OBAMA=THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE

links? citations?

I am a proud Roman Catholic. I love the church, the Vatican and the Pope (he is infalable). And I am also well aware (well as aware as any who believes there is a global conspiracy) about the Vatican's role in the nwo.

I heard an interview with some guy on the Alex jones show who put like this: Obama's visit to europe was to show the powers that be that he could unite europe. Unite europe behind a NAU, an EU, the UN... maybe even unite them in a war against russia. And for all intents and purposes... this is true, as obama is many times more popular than mccain in europe.

If you believe in alternative news (ie conspiracies), then you cannot exclude that world religions are playing into it.

Semper Fortis

How "saved" Christians use a Catholic Doctrine (The Bible) to beat up Catholics. Go Figure!

online ebook called' germanys four reichs' at www.englishdemocraticpart......
slams the e.u.

___________

Lisa C.

www.dvds4delegates.com=Ron Paul, the 44th U.S. President

Join us at: www.campaignforliberty.com

Brought to you by: www.women4ronpaul.com

what religion claims the most members of congress? Roman catholic. they have 130 congressman now.

The Popish Plot Exposed by Rome Herself

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 3

That the Church of Rome should desire to recover the power she lost over our land at the Reformation is natural. For years she has plotted and planned to wipe out that great defeat. The whole history of our country is a history of carefully plotted schemes of the Popes of Rome to once again exercise full power over this Realm. Time after time the Church of Rome has tried to re conquer England and Scotland and Wales but she has met with no success. The bloody deeds of Mary and the perfidity of the Stuart Monarchs failed, and Protestantism became even more firmly seated than ever in our island home. About the middle of the last century, however, a new endeavour by the Pope was commenced. Its aim was to accomplish what past efforts had failed to do. Pope Pius IX sent Cardinal Wiseman and a number of Bishops to take what he called “ecclesiastical possession” of England. Of course there was great resentment at the Pope’s orders and the bombastic impertinence of the Cardinal in attempting to carry them out. But, as England had passed liberal laws the Roman Catholic Church went on its way unmolested. Of the Cardinal’s aims and intentions, of the plot that Rome had hatched for the destruction of our nation there is no secret. The purpose, the revealed and openly declared purpose, was to re conquer England for Rome.

Cardinal Manning, an eager convert to the Roman faith, continued what Wiseman commenced. He declared openly his great objective and the objective of the Vatican. Addressing his clergy he uttered the following words words worthy of careful, continual and earnest consideration:

“It is good for us, reverend brothers, to be here in England. If ever there was a country in which there is much to do, and perhaps much to suffer, it is here. I shall not say too much if I say that it is for us to subjugate and subdue, to conquer and to rule, an imperial race. We have to do with a will which reigns throughout the world, as the will of old Rome reigned once; and it is for us to bend or break that will, which nations and kingdoms have found invincible and inflexible. Were heresy conquered in England, it would be conquered throughout the world. All its lines meet here; therefore, in England the church of God must be gathered in all its strength. You have a great commission to fulfill, and great is the prize for which you strive. Surely a soldier’s life and a soldier’s heart would choose by institution this field of England for the warfare of the faith.”

Notice Rome’s official exposure of her own plot. What is the purpose of the Church of Rome in England? To have greater liberty or a larger faith, or spread her message to those whom she feels are in darkness? It is none of those things. Her self declared purpose is to conquer England, not to convert by persuasion, not to lead out of darkness into light, but rather “to subjugate and to subdue, to conquer and to rule”. Surely we must try and understand the inwardness of the words of Cardinal Manning. When Cardinal Manning died Vaughan took up his work. The great Cathedral at Westminster owes its existence largely to the prelate who never tired of urging his disciples to spare no effort to win England, and who apparently never gave up the hope that his purpose would be accomplished.

There is no doubt about it that Rome is straining every nerve to make this Protestant land of ours yield to the claims she asserts. Of course, she wears the velvet glove over the hand of steel, and hopes that people who have short memories in relation to the great facts of history will not see the steel but it is there nevertheless. We got a glimmer of it when, on the B.C.C., St. John Stevas M.P. noted Roman Catholic politician, stated that he would like to put those who protested against the proposed visit of the Pope in Liverpool, into prison. Shades of old persecuting Rome!

The purpose of the Pope’s visit to this land is no secret. He himself has stated in the Catholic Herald that the object of his visit is to bring the Church of England back into the Roman fold, “This is the real aim and objective of my visit”. That is why we are seeing the relationship between Her Majesty’s Government and the Vatican raised by the appointment of full ambassadors. Take careful note, it wasn’t the Foreign Office that made the announcement. Remember, the Vatican made the announcement first. It should have been announced simultaneously if protocol had been guarded, but protocol with England, as far as the Vatican is concerned, is completely ignored. The Church of Rome is in a grave conspiracy to overthrow the Protestant Constitution of our land, and the aim of the Pope’s visit as declared by himself is to destroy forever the Protestant nature of the Reformed Church of England establish by Law, because he knows if he can achieve this then the Throne itself falls an easy prey to the Vatican. If the Church becomes part of the Roman Catholic system, then the Queen, as Head of that Church, automatically becomes a Roman Catholic, and the whole Government of our land is destroyed.

Then, let us have done with allusions. The proud boast of a free people - “That no foreign Prince, Person, Prelate, State or Potentate have or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, superiority, preeminence or authority ecclesiastical or spiritual within this Realm of England” - has become a mere dead letter. So has also the Act of Settlement! The glory is departed. The arrogant behest of the successor of Hildebrand is obeyed by the English Government. A divided allegiance is proclaimed almost from the very steps of the Throne, even among those august persons its natural guardians, the peers of the Realm. They are not wanting some who think it no shame to profess that their first allegiance is paid to the Pope and only their second to the Queen. Some years ago such instances would have been pronounced exceptional if not mythical, but the Papal aggression and its victories have changed all that. The rising tide of Popery has swept away all the old landmarks, and the men who obtained political power by swearing that they would never use it for the subversion of the Protestant institutions of the Empire have already after the fashion of their faith discarded the obligations of their oath. No wonder many years ago Lord John Russell, Prime Minister of England, had to say, “There is an assumption of power in all the documents which have come from Rome a pretention to supremacy over the Realm of England, and acclaim to sole and undivided sway, which is inconsistent with the Queen’s supremacy, with the rights of our bishops and clergy, and with the spiritual independence of the nation, asserted even in Roman Catholic times”.

‘The Tablet’, the most powerful and potent organ of Rome in the land, spelt out the attitude the official attitude of the Roman Catholic Church - to the laws and constitution of our country on the jurisdiction of the Pope:

“Neither in England nor in Ireland will the Roman Catholics obey the law, that is, the law of the Imperial Parliament. They have, or are likely to have, before them two things called laws, which unhappily (or happily) contradict each other. Both cannot be obeyed, and both cannot be disobeyed. One of them is the law of God the other is not law at all. It pretends to be an Act of Parliament; but in the ethics of legislation it is no more force or value that a solemn enactment that the moon is made of green cheese. It is not a law but a lie, a Parliamentary lie, which its very utterers know to be false, and which they deliberately put forward as a falsehood, careless of contempt and ignominy, so that they can retain their hold of office. Of these two things we need hardly say which will be obeyed and which disobeyed. The law of God that is the Pope’s command will be or rather has been and is being carried into effect: the Parliamentary lie will be spit upon and trampled underfoot and treated as all honest men treat a lie that is rigorously disobeyed.”

Reiterating the same Roman Catholic teaching the Catholic ‘Vindicator’ said: “Rather than that our loyalty to the Holy Apostolic See should be in the least degree tarnished let ten thousand kings and queens perish that is let them be deposed from their throne and become mere individuals. When the Pope and the Queen are placed in antagonism to each other as has been done lately and it is intimated that Her Majesty would not accept a divided allegiance we are compelled to say plainly which allegiance we consider the most important, and we would not hesitate to tell the Queen to her face that she must either be content with this divided allegiance or none at all. Let us never forget that whatever her boasted authority may be it is as nothing and less than nothing compared to that of the Vicar of Christ”.

Cardinal Manning in this connection put forth clearly and explicitly the claims of the Roman Pontiff: “In Christ’s right I am Sovereign. I acknowledge no civil superior: I am the subject of no Prince, and I claim to be the supreme judge on earth, the director of the consciences of men: of the peasant that tills the field and the Prince that sits on the Throne: of the household that sits in the shade of privacy and the legislator that makes laws for the kingdom. I am the last sole supreme judge on earth of what is right and wrong”. It is this Papal usurper that the Roman hierarchy and the British Government would foist upon the nation for its adulation and homage. By her own words her plots are discovered, and by her own confession her purposes are revealed. We must bend all our efforts to keep the Church of Rome from achieving her great goal, the re conquering of our nation. What a dreadful scene is being enacted before us. England meanly submitting to be again enslaved by Rome"-IANPAISLEY.ORG.

online e-book
PAX GERMANICA & U.S. OF EUROPE OR A NEW WORLD ORDER www.originofnations.org/H... Pufendorf

'That explains why Europe-wide coalitions were formed to defeat Charles V, Louis XIV and Napoleon. The latter all sought to replace the system of independent states with a new empire like that of Rome.

Their attempts to grab power also explain why, in the 17th century, Samuel Pufendorf wrote that all European states were “obliged to oppose with all their power” what he called “the monarchy of Europe — or the universal monopoly — this being the fuel with which the whole world may be put to flame.” '- Globalist Perspective > Global History
New World Empire Vs. New World Order

By Michael Lind | Thursday, August 01, 2002
www.theglobalist.com/DBWe...

Blair-faced Liars: Blair, Clinton and the New World Order
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it." — Habakkuk 2:2
Professor Arthur Noble

"What Tony Blair is really doing, says Pierce, is ushering in the [resurrection of the] 'Holy' Roman Empire. This is entirely consistent with our analysis that the real aim of the European Union is a United Roman Catholic States of Europe, which was the ideal pursued by Pius XII through his Concordat with Adolf Hitler. In a remarkable speech given in French in 1975, Pope Paul VI said that it was "the [Roman] Catholic faith that made Europe" and added: "No other human force in Europe can render the service that is confided to us, promoters of the faith, to awaken the Christian soul of Europe, where its unity is rooted." [Reported in The Reformer, January/February, 1976. Note that it is a "human" force, not one of God.]

It is the Papacy that is behind the drive for European unity. The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) once remarked: "The Papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman Empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof." [Leviathan, Part 4, Chapter 47 (1651).] The Microsoft Encarta Encyclopaedia 99 article on the Roman Empire states:

"It was the [Roman Catholic] Church, more than anything, that was the real heir of the Empire, and which was able to provide a measure of continuity after the collapse of temporal power and civil administration."

(editors note the law system of the e.u. is ROMAN LAW! see movie at youtube 'rome rules today'.which has been non-existent for centuries except in the vatican. hows tha for " a measure of continuity" of civil administration"? sounds like their getting ready to merge huh?

The Papacy continued to be based in Rome and to exert enormous authority over most of Europe, keeping alive not only many of the ideas of the Roman world but also a sense of a wider community which looked to the ancient city for support and leadership."

The dream of re-establishing that Empire has never been abandoned. Napoléon and Hitler failed in their attempts. The late Enoch Powell alluded in the Evening Standard (December 2, 1987) to a "profound rearrangement now taking place" involving the "dissolution of the North Atlantic Alliance versus Warsaw Pact confrontation" and resulting in an arrangement which would "reappear like some submerged landscape revealed when the floodwaters fall, an older pattern, which previous generations would have no difficulty in recognising. [...] Its old name is Holy Roman Empire." The comparison is strongly reminiscent of the Biblical prophecy in Revelation 17:8 of a beast ascending out of a bottomless pit."..."Significantly, the recent peregrinations of the present Pope have concentrated on the countries of the Middle East whose territory would be needed to re-establish the former Roman Empire which extended east and south of the Mediterranean, called by the Romans mare nostrum ('our sea'). Already in 1988, when the Pope addressed the European Parliament in Strasbourg, the question of why a spiritual leader was concerned with advocating political unity was analysed by the Sunday Telegraph [July 1, 1991]:

"He is calmly preparing to assume the mantle which he solemnly believes to be his Diving Right – that of new Holy Roman Emperor, reigning from the Urals to the Atlantic."

The Pope's plan to recover the Vatican's European losses necessary for reconstructing the Empire is being graciously facilitated by Tony Blair, who is on record for his 'closeness' to Romanism and is handing the United Kingdom to the Vatican on a plate, whitewashing Irish terrorism, destroying British national identity and sending our troops to fight against our Serb allies of World War II. At the same time, Clinton, who has been photographed taking the Papist mass, is conditioning Americans for the Vatican's planned subsequent move – to rule the world by Romanising America.

Returning to the article by Pierce, we find him mentioning two further significant things which Blair and Clinton have in common apart from their association with the shady Church of Rome. One is that they are both Bilderbergers – members of that exclusive club of the most influential and fanatical New Order promoters steered by the Illuminati, a secret fraternal society with origins in 16th-century Spanish Roman Catholic mysticism. The Illuminati (Italian for 'enlightened ones') – in Spanish Alumbrados – were so called because they claimed to have seen the light, to have had a vision of the divine and to be in direct communication with the Holy Spirit. Interestingly, the Encyclopaedia Britannica states that they "came primarily from among the reformed Franciscans and the Jesuits". As we know, Clinton was educated at the Jesuit Georgetown University in Washington, D.C."...Scrutiny of Bilderberg Conference membership reveals that it is infested with Jesuits and Nazi sympathisers. The conferences were initiated by the Roman Catholic Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands and took their name from the hotel in the Dutch town of Oosterbeek, where the first conference was held in 1954. Significantly, Prince Bernhard himself was an officer in Heinrich Himmler's SS (the Schutzstaffel) in Nazi Germany. The London Times, in its Diary of May 24, 1995 [p. 16], reported that Tony Blair, with concern about sleaze in mind, belatedly listed in the updated Register of Members' Interests a visit which he made in 1993 to the Bilderberg Conference in Athens as Shadow Home Secretary.1 Blair, despite his initial feigned hesitancy on the single currency, has in reality always been an ardent advocate of it. It is no accident that the Portman Papers [Vol. 1. No 6] described the single currency as "Bilderberg treason" and warned that it "means the end for Britain".

The Bilderbergers are widely reported to have been involved in the overthrow of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (now Lady Thatcher) after she returned from an EMU discussion in Rome proclaiming: "I refuse to hand over this sovereign nation to thirteen unelected bankers!"

"Ordinary people," say the Portman Papers [ibid.], "do not know Bilderberg exists, and hence are powerless to scrutinise the highly questionable activity of this treasonous, corporatist oligarchy of influence.

1 Proof of Mr. Blair's attendance at Bildersberg (at first undeclared and then admitted following a complaint) is provided in paragraphs 1, 5 and 7 of the Appendix to the Third Report of the Select Committee on Standards and Privileges, published in Hansard, to which we provide the following link: www.parliament.the-statio... "

An expose
of the Opus Dei and other groups being formed to counter the left may be found in
books such as The Pope’s Armada and Their Kingdom Come.23 You will also find
that the Pope has hit out against Buddhism and "the return of gnostic ideas under the
guise of the so-called New Age" in his remarkably forthright book Crossing the
Threshold of Hope.24 It should also be realised that the Catholic Church have their
own variant for a new world order - a Catholic order. Writing on "Who Leads the New
World Order?" in Liberty magazine, Clifford Goldstein astutely notes:
"The pope, obviously, has a spiritual vision for the new world order.
Unlike other leaders fuzzily conjecturing about the new world order,
John Paul has a Christian vision. The pope believes that neither
oppressive Marxism, with its godless ideology, nor materialistic
capitalism, with its financial inequities, is an acceptable system … the
pope envisions a new world order centered and dependent upon
Christ."25-PAX GERMANICA & U.S.
OF EUROPE –
OR
A NEW WORLD ORDER
WHICH IS THE CORRECT DOCTRINE?
By C
White

"the greatest [Roman] Catholic superstate the world has ever kno
On July 27th, 2008 ruckmanite says:
the site where you can find this article is www.ianpaisley.org. He was a former member of parliament who protested the popes visit their and got thrown out. a good PROTESTant.

EU: (4) Destroying our Protestant Heritage and enslaving us again to Rome

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The European Union
Professor Arthur Noble
British History – a constant struggle against the Papacy

From the Magna Carta through the Gunpowder Plot to Hitler's Concordat with the Vatican, British history has been a constant struggle for the freedom of our Nation from the domination and jurisdictional claims of the Papacy, pursued through numerous plots and in various guises. The Reformation finally won for us liberty of faith and conscience, freedom of discussion and freedom of the press; and when the principles of the Bible regulated all our actions and legislation, unparalleled social blessings and political greatness followed. The ensuing Williamite Revolution Settlement enshrined the Constitutional principle of the Monarch as Defender of the Protestant Faith.

Rome is attacking us again

Today an apostate England, the "Mary's Dowry" freed from the Vatican in the sixteenth century, is being reclaimed by a resurgent Church of Rome with a new face but unchanged dogmas. She lurks behind the so-called Ecumenical Movement which is inextricably linked with the present attempt to set up a United States of Europe. Developments in Europe were not planned to end with merely economic and political union. Their ultimate goal was revealed in the Papal encyclicals of Pius XII and John XXIII: Europe would become "the greatest [Roman] Catholic superstate the world has ever known", "the greatest single human force ever seen by man", united within the ancient boundaries of the Holy Roman Empire by the common spiritual bond of religion. The Papal Nuncio in Brussels describes the EU as "a [Roman] Catholic confederation of States".

Let us now take a peek at the history of the Holy Roman Empire. The following is
taken in its entirety from the Encarta Encyclopedia:
Although he was not legally leader of the Holy Roman Empire as such, in spirit
Napoleon fulfilled the role of a leader of Holy Roman Empire in the west30 (AD1804-
1814/15) and even considered himself to be the successor to Charlemagne31. But
Napoleon was never permitted to gain control of the official Imperial Insignia. Francis
II rescued them from Aachen and Nuremberg where they were whisked to various
destinations before ending up in Vienna in 1801. On 6 August 1806 Francis II
illegally32 abolished the Holy Roman Empire to prevent Napoleon taking possession
of it (he previously created the Austrian Empire which later became known as the
Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was continuum of the eastern half of the Roman
system.33) (see Appendix 1 for a list of Emperors of the Holy Roman Empire). The
Empire had thus split into two clear halves: France and the German Confederation of
the Rhine in the West and the Austro-Hungarian Empire in the East. Historian Heer
labels this Empire as a ’secret Holy Roman Empire’34 which was finally destroyed in
1918. In other words it continued underground and in spirit for decades - the Beast
system continued in the East after the Western part fell with Napoleon.
The northern and western parts began to revive with Bismarck absorbing the lands
which were part of the Confederation of the Rhine and allied with the AustroP
ax Germanica or a New World Order?
13
Hungarian Empire. After World War II, for decades Europe, under the control of
Russia in the East and dominated by America in the West, has been kept from
restoring her vast Empire. Memories are fading in the Anglo-Saxon nations of our
traditional enemies: the Holy Roman Empire, Germany and the Austro-Hungarian
Empire which has led to our politicians lending support toward a United Europe,
which, they believe, will assist in building a world superstructure, when, in fact, it will
turn upon them.
It may not be of coincidence that the Holy Roman Empire disappeared from view
during the years of the rise of Britain and America, the very nations which smashed
its seeming attempts at world conquest in World Wars I and II.
Napoleon convinced the German princes to quit the Holy Roman Empire and come
together as the Confederation of the Rhine which included much of southern
Germany (his Empire would never have survived if the Rhineland German states did
not join in his system) which resulted in him absorbing much of the western part of
the Holy Roman Empire. He divorced his first wife, Josephine, and married the
Archduchess Marie Louise, daughter of Emperor Francis II of Austria in 1810. Their
son became the ’King of Rome’ and imperial eagles and banners were adorned upon
his cradle.35 One historian actually states that:
"After the French Revolution … Napoleon (allied with the Hapsburgs)
set out to recreate the Holy Roman Empire".36
Another says:
"Francis I, Louis XIV, Napoleon, saw themselves as the Holy Roman
Empire's legitimate heirs. Popes waged a thousand-year-long battle
with emperors for the right to Rome."37

Although I appreciate the long hours that "ruckmanite" has put into this post I think in general it would be best to steer away from long ranting dissertations on people's religions.

I must say that reading all of this and seeing the obvious vitriolic hatred of the Catholic Church reminded me exactly of how my neocon family talks about the dangerous Muslims and how they want to take over the earth and kill EVERYONE... and how we must eliminate them before they eliminate us. And one must remember that a large part of the "go kill all the Muslims and save Israel" movement comes from NON organized Christian faiths. I have actually found it rather ironic that the Catholic Church is constantly criticized for A) the Crusades and B) the Inquisition, and yet today many "Christians" are promoting the same "crusades" in the Middle East, and the same "Inquisition" toward those who question the validity of the war.

This movement is about individual freedom. "Paulites" clearly come in all colors, and run the gamut from Catholics, Jews, Protestants, Evangelicals Hindus, Atheists and more. Our personal spiritual beliefs are what give our life purpose and meaning. The FREEDOM to HOLD those beliefs, and allow all others to hold theirs is exactly what we are fighting for in the Campaign for Liberty.

I would just suggest that we keep our personal hatreds to ourselves and try to see the issues as FREEDOM issues... PHILOSOPHICAL issues rather than lumping "groups" together as targets for annihilation. That is exactly how all of our problems start in the first place.

OBAMA does not make decisions. He is told what to do and what to say and is handed a daily script. That perpetratin fraud can't wipe his butt without permission from the POPE!

Does my burka make my butt look fatwa?

That comment is way too long IMHO - it even messed up my screen display.
Please just provide links or smaller quotes to keep the site more user-friendly or manageable..
______________________
*** God bless Ron Paul ***
* Ron Paul For President *

the following qoutes are taken from the book "EUSSR tHE SOVIET ROOTS OF EUROPEAN INTEGRATION' BY VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY AND PAVEL STROILOV. SOVEREIGNTY PUBLICATIONS." sPEAKING WITH ARGENTINEAN PRESIDENT CARLOS MENEM ON 25TH OCTOBER 1990 GORBACHEV MUSED: m. gORBACHEV.[...] BUT WE SHOULD GO FURTHER. FURTHER PROGRESS WILL DEPEND ON THE ACTIONS IN EUROPE IN LATIN AMERICA IN THE ASIAN-PACIFIC REGION. AFTER THE EUROPEAN HOME IS BUILT MANY OTHER HOMES OF COOPERATION MUST FOLLOW.[...] C. MENEM.[..]SPEAKING OF INTEGATION EVERYONE AGREES WITH IT. WE IN LATIN AMERICA INTEND TO ACT ALONG THE SAME LINES AS EUROPE. IN GENERAL, HUMANITY HAS NO OTHER CHOIC. AND THEN, AFTERINTEGRATION WE WILL CONCENTRATE ON CONQUIRING THE UNIVERSE. (THIS AUTHORS NOTE: WHY THE UNIVERSE? NOTHING ELSE WILL BE LEFT TO CONQUER! THESE PEOPLE INTEND TO BRING IN THE KINGDOME WITHOUT THE KING. JESUS CHRIST.) M. GORBACHEV. ONE OF MY AIDES HAS WRITTEN SOMETIM AGO THAT WE NEED TO CREATE A WORLD GOVERNMENT. PEOPLE WERE LAUGHING AT HIM AT THAT TIME . BUT NOW?(?????)(OBVIOUSLY IT;S A DOABLE PLAN!) C.MENEM. SOME 40 YEARS AGO PERON WAS SPEAKING OF CONTINENTALISM WHICH WOULD ENABLE US TO GO FOR A WORLD GOVERNMENT.
M. GORBACHEV. I BILIEVE WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT ENHANCING THE U.N. ROLE. IT COULD NOT REALISE ITS POTENTIAL FOR 40 YEARS AND ONLY NOW DID IT GET SUCH AN OPPORTUNITY. HERE IS A PROTO-TYPE OF THE WORLD GOVERNMENT FOR YOU."
"THUS, ON 18TH JANUARY 1989A DELEGATION OF THE TRILATERAL COMMISION VISITED GORBACHEV- rOCKEVELLER, kISSINGER, nAKASONE AND gISCARD D'eSTAING. oSTENSIBLY THEIR PURPOSE WAS TO ENCOURAGE THE SOVIETS TO BEGIN INTEGRATING INTO THE WORLDS ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS (E.G. GATT IMF) TO CONVERT THE ROUBLE ETC. tHEN, SUDDENLY GISCARD TOOK THE FLOOR AND SAID: 'nOWADAYS WESTERN EUROPE IS EXPERIENCING A PERESTROIKA CHAGING ITS STRUCTURES. IT IS DIFFIDULT TO SAY EXACTLY WHEN THIS WILL HAPPEN FIVE TEN OR TWENTY YEARS LATER. BUT A NEW MODERN FEDERAL STATE WILL EMERGE IN WESTER EUROPE . THAT IS WHERE WE ARE GOING AND THE USSR SHOULD BE PREPARED TO COMMUNICATE WITH A LARGE SINGLE STATE OF WESTERN EUROPE. THIS FUTURE STATE WILL BE OPEN READY FOR ALL FORMS OF COOPERATION.
BUT THEN PERHAPS AAN ISSURE OF ACCESSION OF SOME OTHER STATES DE JURE OR DE FACTO WILL EMERGE. MOST PROBABLY THIS WILL INCLUDE AUSTRIA SWITZERLAND SCANDINAVIAN COUNTRIES AND ALSO SOME EAST EUROPEAN STATES. WE ARE NOT GOING TO STIR UP EAST EUROPEAN COUNTRIES TO SHAKE THE BASIS OF THEIR STABILITY . WE SEE THE DANGERS OF DESTABILISATION IN DIFFERENT STATES AND WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN THAT . BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF SOME EAST EUROPEAN COUNTRIES WHILE PRESERVING THE TIES OF SECURITY WITH THE USSR WISH TO BECOME ASSOCIATE MEMBERS OF THE EEC WHAT WOULD BE YOUR ATTITUDE TO THAT IDEA?
kISSINGER THEN SAID"SECOND LINE OF CONSIDERATIONS IS RELATED TO THE FUTURE OF EUROPE TO INTERRELATIONS BETWEEN ITS DIFFERENT PARTS. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF A CONCEPT OF 'EUROPE FROM THE ATLANTIC TO THE URALS"? WHAT WILL BE THE FATE OF THAT PART OF THE SOVIET UNION WHICH IS SITUATED TO THE EAST OF URALS? WHAT KIND OF RELATIONS WILL THERE BE BETWEEN THE USA AND THE FUTURE EUROPE?
mY COLLEAGUES (THOUGHT THEY DID NOT HAVE A COMMON POSISTION?) IN THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION AND I WANT TO CONTRIBUTE IN A CONSTRUCTIVE MANNER TO THE BUILDING OF THIS EUROPE IN WHICH BOTH THE USSR AND THE USA WOULD HAVE PLAYED A SIMILARLY POSITIVE ROLE."...please note that this conversation was taking place in january 1989 when even the treaty of maastricht was not drafted yet let alone the treaty of amsterdam the treaty of Nice or the european constitution not to mention the fact that no referenda on any of them had yet been held. How did they know much before any of them had yet been held. How did they know much before we have expressed any consent to these damatic changes in our homelands, what will definitely happen in 20 years? Who are these people ? why do they have such enormous power over our lives that we all feel irrelavant our wonted democracy notwithstanding?
In any case this quotation leaves us with a hos of burning questions about the mysterious links between the european superstate project, Giscard;s role in the construction of the european superstate? And WHAT IS THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THIS AND HIS RECENT AUTHORSHIP OF THE NOTORIOUS EUROPEAN CONSTITUTION? ABOVE ALL WHAT HAS THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION TO DO WITH ALL OF THAT?
tThe mystery continued with Georges berthoin, the european co-chariman of the trilateral commission who came to prepare Jacques Delors' visit to Moscow. Here is what vadim zagladin Gorbachevs advisor on european affairs, reported about this secret conversation:..."Nowadays berthoin said delors is most concerned with the following problems: the german question (he is for the unigication of the two german states, but he intends to find a solution which would neither damage the european communities nor the european idea): the increase of political power of the european communities i.e. in fact their TRANSFORMATION INTO A KIND OF FEDERATION;...Delors will probably be interested in what we think of [president Mitterrands;s ] idea of european confederation. Talking to berthoin himself as my companion told me delors meditated: is for the soviet union th idea of 'european confederation' identical to the idea of ;common european home'?then he asked a question, wheher the the soviet union considers itself as a whole from brest to vladivostok belonging to europe. Or THE USSR COUNTS ON ITS WESTERN PART;S ONLY ; INVOLVEMENT IN EUROPE;. in delors opinion it is difficult to imagine that the whole soviet union including for example its asian republics can become a member of the common european home. He would like to hear the soviet argument about that. in fact berthoin went on the further evolution of delor;s own concept much depends on what these arument will be. the idea of categorical separation of the whole soviet union from europe is alien to him. he understand that the ussr is a single entity. however at the same time if the whole ussr will be a part of the common european home what should we do about the USA?
DURING HIS TALKS WITH BERTHOIN DELORS USED TO ASK HIM A QUESTION LIKE THAT AS WELL: WOULD IT BE CLEVER TO INTEGRATE JAPAN? cERTAINLY JAPAN IS NOT EUROPE. BUT INFACT EUROPE USA AND JAPAN IS A SINGLE COMPLEX TO SOME EXTENT.[THIS AUTHORS NOTE ASKING QUESTION TO EUROPEAN CO-CHAIR OF THE TRI(3) LATERAL COMMISION? tHIER STATED GOAL IS THE HARMONIZING OF THE US JAPAN AND EUROPE!) IS IT POSSIBLE THAT THE EUROPEAN PROCESS CAN AFTER SOME TIME BECOME A FACTOR CONTRIBUTING TO CONSTRUCTIVE CO-OPERATION OF ALL THE COUNTRIES OF THE NORTHERN HEMISPHERE?
G. BERTHOIN ADDED, THAT IN HIS PERSONAL OPINION DELORS LACKS CLARITY IN ALL THESE QUESTIONS. ALL HIS IDEAS BEAR ELEMENTS OF REALISM. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND IF WE TRY TO BASE TODAYS POLICY ON THE IDEA OF THE WHOLE NORTHERN HEMISPHERE;S CO-OPERATION WOULD IT NOT LEAD TO THE DESTRUCTION OF THE EUROPEAN IDEA AS SUCH? HOWEVER IN BERTHOIN;S OPINION SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM STRATEGIES OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES WILL IN MANY RESPECTS DEPEND ON THE RESULTS OF NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN DELORS AND GORBACHEV.
BERTHOIN EXPRESSED INTERESTING IDEAS CONCERNING DELORS VIEWS ON THE GENERAL PROBLEMS OF CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS. iN THE OPINION OF THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES CHAIRMAN THERE IS CURRENTLY A KIND OF STRUGGLE BEING CARRIED ON IN THE WORLD BETWEEN TWO KINDS OF DPLOMACY. oNE OF THEM is the traditional diplamacy of defending the national binterests of every country , separately. The other kindis diplomacy (INTERDEPENDENCE) MEANS THE NECESSITY OF INTEGRATION BOTH IN THE ECONOMY AND IN POLITICS
probably now 9reasons delors according to berthoin) we can see a kind of compromise between these two approaches. This compromise has a strong influence upon the positions of separate countries and the EEC as a whole about the chice OF THE WAY FORWARD, WORKING OU THE SO-CALLED ARCHITECURE OF THE FUTURE EUROPEAN AND WORLD ORDER.
IN DELOR;S OPINION (THOUGH IN PRINCIPLE HE SUPPORTS F MITTERRAND;S POLICIES AND IN TURN ENJOY S HIS SUPPORT) THE FRENCH PRESIDENT HAS NOT MADE A CONCLUSIVE CHOICE YET BETWEEN THE OLD AND THE NEW KINDS OF DIPLOMAY. THAT IS WHY HE IS SO INCONSISTENT ON MANY ISSUES INCLUDING THE ONE OF FRANCES; ROLE IN THE WORLD AND IN EUROPE AND THE GERMAN QUESTION.
DELORS HIMSELF BELIEVES THAT TODAYS COMPROMISE APPROACH (WHICH IN HIS OPINION CAN BE SEEN EVERYWHERE) CANNOT EXIST FOR A LON TIME. EITHER EUROPE AND THE WORLD RETURN TO THE OLD APPROACH WHIC WOULD BE VERY DANGEROUS REIVIVING THE OLD INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS OR THE NEW APPROACH WINS, ORIENTED TOWARD A WIDE INTEGRATION AND THEN THE WORLD WOULD REALLY GET A NEW QUALITY.
i dont know berthoin said whether delors will ask this question directly to gorbachev or not. hewill bear it in mind.[...]
In the end berthoin said that he had decided to tell me so frankly about delors plans not only by the right of an old friend but first of all because he wants delors visit to moscow to be marked by really serious advaces in solving the burnig european and world problems. "theis is what our comon future depends on" he concluded. (this authors not 'our common future ' was the title of a book handed out at i believe it was called the world wildlife conference where rothschild, and warhouser were in attendance. he may have been talking about ideas in this book.0
"OUR SLOGAN IS A WORLDWIDE SOVIET UNION"ANTHEM OF THE COMINTERN 1938.
it, but we do because we were raised in the Soviet Union where we had to study the Soviet ideology in school and at university. The ultimate purpose of the Soviet Union was to create a new historic entity, the Soviet people, all around the globe. The same is true in the EU today. They are trying to create a new people. They call this people “Europeans”, whatever that means.

According to Communist doctrine as well as to many forms of Socialist thinking, the state, the national state, is supposed to wither away. In Russia, however, the opposite happened. Instead of withering away the Soviet state became a very powerful state, but the nationalities were obliterated. But when the time of the Soviet collapse came these suppressed feelings of national identity came bouncing back and they nearly destroyed the country. It was so frightening.

PB: Do you think the same thing can happen when the European Union collapses?

VB: Absolutely, you can press a spring only that much, and the human psyche is very resilient you know. You can press it, you can press it, but don’t forget it is still accumulating a power to rebound. It is like a spring and it always goes to overshoot.

PB: But all these countries that joined the European Union did so voluntarily.

VB: No, they did not. Look at Denmark which voted against the Maastricht treaty twice. Look at Ireland [which voted against the Nice treaty]. Look at many other countries, they are under enormous pressure. It is almost blackmail. Switzerland was forced to vote five times in a referendum. All five times they have rejected it, but who knows what will happen the sixth time, the seventh time. It is always the same thing. It is a trick for idiots. The people have to vote in referendums until the people vote the way that is wanted. Then they have to stop voting. Why stop? Let us continue voting. The European Union is what Americans would call a shotgun marriage.

PB: What do you think young people should do about the European Union? What should they insist on, to democratize the institution or just abolish it?

VB: I think that the European Union, like the Soviet Union, cannot be democratized. Gorbachev tried to democratize it and it blew up. This kind of structures cannot be democratized.

PB: But we have a European Parliament which is chosen by the people.

VB: The European Parliament is elected on the basis of proportional representation, which is not true representation. And what does it vote on? The percentage of fat in yoghurt, that kind of thing. It is ridiculous. It is given the task of the Supreme Soviet. The average MP can speak for six minutes per year in the Chamber. That is not a real parliament.

Transcript of Mr Bukovsky’s Brussels speech
Listen to it here

In 1992 I had unprecedented access to Politburo and Central Committee secret documents which have been classified, and still are even now, for 30 years. These documents show very clearly that the whole idea of turning the European common market into a federal state was agreed between the left-wing parties of Europe and Moscow as a joint project which [Soviet leader Mikhail] Gorbachev in 1988-89 called our “common European home.”

The idea was very simple. It first came up in 1985-86, when the Italian Communists visited Gorbachev, followed by the German Social-Democrats. They all complained that the changes in the world, particularly after [British Prime Minister Margaret] Thatcher introduced privatisation and economic liberalisation, were threatening to wipe out the achievement (as they called it) of generations of Socialists and Social-Democrats – threatening to reverse it completely. Therefore the only way to withstand this onslaught of wild capitalism (as they called it) was to try to introduce the same socialist goals in all countries at once. Prior to that, the left-wing parties and the Soviet Union had opposed European integration very much because they perceived it as a means to block their socialist goals. From 1985 onwards they completely changed their view. The Soviets came to a conclusion and to an agreement with the left-wing parties that if they worked together they could hijack the whole European project and turn it upside down. Instead of an open market they would turn it into a federal state.

According to the [secret Soviet] documents, 1985-86 is the turning point. I have published most of these documents. You might even find them on the internet. But the conversations they had are really eye opening. For the first time you understand that there is a conspiracy – quite understandable for them, as they were trying to save their political hides. In the East the Soviets needed a change of relations with Europe because they were entering a protracted and very deep structural crisis; in the West the left-wing parties were afraid of being wiped out and losing their influence and prestige. So it was a conspiracy, quite openly made by them, agreed upon, and worked out.

In January of 1989, for example, a delegation of the Trilateral Commission came to see Gorbachev. It included [former Japanese Prime Minister Yasuhiro] Nakasone, [former French President Valéry] Giscard d’Estaing, [American banker David] Rockefeller and [former US Secretary of State Henry] Kissinger. They had a very nice conversation where they tried to explain to Gorbachev that Soviet Russia had to integrate into the financial institutions of the world, such as Gatt, the IMF and the World Bank.

In the middle of it Giscard d’Estaing suddenly takes the floor and says: “Mr President, I cannot tell you exactly when it will happen – probably within 15 years – but Europe is going to be a federal state and you have to prepare yourself for that. You have to work out with us, and the European leaders, how you would react to that, how would you allow the other Easteuropean countries to interact with it or how to become a part of it, you have to be prepared.”

This was January 1989, at a time when the [1992] Maastricht treaty had not even been drafted. How the hell did Giscard d’Estaing know what was going to happen in 15 years time? And surprise, surprise, how did he become the author of the European constitution [in 2002-03]? A very good question. It does smell of conspiracy, doesn’t it?

Luckily for us the Soviet part of this conspiracy collapsed earlier and it did not reach the point where Moscow could influence the course of events. But the original idea was to have what they called a convergency, whereby the Soviet Union would mellow somewhat and become more social-democratic, while Western Europe would become social-democratic and socialist. Then there will be convergency. The structures have to fit each other. This is why the structures of the European Union were initially built with the purpose of fitting into the Soviet structure. This is why they are so similar in functioning and in structure.

It is no accident that the European Parliament, for example, reminds me of the Supreme Soviet. It looks like the Supreme Soviet because it was designed like it. Similary, when you look at the European Commission it looks like the Politburo. I mean it does so exactly, except for the fact that the Commission now has 25 members and the Politburo usually had 13 or 15 members. Apart from that they are exactly the same, unaccountable to anyone, not directly elected by anyone at all. When you look into all this bizarre activity of the European Union with its 80,000 pages of regulations it looks like Gosplan. We used to have an organisation which was planning everything in the economy, to the last nut and bolt, five years in advance. Exactly the same thing is happening in the EU. When you look at the type of EU corruption, it is exactly the Soviet type of corruption, going from top to bottom rather than going from bottom to top.

If you go through all the structures and features of this emerging European monster you will notice that it more and more resembles the Soviet Union. Of course, it is a milder version of the Soviet Union. Please, do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that it has a Gulag. It has no KGB – not yet – but I am very carefully watching such structures as Europol for example. That really worries me a lot because this organisation will probably have powers bigger than those of the KGB. They will have diplomatic immunity. Can you imagine a KGB with diplomatic immunity? They will have to police us on 32 kinds of crimes – two of which are particularly worrying, one is called racism, another is called xenophobia. No criminal court on earth defines anything like this as a crime [this is not entirely true, as Belgium already does so – pb]. So it is a new crime, and we have already been warned. Someone from the British government told us that those who object to uncontrolled immigration from the Third World will be regarded as racist and those who oppose further European integration will be regarded as xenophobes. I think Patricia Hewitt said this publicly.(Patricia Hewitt, was formerly Minister for Small Business and E-Commerce at the Department of Trade and Industry, Economic Secretary at the Treasury and Secretary of State at the DTI.

She was appointed Secretary of State for Health in May 2005.

Ms Hewitt has been a Member of Parliament since 1997. She was educated at the Canberra Girls' Grammar School and Newnham College, Cambridge University.

Patricia Hewitt was Press and Broadcasting Officer and Policy Coordinator to the then Leader of the Opposition, the Rt. Hon. Neil Kinnock; Deputy Director of the Institute for Public Policy Research, and Director of Research for Andersen Consulting.

).

Hence, we have now been warned. Meanwhile they are introducing more and more ideology. The Soviet Union used to be a state run by ideology. Today’s ideology of the European Union is social-democratic, statist, and a big part of it is also political correctness. I watch very carefully how political correctness spreads and becomes an oppressive ideology, not to mention the fact that they forbid smoking almost everywhere now. Look at this persecution of people like the Swedish pastor who was persecuted for several months because he said that the Bible does not approve homosexuality. France passed the same law of hate speech concerning gays. Britain is passing hate speech laws concerning race relations and now religious speech, and so on and so forth. What you observe, taken into perspective, is a systematic introduction of ideology which could later be enforced with oppressive measures. Apparently that is the whole purpose of Europol. Otherwise why do we need it? To me Europol looks very suspicious. I watch very carefully who is persecuted for what and what is happening, because that is one field in which I am an expert. I know how Gulags spring up.

It looks like we are living in a period of rapid, systematic and very consistent dismantlement of democracy. Look at this Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill. It makes ministers into legislators who can introduce new laws without bothering to tell Parliament or anyone. My immediate reaction is why do we need it? Britain survived two world wars, the war with Napoleon, the Spanish Armada, not to mention the Cold War, when we were told at any moment we might have a nuclear world war, without any need for introducing this kind legislation, without the need for suspending our civil liberaties and introducing emergency powers. Why do we need it right now? This can make a dictatorship out of your country in no time.

Today’s situation is really grim. Major political parties have been completely taken in by the new EU project. None of them really opposes it. They have become very corrupt. Who is going to defend our freedoms? It looks like we are heading towards some kind of collapse, some kind of crisis. The most likely outcome is that there will be an economic collapse in Europe, which in due time is bound to happen with this growth of expenses and taxes. The inability to create a competitive environment, the overregulation of the economy, the bureaucratisation, it is going to lead to economic collapse. Particularly the introduction of the euro was a crazy idea. Currency is not supposed to be political.

I have no doubt about it. There will be a collapse of the European Union pretty much like the Soviet Union collapsed. But do not forget that when these things collapse they leave such devastation that it takes a generation to recover. Just think what will happen if it comes to an economic crisis. The recrimination between nations will be huge. It might come to blows. Look to the huge number of immigrants from Third World countries now living in Europe. This was promoted by the European Union. What will happen with them if there is an economic collapse? We will probably have, like in the Soviet Union at the end, so much ethnic strife that the mind boggles. In no other country were there such ethnic tensions as in the Soviet Union, except probably in Yugoslavia. So that is exactly what will happen here, too. We have to be prepared for that. This huge edifice of bureaucracy is going to collapse on our heads.

This is why, and I am very frank about it, the sooner we finish with the EU the better. The sooner it collapses the less damage it will have done to us and to other countries. But we have to be quick because the Eurocrats are moving very fast. It will be difficult to defeat them. Today it is still simple. If one million people march on Brussels today these guys will run away to the Bahamas. If tomorrow half of the British population refuses to pay its taxes, nothing will happen and no-one will go to jail. Today you can still do that. But I do not know what the situation will be tomorrow with a fully fledged Europol staffed by former Stasi or Securitate officers. Anything may happen.

We are losing time. We have to defeat them. We have to sit and think, work out a strategy in the shortest possible way to achieve maximum effect. Otherwise it will be too late. So what should I say? My conclusion is not optimistic. So far, despite the fact that we do have some anti-EU forces in almost every country, it is not enough. We are losing and we are wasting time.

A Google News search returns but one U.S. publication mentioning the comments of the “uroskeptic” Vladimir Bukovsky: the Washington Times. “Liberty and democracy require limited governments, while supranationalism by definition tends toward unlimitedness,” writes Paul Belien for the newspaper on June 20. “The former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky refers to the EU as the ‘EUSSR.’ He does so, he explains, because the former USSR and the EU share the same goal: the obliteration of nations. ‘The European Union, like the Soviet Union, cannot be democratized,’ he says. If the EU becomes a genuine state it is bound to be an evil empire, because there is no European nation.” -Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU Dictatorship ."The State of the World Forum is the launching of a multi-year global initiative to focus on the fundamental challenges and opportunities confronting humanity as we enter the next phase of human development. It is being held in the belief that at this momentous juncture in history -- between the ending of the Cold War and the dawn of the new century -- we are experiencing the birth of the first global civilization." Gorbachev Conference Mission Statement (p. 3), September, 1995.

"Human interdependence must now become our watchword, as we move into the global civilization which lies ahead; interdependence with each other, interdependence with the Earth, interdependence with the Spirit which perennially guides the affairs of humankind." Gorbachev Foundation President Jim Garrison. September, 1995.

"What Boutros-Ghali proposes is closer than anyone on the planet should ever want to get to a transnational military force that could override and eventually abolish national sovereignty altogether and in the process set up the United Nations itself as the power apparatus of an unelected global elite." Samuel Francis, Human Events, August 22, 1992.

A SOUL FOR EUROPE: How the EU intends organising our religion

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
British Church Newspaper – 4 February 2005
Mr Steve Reed
“A Soul For Europe” is a committee of representatives from Europe’s larger, ecumenical, religious bodies. It is so important that it operates directly from the office of the President of the European Commission.

Its job is to administer what the Eurocrats call the “faith-sector of civil society”. It has a budget for encouraging “faith-groups” to join in its deliberations and machinations.

One must remember that the Eurocrats’ plans are not just for Europe but for a world government. Their think-tanks think globally.

THE EU’S CONCEPT OF SOCIETY

In the minds of these Eurocrats, society consists of two parts – the political (or governmental) part and the civil (or non-governmental) part.

The political part consists of elected representatives and their superiors, called ‘functionaries’. The civil part is everyone else.

The EU Parliament and the national Parliaments elect the ‘functionaries’, that is the Commission, and the parliament are then subordinate to the ‘functionaries’.

These elected parliaments, both the parliaments of the individual EU countries and the EU Parliament, play only a minor role in shaping legislation and they cannot change the constitutional set up. So no popular vote can ever bring about real change.

It is the ‘functionaries’, the people at the very top, the Commission, who change things. They consult, at least in theory, the elected representatives, and also the so-called “non-governmental organisations” drawn from the various “sectors of civil-society”.

WHERE THE CHURCHES COME IN

These “sectors of civil society” are represented, at the moment, by the awkwardly named, “Social, Economic and Environmental Partners” (SEEP) which are attached to “regional assemblies”.

Our existing, un-elected, “regional assemblies” are components of the political part of the EU (and ultimately of a global government if their plans succeed).

The regional SEEPS are components of the “civil society” part of the EU.

Thus, at your “regional assembly”, you will find sitting together with the representatives of local authorities, and voting budgets with them, the delegates of selected SEEP’s, supposedly representing “the sectors of civil society”, as follows:

The commercial sector, the trade-unions sector; the environmental-concern sector, the equalities sector (supposedly representing “disadvantaged, social groups”) the “community and voluntary” sector (charities and guarantee-limited companies) and the “faith-sector”, which, by the way, includes non-Christian, and even pseudo-pagan (“pagan-revivalist”) elements.

The fact to note here is that the “faith-sector” was identified as a SEEP, from the outset. This is because the churches, particularly the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church, played a special role in setting up the pan-continental and global megastate system. And they are still playing an important role in its consolidation today. Moreover this religious “A Soul For Europe” project has a unique status because it is within the office of the President of the Commission itself.

ANGLICANS, ROMAN CATHOLICS AND NON-CONFORMISTS

Anglican involvement goes back before World War II to the formation of the Provisional World Council of Churches. This liaised, during the war, both with the American Committee for a United Europe on the one hand, and, on the other hand, with agents of Monnet and Spinelli-the so-called “god-fathers of the EU” – in Switzerland (see Britain Held Hostage, Lindsay Jenkins).

Vatican involvement came later, since the Popes supported both Mussolini and Hitler in their peculiar effort to set up a Nazi megastate (see The Vatican Against Europe, by Edmond Paris). This was with Soviet agreement (see “Facts and Chronicles Denied to the Public”, by Pierre de Villemarest). Like the Russians, the Popes did not concur with the American-initiated EU project until the Nazi-version had failed, and the Axis had been incorporated into the current scheme (see The EU, Enemy of its Member-States by Christopher Story).

The absorption of the non-conformist denominations (especially the Methodists) into the megastate-project, through the ecumenical movement (including “Churches Together”) took place later again. It’s a fascinating, appalling tale, and a long one.

QUISLINGS AND TRAITOR CHURCHES

The regional movement was designed by the magastate, to undermine the nation-state from within. Suffice it to say that when the movement surfaced in Britain, it was led, in Scotland, by an Anglican (Episcopal Church of Scotland) cleric – one Canon Kenyon Wright – and, in England, by the House of Bishops of the Church of England, which placed one of its members, a bishop, at the head of each of the “regional Constitutional Conventions”. The task of these Conventions was to mould public opinion to accept Elected Regional Assemblies (ERA’s)

Thanks largely to the efforts of the UK Independence Party, the Elected Regional Assemblies initiative has been defeated, for the moment, but regionalization continues apace under the guidance of governmental organisations and their Quisling collaborators – including the traitor-churches and the “A Soul For Europe” project.

REGIOANL TOTEMS

Regional totems – of which Gormley’s hideous “Angel of the North”, at Gateshead, is the most obvious and spectacular-continue to spring up at key points in the megastate’s regions.

These not only express ideas of “regional identity”, but they also express “A Soul For Europe’s” concept of “the elements underlying all religions”. These pan-religious elements include angels, cruciform figures, the Willow Giant beside the M5 at Bridgwater, orbs (see the London Eye) and other perhaps less savoury symbols (see Traveling Light near Weston-super-Mare). These are elements that “A Soul For Europe” exists to identify and publicise, with the help of the churches.

NEW POLITICAL PARTIES

Another aspect of the megastate-system, in which “A Soul For Europe” is involved, is the development of sector-specific political parties. These are now emerging in order to break down support for national, political parties, and, most urgently, to absorb potentially rebellious elements and thereby undermine the development of pro-democracy, anti-megastate parties (i.e UKIP).

You may have noticed, for example, at the EU-elections, in June, a “Countryside Party” (designed to represent the “rural sector”) whose sibling-parties are more advanced on the continent, especially in France. The “Green Party”, if it was not always so, must now be included in this category. There is also an attempt to create a “Senior Citizens’ Party”.

This again is where “A Soul For Europe” comes in. A number of pro-megastate, “Christian” parties (modeled on continental, “Christian” parties) are emerging which have already contrived to split the UKIP-vote in several elections.

http://www.ianpaisley.org... EU And The UN Are The Vatican’s Tools In The Balkans

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crushing the Orthodox Church in Serbia - Part 3
Dr Clive Gillis

When the Bishop of Rome was seeking primacy among the Christian bishops, the Greek Orthodox Church was busy building a strong Orthodox bloc in the Balkans by the conversion of newly settling tribes.

The Serbian Orthodox Church in the west and the Bulgarian in the east eventually proclaimed independence from the Greek Church.

Then came Islam with the Ottoman conquest. The Turkish empire lasted from the 13th to the 19th centuries. But Serbia kept her Orthodox culture alive and it was still in existence right across the whole of the Western Balkans when the Ottoman Empire collapsed.

Rome on the attack

Rome began to move against Serbian Orthodoxy long before the arrival of the Turks. Pope Gregory VII - the Pope before whom the Holy Roman Emperor had grovelled - granted Grand Zupan Michael (1050-80) of Serbia a papal kingship and later King Stephen I Nemanja and his family converted to Rome.

King Stephen’s Orthodox brother, Rastko, acted immediately. He became the revered Saint Sava. Rastko created the Serbian Church as a separate entity and in doing so created the Serbian state and culture. The term Saint-Savaism, often used contemptuously, sums this up. As one writer puts it, “Saint Savaism regards the nation as holy because of its identification with the only true faith ... With all their heart the people want a holy church, holy school, holy culture, holy dynasty, holy authorities, holy state and - holy army”

Under King Stephen Dushan, Serbia came to stretch almost to Athens. But Dushan was very hostile to the Roman Catholic Church. Article 6 of his code punished with death any Serbian who adhered to the “Latin heresy”, or any Latin ecclesiastic who sought to make proselytes.

After the collapse of the Ottoman empire, Rome determined to counter ‘Saint Savaism’. The campaign continues to this day. Thus in 1913, Roman Catholic Europe prevented Serbia from absorbing some of the Serbian Orthodox areas of Albania which might have yielded Serbia access to the sea. After World War II, President Tito persistently blocked Serbian expansion within Yugoslavia.

Now the Serbs ate likely to lose Montenegro. It is scheduled to hold a referendum on independence on 21st May. Montenegrins number 43% and Serbs 32%. A leaked secret video reveals vote rigging. Serb politician Budimir Aleksic lamented that deputies of the ruling party are paying hooligans to beat up eminent intellectuals only because they belong to a different nation and have differing political views.

Serbs scotched in Kosovo

Worse still for the Serbs, the Serbian President Vojislav Kostunica has recently capitulated over Kosovo.

Following Serbian attempts in the 1990s to reassert power there, NATO and the US made it a UN protectorate. Since then half of the Serbs have fled from Albanian Moslem persecution. Those remaining live in fear. President Kostunica, a former communist, believes that Serbia’s best option is to reject her Orthodox past and embrace Europe. Talks for joining the EU in 2012 are well advanced. But the Financial Times of 7th April, in a leader headed “Some Balkan states may find EU’s door closed,” spelled out how France and Germany, fearing Turkey’s EU bid, are resisting further expansion.

Olli Rehn, the European Union enlargement commissioner, says Croatia’s bid is assured but that he has a fight on his hands keeping Europe’s doors open to the remaining Balkan states.

If Serbia wants admission to the EU, it will have to Europeanise fast and not quibble over Kosovo. A papal visit from Benedict XVI to Belgrade would do much to advance Serbia’s cause. Boris Tadic, President of Serbia, visited the pope in the Vatican in 2005 to extend just such an invitation.

The fact is that Kosovo is the cradle of Serbian Orthodoxy. It is thick with ancient Orthodox churches, monasteries and shrines and tradition. During Ottoman rule many Moslem Albanians settled in Kosovo. Tito granted Kosovo autonomy in 1974 and after his death Kosovo sought full independence. But Milosevic rescinded this autonomy. So in 1991 the Kosovo Albanians declared unilateral independence. Milosevic’s determination to secure Kosovo was obstructed by the Moslem Albanian Kosovan Liberation Army (KLA). Serbian Orthodox churches and monasteries were their particular target. Milosevic’s attempts to recapture Kosovo were finally halted by the Nato bombing of Kosovo and Serbia including Belgrade in march 1999.

The Vatican's influence

The Vatican has Permanent Observer Status at the UN with untold opportunities for secret lobbying and it is continually making political interventions.

UN reports that were used to demonise Serbia in the 90’s are now surfacing. Thus one such report blames, “the Bosnian Moslems for the February 1994 massacre of Moslems at a Sarajevo market”. Yet this incident was always labelled a Serb aggression at the time, thus giving the US a pretext for bombing the Bosnian Serbs. In fact the UN knew all along that Moslems had fired “on their own people in order to create international sympathy and get the West to fight on their side against the Serbs”.

During this modern day crusade hundreds of Orthodox churches monasteries, and shrines, far more than in 500 years of Ottoman rule, have been destroyed. Numerous pictures exist on the Internet, yet few reports have reached the west.

The UN administration of Kosovo was set up in autumn 1999. Yet atrocities against the Serbian Orthodox church continued. Kosovan reluctance to pursue the guilty is glaring. The BBC reported in October 2000 that the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) had found, “that the United Nations-run judicial system displays clear evidence of bias against Kosovo Serbs”. This became peculiarly public in 2001 when a coach from Nis carrying 250 Serbian Orthodox pilgrims was blown up by remote detonator. Ten Serbs were killed, including a two-year-old boy, and 20 more injured, - and that despite a Nato escort. The bus was taking Serbs who had already fled Albanian persecution in Kosovo in 1999 back to a memorial service for their dead and to visit family graves.

Murky world of ‘peace keeping’

Anthony Loyd later reported in The Times on the “murky world of UN and Nato peacekeeping in Kosovo” - Enquiries had been “blocked at every turn” and “the four suspects are now free”. The TMK (Kosovo Protection Corps) created in 1999 under the aegis of Nato and the UN after Serb withdrawal from Kosovo is just the KLA made respectable. KFOR (The Nato-led peacekeepers in Kosovo) and the UNMIK (the UN temporary administration were being blatantly obstructive. One suspect linked to the scene by DNA evidence was an Albanian criminal. He escaped from a US high detention facility – ‘using a pair of wire cutters hidden in a spinach pie’ - with such ease that suspicions arose that he was an American spy. The remaining suspects were high ranking TMK Albanians. They were freed for lack of evidence to receive local heroes’ welcomes, two being immediately reinstated as a Captain and Colonel. It was alleged they had been paid throughout their detention, as if still in post, from UN funds. Loyd concluded, “Any remaining trust held by Kosovo’s Serbs in UNMIK, KFOR or justice in the province disintegrated after the men were set free”.

Kristallnacht re-enacted

In March 2004 a fresh wave of desecration occurred under the noses UN peacekeepers. Damjan de Krnjevic-Miskovic reported, “A pogrom started in Europe this week, with one UN official being quoted as saying, ‘Kristallnacht is under way in Kosovo’. Serbs are being murdered and their 800-year-old churches are aflame. Much of the Christian heritage in Kosovo and Metohija is on fire and could be lost forever”.

He continued, “How did this week’s events begin? Just as in the 1930s ... prearranged plans were put into action .. . Serbian children were accused of chasing four Albanian children into a river and causing the death of three of them. Hours later, the UN Mission - which is what passes for authority in Kosovo - issued a statement that the accusation against the Serbs was false, adding that the surviving Albanian child had told the UN that no Serbs, had been involved in the drownings. Nevertheless, anti-Serb violence did not abate. And today Kosovo burns still . . . The wave of violence has been too coordinated to be a spontaneous ... It is clear that some in the Kosovo Albanian leadership believe that by cleansing all remaining Serbs from the area ... and destroying Serbian cultural sites, they can present the international community with a fait accompli.” Even an internet link to 11 pictures of the burning of St Sava Mitrovica on March 17th, showing UN armed soldiers standing by chatting to an Albanian mob as they assemble a pile of wood, break into the church and fire it, has disappeared when I came to compiling this article. Little wonder the BBC’s Geraldine Coghlan, handling the Hague War Crimes Tribunal, reported in 2005 on its “bias against Serbs and for not bringing more ethnic Albanians to trial”.

Journalists not paid unless they lied

American journalist Stella Jatras has noted a further link in the chain of bias. “The outrage is that we [journalists] have handed over Serbia’s Jerusalem, the seat of the Serbian Orthodox Church, to a bunch of KLA narcoterrorists (40% of Europe’s heroin coming via Kosovo in 2001) who have been tuned into heroes”.

Jatras thinks that US press reliance on “stringers”, local roving reporters, is an endemic cause of bias. These ‘stringers’ know that if they send in pro-Serb material they are not likely to be paid or thick reports published. They therefore embellish anti - Serb stories. Apparently one story of a mass grave containing 567 Moslem Albanians slaughtered by Serbs was found to be entirely fabricated. “It doesn’t pay to be impartial in the Balkans”.

Serb clusters around Serbian Orthodox Churches in Kosovo still remain, hoping to survive by mutual support. Now, in 2006, reports are emerging of anti Serbian graffiti “Self-determination” (Vetevendosje) appearing on Serb owned houses. The implied threat ‘we know where you live’ - is chilling.

The National Catholic Reporter voiced Serbian Orthodoxy’s dilemma: - The modern Serbian Orthodox church was founded in the province of Kosovo and Metohija in the 11th century ... The big question is Patriarch Pavle. He governs the Orthodox church as the first among equals .......Only Patriarch Pavle (the 44th successor to St Sava) now 91 and in failing health, can make the final decision [on Pope Benedict’s visit]”. And what a decision! Is Kosovo, known to the Serbian Orthodox as ‘heavenly Serbia’, to be engulfed by Rome or is it to become a European fundamentalist Islamic state?

So many in the West see St Savaism as the curse of the Balkans. They feel the European powers have been overindulgent to a belligerent Serbia and its myths of former greatness with horrifying results. They see “demonisation of the Croats” as a “demonisation of the Catholic Church” and they believe Rome to be an unjustly maligned institution which has really been proved to be wise beyond measure in being first to recognise Croatian independence in 1991, thus inaugurating a new era of Balkan peace and tolerance. At last the Vatican has the Serbian Orthodox Church manoeuvred into a corner.

Pictures of St Sava burning can be seen at: www.kosovo.net/news/archi... April _16/6.html

"This is how we will create a North American consciousness and a true North American Community. It will be forged in the heat of conflict, not through a rational discussion, as painful as that may be. It really cannot happen any other way." - Bruce Stokes, CFR Senior Fellow, speaking at the "Toward a North American Community?" conference, June 11, 2002Globalist think tank Strategizes on the "North American Consciousness"

WORLD MUST BE WARY OF FASCIST CROAT FORCES

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TIMES UNION,
Albany, New York
Sunday, May 23, 1993
Page E1
By Paul Reid

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For fair use only
Published under the provision of
U.S. Code, Title 17, section 107.

* * *

QUOTE:

BOSTON - Sometimes a journalist finds in a single experience the metaphor that defines his story. When the story is big, beyond comprehension even - like the Yugoslav civil war - that experience may serve as a catalyst for further research or unsettled sleep. Such was case when I met the HOS - the neo-Nazi Croat militia.

In October 1991 the civil war was moving to the start of the Bosnian phase. I was struck by the historical similarities to the earlier Balkan wars, and by the parallels between Slavic nationalism and the nationalism in the Soviet Union. The Yugoslav war seemed like it might be a window on the future of the entire old East Bloc, so I went to Croatia.

Croatia and Slovenia were on the verge of recognition by Germany, a curious circumstance to an American journalist who wondered why the Germans - with their own problems in the old East Germany - would be so quick to rush into the political riptide of the Balkans. Clearly, this civil war seemed to be about the dismantling of the Yugoslav federation.

Throughout of summer 1991, American television news had reported on Serb snipers and Serb shelling of eastern Croatian towns. The news weeklies had focused on the civil war, especially the "brutality" of the Serbs. Clearly, this trip to Croatia would teach me just why the Serbs seemed committed to the reality of a Greater Serbia at any cost, why they felt such a need to extinguish their enemies.

Then, after a day spent with Croat forces besieging the Marshal Tito Barracs outside Zagreb, I encountered the HOS. Clearly, from that day on, nothing was clear.

The HOS (*) - or Croatian Defense Force - are the best-trained, best-armed Croat paramilitary force. Paramilitary in Croatia does not mean extra-military. The entire Croat military is made up of militia. There is no central command, no joint chiefs reporting to a civilian command. Paramilitary groups are the Croat army. Where any particular militia in any given village may be armed with old shotguns and the occasional automatic weapon, the HOS sport crisp uniforms, Austrian sidearms and AK-47s. The next time you are watching TV news, look for the Croat flag flying over T-series East German battle tanks, deployed in Bosnia. The guys on the tanks are the HOS.

The HOS are the troops who threw grenades through the windows of Muslim homes, burning the families alive. The HOS are the troops who tried to keep U.N. inspectors out of Bosnian villages. The HOS are the troops who salute with a straight-armed gesture that will send chills up your spine. THE HOS ARE FASCIST, PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...Jewish leaders were UNANIMOUS in saying they saw worring PARALLELS BETWEEN THE NAZI AND PRO-NAZI MASSACRES OF 50 YEARS AGO and the unease of Jews in Croatia under strongly nationalist regime in the break away republic TODAY...

"What worries us is that those in power in Croatia NOW are largely THE SAME AS DURING THE NAZI ERA... In some cases THEY ARE EXACTLY THE SAME PEOPLE, now in their seventies and BACK from exile under the Communists. In other cases, they are the CHILDREN OF THE USTASHA... THEY WEAR *THE SAME BLACK SHIRTS*, the same black trousers, many carry THE SAME "SERBO-SEKS" [KNIVES FOR THE SERBS]..." said Dr. Klara Mandic, a senior Jewish community leader.
The above quote is from:
Phil Davidson
[British] The Independent
October 21, 1991, page 10
"War raises old anxieties for Croatian Jews"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I met HOS troops in the bar at the international Hotel in Zagreb. It was during an air raid alert, and while many of my colleagues were hunched over their drinks and the spiffy press packets handed out by the Croat information ministry, I struck up a conversation with one of three HOS troopers. Another one of the three was very drunk, and before he stumbled into the night, he did his straight-armed Nazi salute, complete with a bellowing "Seigh Heil." His friend told me that the HOS would push the "Turkish" Serbs right back to Asia.

The spiffy Croat press packet said nothing about the HOS.

In fact, except for March 28 Boston Globe story, I am not aware of a single major news media outlet that has told the story of the HOS, and the implications of that story. In fact, while the entire focus of U.S. journalism has been on Serbian "agression," the Croat HOS has been conducting its own campaign of GENOCIDE.

The story continued on the next page (E2) under title: CROATIA: Crack forces are guilty of atrocities ...

A brief familiarization with Croat history should have prepared Western journalists for the neo-Nazi movement in Croatia. A rudimentary understanding of Croat history should have moved news producers to assign reporters to what should have been an ongoing story: Croatia, if armed, will do today what Croatia did for Hitler in World War II, when more than 400,000 Serbs were exterminated by Croat Nazis. This is not to excuse a single shot fired by Serbs, but only to put today's events in a historical perspective: Croats see themselves as protectors of the European frontier, and they see Serbs as inferior Asiatics to be pushed out, or put down.

Not reported in the U.S. press was the fact that soon after Croatia declared its independence in June 1991, Croatian [actually: "Krajina"] Serbs were asked to take a loyalty oath. Forty thousand who would not sign were forced out of their homes. At the same time, squares in Zagreb were renamed for members of the Ustasha - the Croat Nazi movement of World War II. Nazi-hunter Simon Wiesenthal has long warned of the rebirth of Croat fascism, but not until Croat President Franjo Tudjman showed up at the April dedication of the Holocaust Memorial in Washington did the American press begin asking just what it is about Croatia's past that might so bother Serbs.

This all begs for further scrutiny.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Croatian government has revived many of the paraphenalia of the Nazi puppet regime headed by Ante Pavelic in the early 1940s. STREETS AND SQUARES HAVE BEEN RENAMED AFTER USTASHA HEROES...

...Plans are well under way to REINSTATE the kuna, THE CURRENCY OF THE FASCIST STATE. THE CROATIAN FLAG ONCE AGAIN SPORTS SAHOVNICA, THE RED AND WHITE CHEQUERED SHIELD WHICH SYMBOLIZED PAVELIC'S STATE - symbol which some... equate with a reunited Germany flying the swastika...

...It is less easy to explain that lack of international reaction to the RESURGENT FASCISM *SO EVIDENT* in the building of the new nation. British suggestions of economic sanctions on account of Croatia's military involvement in Bosnia have been repeatedly blocked by Germany... Germany is siding with Croatia... former partners in tourism and GENOCIDE. On the American side, THERE ARE NONE SO BLIND AS THOSE WHO WILL NOT SEE. SWASTIKAS, BLACK UNIFORMS, *RAPE AND PILLAGE* fade into insignificanse beside the demonic image the State Department has built for the Serbs.
The above quote is from:
Kenneth Roberts
[British] THE SPECTATOR
March 19 1994, pages 16, 17, 18
"UNRECONSTRUCTED NAZISM ON DISPLAY -
The Germans warmly support the Croats. Kenneth Roberts says this reuniting of Second World War allies is distasteful"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no dispute that 40,000 [regular] Croatian troops [drafted in Croatia proper], including the HOS troops riding tanks, are in Bosnia. There is no question that they are now murdering Muslims. There is no doubt that they have T-Series battle tanks, supplied last year by the German GOVERNMENT. Why, then, has not a single major U.S. media outlet asked these questions? What about the arms embargo? What are foreign troops doing in Bosnia? What other weapons have the Germans sold the Croats? When?

In fact, during 1992 Germany sold MiG aircraft, SAM missiles and 60 battle tanks to Croatia. Croatia, in turn, sold 120mm and 76mm light artillery to Bosnia, along with SAM missiles, possibly the same ones sold Croatia by Germany. These transactions are matter of public record, listed in the Defense and Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy report of December 1992.

I'm troubled by the possible consequences of not asking these questions. Is U.S. policy based, in part, on an incomplete assessment of the situation in the former Yugoslavia? If so, are U.S. troops about to be deployed to a place where both the people and terrain will be inhospitable? Do U.S. policy-makers believe that political support for troop deployment can only be assured if the American public finds a "good guy" to fight for? And ARE THE CROATS REALLY GOOD GUYS? Or are there only bad guys fighting a war that should be contained, to be sure, but not joined?

Finally, as was the case with public relations and Kuwait during Operation Desert Storm, are public relations firms doing such a good job "spinning" the news that both the public and policy-makers are operating under false assumptions? The Croat government is represented by the Washington PR firm of Ruder Finn. The Serb government is represented by the British firm of Ian Greer Associates. Recently on a Bosnian radio station, Gen. Lou MacKenzie, former U.N. commander in Bosnia, made reference to the distillation of news from Bosnia through public relations firms, saying, "If you're to have a civil war, the first thing you need is a good PR firm."

When one considers Croat history, the HOS, Croat atrocities in Bosnia and Croat weapons purchases, one must conclude that Ruder Finn is doing a first-class job. At what cost to U.S. prestige and the lives of U.S. troops remains to be seen.

I came away from Yugoslavia with far more questions than answers. Some of these questions need to be asked by the TV networks, which are in a position to educate the public and the policy-makers. Photo footage of an HOS squad throwing grenades through the windows of Bosnian farmers will tell a horrific story, but a story that needs to be told. It needs to be told before U.S. troops land in a war zone where they will have no friends, where they too will be everyman's target.

(End of quote).

* * *

Paul Reid, a Boston columnist who writes frequently about international terrorism, wrote this article for The Miami Herald.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(*) HOS stands for "Hrvatske Oslobodilacke Snage" which translates to "Croatian Liberation Army." This is not to be confused with "Kosovo Liberation Army" (KLA) though both "armies" were armed, trained, equipped and supported -- in any shape and form -- by the "democratic" West.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Next:

[ World Nazis flock to Croatia to fight the Serbs ]

[ Anti-fascists betray the Serbs ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to:

[ Nazi Croats are marching again! ]

[ PR wars against the Serbs ]

Yes, but trust and thank God that there will be protection for His worshipers when they are gathered onto one place before the coming GT...
http://www.escapeallthese...
http://timmchyde.com/

______________________
*** God bless Ron Paul ***
* Ron Paul For President *