EU.
Fortunately, Republican candidates in the USA are becoming Eurosceptics and magazines there like The National Interest are publishing the case for Brexit. The international coalition behind Macmillan and Heath will find things a lot more difficult this time round — especially given the obvious difficulties of the Eurozone, the failure of EU migration policy and the lack of any coherent EU security policy.
Most importantly, having been fooled once, the British public will be much more difficult to fool again.
»
- 4762 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
"The EU is a bunch unelected elitist bureaucrats who think they know everything, running around issuing policies and decrees on a population that didn't ask. Publications all over Europe (left and right wing) have pointed out the EU has no democratic legitimacy."
masterful. a piece of tangled, mangled interlocking halftruths. interesting: your "left and right wing". so who supports the whole idea? the Brits are going to have a referendum, why do they have to have one if they are fully of the same opinion? they don't have a referendum about driving on the right or left side, do they? there, there is full agreement
the corrisponding halftruth is that "the EU" is a product of liberal (in the classic sense) ideas. it's about... Freedoms. and opposition to those Freedoms. strange, eh?
A massive doom campaign will swing the public as demonstrated in the Scottish referendum
This is the natural effect of energy and communication.
All leaders want to be "The Leader" and the bigger the number of people they "lead", the more Leader like they feel. So there's always a trend to "defeat" the other "leaders" who might challenge them and make them feel less like "The Leader" the see in their mind.
When all you had were horses then "The Leader" could only lead a small number of people. Add roads and wheels, and it can be a larger number. Add energy for engines and planes and the internet and it could be the entire planet.
There is no conspiracy required for world government, it's a natural human tendency which is simply allowed by technological progress and energy. Any time "The Leader's" whims are balked there is a need to expland his influence.
All it requires is that some people believe they are better and more valuable than you. i.e. Narcissism.
Of course, we can just allow the process to continue, or, we can treat The Leaders the way they deserve to be treated,
Fucking hilarious, the US pretending to believe in democracy, all a load of bollocks really, as it subverts the so called UK democracy and EVERY OTHER DEMOCRACY IN THE WORLD. Even the UK a supposed democratic state is not permitted to have democracy "because it does not fucking exist", Cameron will never let us leave the EU neither. CONNED INTO JOINING ANF THE ONLY WAY TO LEAVE IS WAR, THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION.
Democracy is an elite concept to stop you killing them when they do things you don't like and that is why democracy needs to be now thrown away in full. Then let the 1% carry on against the wishes of the 99% at that point without democracy you would have the legitimate right to execute them.
I DO NOT VOTE ANYMORE, NEVER WILL AGAIN, FOR I SEE IT NOW FOR THE PERNICIOUS CONCEPT IT IS AND THE ABOMINATION OF A REALITY IT CREATES FOR ALL THOSE SUBJECTED TO IT.
You can try and convince me otherwise, all the arguments and debtates though serve only to ponder questions such as...
Did the US people choose through the democratic process to give Toyotas and guns to ISIS guns so they can end up shooting French people?
Did the US people give the green light to Turkey, your buddy to shoot down a Russian plane?
The examples of these questions abound everywhere now as the US has spread its presence everywhere but you keep coming back to the same answer. NO! If NO then your democracy is bollocks also and does not exist so can we please fuck that concept off and get to the truth.
Currently the UK government and all political parties want to bomb the fuck out of Syria. Yeah right, like Syria needs more bombs and airstrikes like a hole in the head. What it needs is troops. Once upon a time I would call it a UN presence, but that was bastardised also now it does not represent the world, it represents guess who? YOU KNOW THE ANSWER I KNOW YOU DO!
The UK government will not listen to what is needed, you can carry out more worthless air strikes but you put 20,000 troops on the ground to to protect the people then it might be worth it. Without the troops like the US, looks like they pretended to bomb ISIS anyway were never going to achieve anything.
So roll on Iran putting in the troops at least, then provided they do not slaughter the mass of innocent people as in air strikes or ISIS brutality it will be a godsend for the Syrian people. A chance of stability.
Once the shadow of democracy is removed those 1%'ers will definitely have nervous twitches because now you can see them for who they are.
"How a secretive elite created the EU to build World Government"
well, the article is better then the title. which is misleading
there is nothing "secretive" about the this planet's Federalists. it's a political movement, and a highly visible one, with many very visible exponents
in Britain, for example, it contains splits: between proposers of a Commonwealth Federation, a World Federation and a federation in Europe, i.e. a more federal, more centralized EU
a good example for Commonwealth-and-possibly-World-Federation proponents are Cecil Rhodes and Rupert Murdoch
as such, the main contention they have in regard to where to federalize more is all about options, ways. Through the UN or through the EU or through the British Commonwealth
their usual criticism about the UN is that it's toothless, that the EU is too confederational (i.e. the Council is too powerful, the EU Parliament too little), the UK too small to serve as a full fulcrum of federal center, the US too insular to understand global issues
it is a movement, and it's not even necessary to hide it in secrecy. it's there, in plain light. a simple meme, actually: everybody under a similar federal regime, which means no wars in the old sense, but also a commonality of approaches in order to tackle everybody's issues
James Tiberius Kirk from Star Treck would say: what else? He is portrayed as an officer of the World Federation's Navy
------
I write Federalists, not Globalists, because the latter word is completely undefined. But as such most proponents of Federalists come from many ideological corners. The Left finds it's it attractive, too, in general. Though they are less picky on a federational or confederational model, so they say out of this part of the liberal (classic) debate vs conservatives
the ideologically liberal behind Federalism are, though, very near that second word. their preferred outcome of history is a world free from barriers. the perfect unhindered flow of financial instrument, first, then of services, then of goods, and if possible of people, too
but the British conservatives have their Imperialists that do prefer a Commonwealth Federation, while others see the European alliance basket as containing more fruits. you might even find conservatives that do agree with their continental counterparts on keeping the UK on certain super-national rules just to temper national excesses
So it is a complex matter, but it has, at this stage, more to do with a re-positioning of Britain - more China, less US-oriented while having a referendum about more or less EU vs more or less Commonwealth oriented
myself, I oppose (here on the european continent, mind you) most of the Federalist agenda, I'm still an oldfashioned proponent of sovereignty, which does not exclude Confederationalism at priori
to my American friends: you could do a bit with more federalism at home. The very word used to imply less centralism. A text-book example of a federated State is one that collects roughly half of it's taxes for it's own, local purposes. it implies a balance between the federated members and the center. a good example of working, balanced federation is the Federal Republic of Germany. The USof A, way less so, and no, the FED is not the main reason, while the 17th Amendment was the main change from federalism to a more centralized state
as a reminder: the current EU is not even a confederation. it fulfils the first criterium of confederation by the very fact that members can leave, yes, as we might see with the UK (and no't it's a UK internal affair if they leave or not), but it's very limited in it's scope, by treaties. the proper way to describe the current EU is more of a treaty-based confederative trade and regulative alliance organization, in the same way that "Schengen" is a a treaty-based confederative border regulative alliance and the European Central Bank is a confederative monetary alliance organization
as such, the EU is a bit... chafing, for England. mostly because it's instincts is to belong to all clubs while leading them, or opposing them as a matter of course. the sheer... peerhood of the EU is... so damn continental, I guess. but again, moaning is the national sport, and the EU has served well for those purposes. if we see Brexit, we might see Britons moaning even more about the EU. particularly on vacations or when retiring on the continent
oh, and specifically about this "Fortunately, Republican candidates in the USA are becoming Eurosceptics and magazines there like The National Interest are publishing the case for Brexit. The international coalition behind Macmillan and Heath will find things a lot more difficult this time round — especially given the obvious difficulties of the Eurozone, the failure of EU migration policy and the lack of any coherent EU security policy."
lol. American Republican candidates become more eurosceptic? (A)
lol. American Republican candidates become more eurosceptic? (B)
lol. American Republican candidates become more eurosceptic? (C)
even with (C)... on behalf of American interests versus the EU (C1) or on behalf of British interests versus the EU (C2)?
C1 entails that (damn) TTIP pact that Democrats want to push through the "British gateway to the EU"
C2 seems to imply a support for BreXit
B... B... nothing new, really. the real question is actually... why A?
Please remain a European.
Ghordius - Your reference "James Tiberius Kirk from Star Treck would say: what else? He is portrayed as an officer of the World Federation's Navy" and your entire premise are infantile.
Great points.
The founding leaders of the individual states at the time the Constitution was ratified largely and rightly distrusted a central government.
That's why the 10th Amendment exists.
From an emotional point of view, after two world wars, I can understand why Europeans might desire a way to lessen the chance of war- but the answer to that is in Leadership, not Confederation. You do not have wars if you keep the Hitlers and Mussolinis from power.
Today, the US does not effectively follow the Constitution, which is why the nation is in distress. You simply cannot allow certain people to gain office, but this requires involved citizens.
Americans have forgotten Jefferson's words: "Bind politicians by the chains of the Constitution."
It is a conundrum affecting both Europeans and Americans, based in human nature. You trust an individual to represent you in government, but you have to stay involved.
There has to be a change of consciousness towards Libertarianism and Freedom and Individual Responsibility.
The "Federalists Papers" were required reading when I went to school.
It seems to me your brand of Federalism varies somewhat from the American Colonial version.
I feel that the comparisons may not be accurate.
I'd like to point out that one of the world's biggest proponents of world government died last night, Maurice Strong. The man who brought us the term "Agenda 21".
Hopefully he read this article and keeled over. We are taught to not speak ill of the dead but that only applies to humans.
There will be one less flying to the Paris Conference on climate change. Strong finally stopped being a hypocrite and followed his own advise by depopulating the world.
Not to speak ill of the dead my PC Bro? How's this?
Rot in fucking hell you Soros-cocksucker Strong and may George be on your heels.
Um. Please.
You forgot to add "Have a Nice Day".
Just in time.
And he and his ilk say there is no God.
Lucifer has called his disciple. Now let's hope Soros joins him soon.
OMG!!! It's the: Nazi NWO Anglo Banking Lizzard people again!!! Aaaaaa!!! Fear porn!!! Only saviour is criminal putin regime that steals money from russians, sells Russian land, kills & jails opposition and leads world with highest corruption!!! He is saviour!!!
ha ha ha :D stupid fucks... :D
Mean time under criminal putin regime rule, people in Crimea lives without electricity for a week now... https://youtu.be/a55p9q01c3o only few has fuel generators
Meanwhile, with your troll post, you are busy having large objects shoved up your bung-hole.
"Of course it always helps to know where people are coming from, so I’ll mention right off the bat that Jones is a Roman Catholic, and one of the focuses of his book, perhaps the main one, is the gradual erosion, over a number of centuries, of the Church’s power and authority in Europe, a process in which Jews, as the author shows, played very key and very active roles every step of the way (along with the help of willing Christians), and the eventual displacement of that authority by the rising tide of Jewish power. This is an extremely important area of study because for many, many centuries it was the Catholic Church that kept Jewish power in check. Today the Church no longer plays that role, leaving a void that Islam, fortunately, has stepped in to fill, and while Islam has not been able, at least thus far, to thoroughly check Jewish power as successfully as Christianity once did, it nonetheless stands as one of the only major remaining obstacles to total global domination by Jewish Zionists, which is why Christians and Muslims, now more than ever, need to unite (but I’m getting a bit off topic here).
...
The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit has a total of 32 chapters, but in this review, I’ll focus mainly on three—the third chapter, entitled “Rome Discovers the Talmud”; Chapter number 7, “Reuchlin vs. Pfefferkorn”; and the 24th chapter, “The Second Vatican Council Begins.” Chapter 24, along with a subsequent related chapter, covers the Church’s passage of Nostra Aetate, the 1965 document that resulted in a capitulation to Jewish power and ushered in the modern era of “interfaith dialogue”—efforts that have led to little other than Christians being spat upon in Israel and their faith ridiculed in American media.
...
"This pattern, i.e. of Jews lending their support to the Christian Judaizers, was to continue over the next few centuries, and as Jones notes, “before long the trajectory was predictable”—the Judaizers would discard the teachings of Jesus in favor of the Old Testament, rising up against the established Church and urging “reform,” taking up the sword in an effort to “bring about heaven on earth.” And every step of the way the Jews were essentially playing them like a violin. Does any of this sound familiar?"
___
Douglas Reed's "The Controversy of Zion":
http://vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres/reeedcontrov.pdf
Archibald Ramsay's "The Nameless War":
https://archive.org/details/TheNamelessWar_105
O'Grady's "The Beasts of the Apocalypse":
https://archive.org/details/TheBeastsOfTheApocalypse1959
Re Wilhelm Marr's "The Victory of Judahism over Germanism":
https://www.darkmoon.me/2014/the-jewish-question-a-problem-without-a-sol...
(Book itself: http://vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres10/Marreng.pdf )
Maurice Pinay's "The Plot Against the Church":
https://archive.org/details/ThePlotAgainstTheChurch_192
Henry Ford's "The International J-w":
https://archive.org/details/TheInternationalJew_655
" Jewish Domination of Weimar Germany":
https://archive.org/details/JewishDominationOfWeimarGermany1919-1932
Bonus:
http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/j...
http://www.culturewars.com/2003/RevolutionaryJew.html
http://www.deliberation.info/a-review-of-the-jewish-revolutionary-spirit...
THE CAUSES OF HOSTILITY TOWARDS JEWS: A HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
http://holywar.org/jewishtr/02hos.htm
The last thing "Zinu" wants to get into is a battle of information using the internet.
Unlike the zionist media, the free flowing internet uncensored, (yet) reveals much information, zionist take pains to hide from their goyim.
Great information by the way. You will NEVER see any of this information in ANY American calls room, regardless the level of education, so strong is their control over what is spoon fed into our children's minds.
The greatest trick of all is getting the idiot "Evangelicals" to back the Jews and war against the Muslims.
This is not "The Nation", or "Huffington Post", silencing honest discussion with screams of "conspiracy theorist" or "anti-Semitic", do not carry much water, in fact, they only open up more discussion. You become the example of the (zionistic) PC police trying to stifle the knowledge that is now beyond explicit.
So, on the subject of not silencing dissent like the Nation or the Huffington Post, you didn't downvote him, right?
He's welcome to come here and share his opinion, right?
Anybody who tries to ban him is doing the work and aping the example of the "(zionistic) PC police", right?
Of course I did, because that person is NOT opening a discussion, but trying to limit it. I DON'T support fasicsm. Nice try, but hypocracy is limited to simular ideas, not contrary ones.
Zinu: I don't like Putin.
Nevertheless: You are trying to stifle discussion and need to be suppressed for the good and safety of the community.
Zinu: I still don't like Putin.
Nevertheless: Silence, you fascist.
Nice try, but "Zinu" is NOT talking about Putin, but those who support Putin. I know reading comprehension is not always easy, takes time, but it is fundamental to any productive conversation, you should try it.
The lizard people are real. They swarm my pool area every day, stare at me, and psychically warn me that their day is coming and that I (and my pesky cat which keeps killing them for sport) will one day be their pawn.
Actually, we all know by now, I hope, that the "lizard/Satanic/alien" references are simply misinformation. Misinformation of the lizard sort is very amusing but doesn't get much mileage. There are other ways to deflect, distract, and misinform that have been much more useful. Much of that is heard among Liberal circles or modern, Zionist excusing, church services. Little do they know how many of the Chosen they worship, with unflinching resolve, are acually atheist, nationalists.
COP 21 is the extension of this plan, perhaps the final step. What is most telling is that all demonstrations are prohibited. Not wanting the skeptics to steal the climate show, they decided to hedge their bets. Climate and terror are the two over-arching principles which dictate how globalization will play out. Odd that Paris is at the centre of the world in both respects this November, 2015. Add to that the Strong Cities Network inaugural meeting in Paris (spring 2016.)
"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever."
- George Orwell
Orwell was a visionary, he was not writing fiction, but what he imaged what was coming.
These are the douche-king overlords who will herd the sweltering, lazy, swarthy, foreign-looking masses into large swamp-pits and watch them wrestle each other naked ... for food.
(about as much dignity as I saw on "black friday")
wah?
It's pretty apparent, I mean the way they try ANYTHING to keep that wet bag of shit together. Make up rules as you go, who's going to stop you? For instance, QE was supposed to be illegal now they're doing it and trying to keep it together with digital zeros created out of thin air just like the fucktards in the US. Down with you motherfuckers! Scarry part is this crazy bastards might end up getting us all killed because they'll never let go. One could only hope the 'right people' start getting suicided.
EU is a FALSE/FLAG CIA/Mossad plot under guise to allow Chinese to sell their products to Europeans without dealing with myriad of national economic trade policies. The real objective--however-- is to allow ISIS to take over Brussels, then Israel will take control over entire EU and bring back 60 million Jews hiding in the Urals to create new Khazaria.
Khazaria and Middle Eastern Caliphate will then rule over the entire world.
If not, I don't know why anyone would want to create EU.
Here is my take on who's behind the secretive elite:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D13TJzX19Pg
The first thing you do when you form a club is to draft rules and bylaws detailing how the club's members will conduct themselves. It doesn't matter if it's a Home Owners Association in a Florida retirement community or an Outlaw Motorcycle Club in San Bernardino. It starts with a short list of basic rational rules drawn up by the founding members, but over time expands to include lots of mysterious and restrictive petty rules like what color flower pots you can have on your balcony or what type of patches you can sew onto your jacket.
The people who run the club have to be given the power to enforce the rules of course, and the original basic rational rules get bent to accommodate the new, bullshit rules.
Eventually the the short list of original basic rational rules becomes a historical relic, and club members wonder in awe how the original members could possibly know how to conduct themselves with such a crude, rudimentary document as their guide.
If England's not careful it'll end up just like it did when everyone from the former British colonies got wind that you could go to England and not be kicked out of the so-called motherland.England was flooded with millions from Africa and from around the globe from their colonies.This time though it'll be even bigger because England has taken part in the IMF and World Bank that has destroyed and abused whole societies in Africa and around the globe.It's not just war sending all these refugees to Europe.It's far bigger than that.You can't get the bankers off the backs of any of these countries.With the U.S. and NATO bombing countries endlessly they have now become the mother to the bombed out societies.Many in Europe are surprised right now to find out that a lot of these refugees don't even come from Syria.There are many more coming in from Africa through Libya.This is the plan from the terrorist networks.If you can't get back at them militarily you do it through economics.You set up human smuggling networks ripping everyone off along the way.Finally you send them all off across the pond to Europe.There's lots of money in this and everyone wants to ay in order to get to Germany.Word travels fast with the poor.It's unstoppable because of massive corruption created by Colonialists and their American counterparts mostly through the banking system supporting mafia-like regimes.That's all Turkey is,a matter of fact.With the CIA backing this family that are billionaires and at the same time keeping up their other foreign programs financed by Afghani heroin that comes in through government operations using CitiBank.
Sooo It's not climate change?
Agreed apart from the 'unstoppable' bit. Europe could stop the immivasion overnight if TPTB wanted to. But they don't want to.
We think it’s a new thing to get a PR machine up and running to influence the outcomes of elections and referendums.
The referendum on entry to the EEC used the PR machine to get the desired outcome. Big business was on the side of entry to the EEC and could fund a big PR machine, there was almost no funding for a PR machine to vote against entry, The outcome was a foregone conclusion.
An old idea has come into play more recently to strip nations of their powers.
“Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.” Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812), founder of the House of Rothschild.
Take away the ability of nations to control their own currency , the idea behind the Euro.
“The putative “father of the Euro”, economist Robert Mundell is reported to have explained to one of his university of Chicago students, Greg Palast: “the Euro is the easy way in which Congresses and Parliaments can be stripped of all power over monetary and fiscal policy. Bothersome democracy is removed from the economic system” Michael Hudson “Killing the Host”
The foundations of the EU were laid by the Paneuropean idealism of an aristrocrat called van Coudenhove-Kalergi. Look him up and especially what he says about the mixing of races.
This is a useful link on the C-K Plan.
This current crisis is just the leveling buldozer Phase! The entire world has to be put into neutral , the current Economic war will do just that! Federalization thru Finacialization! Destrution through debt default!
We all see it coming on the horizen, its just to horrible to except, humiliation, pride turned to shame. The people will accept! And all the soap in the world can't stop it!
The crisis will demand a king to be seated on the world throne!
All soveriegns most throw their crowns at the feet of the "...... "
A blood decendant with all the rights and credentials!
A true world Emperor with divine gifts and rights.
Who shall resist his command this king of the world !
But warn you as I may, none will change their ways!
…10And he said to me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near. 11"Let the one who does wrong, still do wrong; and the one who is filthy, still be filthy; and let the one who is righteous, still practice righteousness; and the one who is holy, still keep himself holy." 12"Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done.…
The Anti-Christ is supposed to reign first, right? I think I'll go consult with Michael York on this one.
the first european intellecual who launched the idea of Europe was Victor Hugo incensed by the unending Napoleonic wars of the Big and the Small Napoleons.
He was a pacifist who believed in cultural revival of Europe based on the Enlightenment and material progess (industrial revolution/science).
Rationality. But Pax AMerica in its current neo-con form is to world peace what El Nino is to world climate change.
the UKIP is a watered down Enoch Powell movement; xenophobia unlimited. The opposite of Hugo and Dickens.
Patriotism is defending your country; nationalism is hating the OTHER. Big difference.
http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-theories/2015/11/us-gives-their-prox...
No doubt that the overall plan for the EU is a European super-state which in turn is to be a key component of a NWO World Government. Ten or even five years ago I'd have laughed at this conclusion. Now it seems so blatant that I can't understand anyone not seeing it.
i cant even read all this shit in the article when he starts using government growth numbers. WTF. the most fabricated number the gov uses......the EU was created by the central banks to rule the world ...period.
Its a fact the illuminati existed and were founded in 1776 in Bavaria Germany by Adam Weisshaupt, the documents discovered by the Bavarian Police force are still to read in the library or online. Its also been openly talked about it by various members of the so called "New World Order". Secret Societies existed in almost every age of humans, from the Assassins to Temple Knights, Rosenkreutzer, Knights of Malta, Skull and Bones to modern CFR or Trilateral´s, so than conspiracies, almost al history books are full of them....
Proofs of a Conspiracy (1798)
http://www.sacred-texts.com/sro/pc/pc.pdf
The Scheme is dead. Long live the Scheme!
The thing that will stop the NWO gov is the politicians themselves. They all have cushy jobs being politicians in their own countries. None of them is willing to cede that power with the hope that they would have a similar position in the NWO.
"In reality the Illuminati does not exist. There is no secret elite. There is just capitalists of various ethical stripes and huge institutions with enormous resources staffed by employees of various competence.
The world is mostly run by greed, luck and stupidity. And that assessment stretches from Washington, to London, to Moscow, to Damascus, to Beijing, to Tokyo.
A human life is simply not long enough to gain control of such a huge population, there are too many competing interests."
s/
sincerely, Your Government.
(that does not have hundreds of millions of sq ft of the latest and greatest of state of the art main frame computers that can monitor every aspect of every humans needs, wants and desires.)
Let's all do a bit of reading on the German Jew, FRANZ BOAS. Of course, Boas is not the single source of what has grown like a cancer throughout the Western world, but this should shed light on at least some of the background that has led us through two world wars and the current cultural attacks on Europeans; and, I believe, it has great bearing on the psyche of Liberalism and the otherwise baffling Christian support for Zionism.
"Boas and his entire cadre of disciples had extensive Communist connections. He repeatedly proclaimed that he was in a"holy war against racism"..."
"Early on, Jewish intellectual leaders boasted of the racial distinctiveness and superiority of the Jewish people. Only later did the strange strategy evolve that Jewish distinctiveness could only be preserved by eliminating distinctiveness among non-Jews. Franz Boas and other Jewish intellectuals believed that the Jewish people would only be safe with the elimination of all vestiges of racism among the Gentiles. From there, it was a short step to using other groups infurtherance of the Jewish agenda, such as founding the NAACP, and adopting cryptic "behind the scenes" financingand control of Black and Gentile front organizations.'
http://www.scribd.com/doc/53051322/David-Duke-1998-My-Awakening-A-Path-t...
The first movement towards a central governing body is older than the existence of man and his feeble attemps to self govern. The European MOVEMENT TO CENTRAL GOV. WAS NOT innitiated BY ANY CONTEMPORARY EUROPEAN, it goes back to early antiquity, in triest a city in germany. founded by Gilgamesh.
It seems that with strength comes the temptation to dominate the plebs , so to speak !
There is the fight of The sumerian founder and leader , Nimrud , who found competition from the son of the temple highpriest named Terah was against his son Abraham of UR of the Caldeans!
Emnity has existed between the two sides for ever !
All this nonsence about conspiring groups of people is , Well, NOT A COMPLETELY PHYSICAL PHENOMENON! but something other than! Sort of a blood feud! You don have just one man, but generation after generation defending each others side, and that my friends accounts for the appearence of a conspiracy, it is and it isn't, you see!
There has existed a fragil truce between the two on and off through the millenium! But, each side Acknowledges a True Devine Creator and , the one is a rival of , and the other is a friend of .
The material every daily affaire of kingly worldly order is ones domain and the temple and the devine order is the affaire of the other. Simple right?
If you look up Professor Micheal Hudsons work on this subject you will be able to get a much clearer persective of the interaction between the civil and spiritual in early civilization ! http://michael-hudson.com/
And as was in the past so shall it be in the future, We still have not found that balance of economy , between the civil or physical and spiritual . But, as is with all imbalances they eventually will find there rebalance ! The original puurpose of the Temple was for keeping in balance the peoples individual needs and thoses of the society as a whole!
That is what the job of the highpriest was to smooth things out !
Jesus the Great High Priest
Hewbrews 4;14Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has ascended into heaven,f Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess.
15For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin.
16Let us then approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.