German economy falls into recession
Associated Press
(November 13, 2008)
- The German economy, Europe's biggest, tipped into recession
in the third quarter as weakening exports fueled a bigger-than-expected
fall in national output, government figures showed Thursday. Gross
domestic product contracted by 0.5 percent in the July-September period
compared with the previous quarter, the Federal Statistical Office said
— a much sharper fall than the roughly 0.2 percent decline economists
had expected. That followed a 0.4 percent fall in GDP in the second
quarter, which was the first decline since late 2004, and a 1.4 percent
growth rate in the first quarter.
Has the U.N. Found the Smoking Gun in the Syrian ‘Nuclear’ Incident?
The Media Line
(November 11, 2008)
- There are widespread reports in the international media
that the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) inspectors found
traces of weapons-grade uranium at a site in Syria, which Israel is
believed to have destroyed in an air strike a year ago. The reports
suggest the uranium was discovered in June, but the story has only just
been leaked to the media. Confirmation is expected to come from the
IAEA’s head Muhammad Al-Barade’i when the United Nations’ watchdog meets
at the end of this month. Since the bombing, Syria has insisted the site
was used for agricultural purposes, but media reports have persisted
about North Korean involvement, as well as links to Iran’s nuclear
program.
Interview: Single EU defence 'not for all'
Euractiv
(November 11, 2008)
- It is impossible to conceive 'Defence Europe' as a project
for all 27 member states because they do not all share "similar
ambitions", French Defence Minister Hervé Morin told EurActiv France
in an exclusive interview.
Gordon Brown calls for new world order to beat recession
Telegraph UK
(November 10, 2008)
- Mr Brown will call on fellow world leaders to use the
current worldwide economic downturn as an opportunity to thoroughly
reform international financial institutions and create a new "truly
global society" with Britain, the US and Europe providing leadership.
His call comes ahead of an emergency summit of world leaders and
finance ministers from 20 major countries, the G20, in Washington
next weekend. Mr Brown will say that the Washington meeting must
establish a consensus on a new Bretton Woods-style framework for the
international financial system, featuring a reformed International
Monetary Fund which will act as a global early-warning system for
financial problems.
European Air Transport Fleet Launched
European Defense Agency
(November 10, 2008)
- European Defence Ministers, meeting in the Steering Board
of the European Defence Agency, launched today concrete initiatives
and projects for improving European military capabilities. Decisions
were taken on programmes related to air transport, maritime
surveillance and helicopters, amongst others. EUROPEAN DEFENCE AGENCY The European Defence Agency (EDA) was established by the Council on 12 July 2004. It is designed "to support the Council and the Member States in their effort to improve European defence capabilities in the field of crisis management and to sustain the ESDP as it stands now and develops in the future". More specifically, the Agency is ascribed four functions, relating to:
These functions all relate to improving Europe's
defence performance, by promoting coherence in place of fragmentation.
Who are the Architects of Economic Collapse? Will an Obama
Administration Reverse the Tide?
Global Research
(November 9, 2008)
- Most Serious Economic Crisis in Modern History
The Democrats casually blame the Bush administration for the October financial meltdown. Obama says that he will be introducing an entirely different policy agenda which responds to the interests of Main Street:
Is Obama committed to "taming Wall
Street" and "disarming financial markets"? Ironically, it was under the
Clinton administration that these policies of "greed and
irresponsibility" were adopted. | EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | NewWorldOrder | America | Economic Crisis |
World has 100 days to fix crisis: EU leaders
Economic Times
(November 8, 2008) - European Union leaders backed a 100-day
deadline by which the world's leading economies should decide urgent
global finance reforms, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said on
Friday. Sarkozy, who chaired a special meeting of EU nations, said
the financial crisis and economic downturn required a quick deal on
an overhaul at a Nov 15 summit in Washington bringing together
leaders of the world's 20 largest industrialized nations and
emerging economies. "We are in an economic crisis. We have to take
this into account," Sarkozy said. "We have to react and we have no
time to lose." "I'm not going to take part in a summit where there
is just talk for talk's sake," Sarkozy told reporters after talks
between the heads of the EU's 27 nations.
Europe
unveils its vision for global financial reform
EU Observer
(November 7, 2008)
- EU leaders have agreed on a set of principles that should
guide future talks on the reform of the global financial
architecture, urging for more regulation and transparency in the
sector that has delivered the world's biggest economic crisis since
the Great Depression of the 1930s. "No financial institution, no
market segmentation and no jurisdiction must escape proportionate
and adequate regulation or at least oversight," states the document
adopted at an extraordinary summit on Friday (7 November).
Obama and EU
to reinvent global politics, pundit says
EU Observer
(November 6, 2008)
- The Obama administration will play a big role in
"reinventing" the international system, especially on the financial
side, in strong partnership with the EU, US foreign policy expert
David J. Rothkopf said on Wednesday.
Javier SOLANA, EU High Representative for the CFSP, congratulates
Barack Obama on his election as President of the United States of
America Council of the
European Union
(November 5, 2008)
- Javier SOLA9A, EU High Representative for the Common
Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), made the following statement
today following the Presidential elections in the United States of
America :
French EU
defence plan is not anti-NATO, minister says
EU Observer (November 4, 2008)
- The US is still critical of the EU's common security and
defence policy, a pet project of the bloc's French presidency, but
French interior minister Michelle Alliot-Marie defended the
initiative on Monday as not being aimed against NATO.
Summary of remarks by Javier Solana, EU High Representative for the
CFSP, at the Ministerial Meeting of the Barcelona Process: Union for
the Mediterranean Council of the European Union (November
4, 2008)
- On Tuesday, the plenary session was focussed on the
concrete project areas on which the partners will work in priority:
de-pollution of the Mediterranean, maritime and land highways, civil
protection, alternative energies and the Mediterranean Solar Plan,
higher education and research, the Mediterranean Business
Development Initiative. During the working lunch, the Ministers
discussed regional issues, including the Middle East Peace Process. FINAL DECLARATION The Paris Summit of the ‘Barcelona Process: Union for the
Mediterranean’ (Paris, 13 July 2008) injected a renewed political
momentum into Euro–Mediterranean relations. In Paris, the Heads of State
and Government agreed to build on and reinforce the successful elements
of the
Barcelona Process by upgrading their relations, incorporating
more co-ownership in their multilateral cooperation framework and
delivering concrete benefits for the citizens of the region. This first
Summit marked an important step forward for the Euro-Mediterranean
Partnership while also highlighting the EU and Mediterranean partners’
unwavering commitment and common political will to make the goals of the
Barcelona Declaration – the creation of an area of peace, stability,
security and shared prosperity, as well as full respect of democratic
principles, human rights and fundamental freedoms and promotion of
understanding between cultures and civilizations in the
Euro-Mediterranean region – a reality. It was decided to launch and/or
to reinforce a number of key initiatives: De-pollution of the
Mediterranean, Maritime and Land Highways, Civil Protection, Alternative
Energies: Mediterranean Solar Plan, Higher Education and Research,
Euro-Mediterranean University and the Mediterranean Business Development
Initiative.
Mediterranean Union agrees on HQ, Arab-Israeli role
AFP
(November 4, 2008)
- Foreign ministers from the new Mediterranean Union struck a
deal Tuesday for Barcelona to host the forum's headquarters and for
Israel and the Arab League to take part side-by-side. The Union's 43
member states held two days of talks in the port of Marseille to end
a four-month deadlock on the two contentious issues, which
threatened to hamstring the fledgling organisation. French Foreign
Minister Bernard Kouchner and Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul
Gheit, whose countries currently co-chair the forum, announced the
breakthrough at a joint news conference in the southern French city.
"It wasn't supposed to work, and yet it did," said Kouchner, adding:
"The essential points were accepted completely and without
reservation by all 43 states" in the Union for the Mediterranean.
Ireland to
work with EU lawyers on Lisbon opt-outs
EU Observer (October 17, 2008)
- Irish Taoisach Brian Cowen said his government is
consulting with EU council legal services on drafting possible
"opt-outs" to the Lisbon treaty, speaking after an EU summit in
Brussels on Thursday (17 October). "We are prepared to go into that
process in good faith," he said, the Irish Times reports, with the
structure of the European Commission, EU military integration,
taxation and civil rights the likely areas of concern.
Solana’s speech to Institute for Security Studies
Consilium Europa
(October 30, 2008) - Dear friends, Let
me start our "tour d'horizon" with the financial crisis. It has been the
emblematic event of 2008, putting all else into the background. It is
worth analysing, especially for its consequences for foreign policy.
Allow me to make some observations: |
Iran
|
Israel
|
Islam
|
Gog/Magog
|
EU/UN /
4th Kingdom
|
Solana
| 1st
Seal
|
America
|
Economic Crisis
|
A Real Election Choice On The United Nations
Forbes
(October 30, 2008) - When Barack Obama
said he'd like to "spread the wealth around," he was widely
understood to be talking about redistributing income within the U.S.
But there's another arena in which Obama fans are waiting
impatiently for the promised wealth-spreading--the United Nations.
Snow blankets London for Global Warming debate
The Register
(October 29, 2008) - Snow fell as the
House of Commons debated Global Warming yesterday - the first October
fall in the metropolis since 1922. The Mother of Parliaments was
discussing the Mother of All Bills for the last time, in a marathon six
hour session. In order to combat a projected two degree centigrade rise
in global temperature, the Climate Change Bill pledges the UK to reduce
its carbon dioxide emissions by 80 per cent by 2050. The bill was
receiving a third reading, which means both the last chance for both
democratic scrutiny and consent.
Brussels renews attempt to seize control of telecoms
EurActiv
(October 28, 2008) - The European
Commission has drafted a revised set of rules for the Internet and
telecoms sector to be presented in November. Overruling a European
Parliament vote earlier in September, Brussels is pushing for more
European rather than national control over telecoms.
At the U.N., Many Hope for an Obama Win
The Washington Post (October 26, 2008) - There are no
"Obama 2008" buttons, banners or T-shirts visible here at U.N.
headquarters, but it might be difficult to find a sliver of
territory in the United States more enthusiastic over the prospect
of the Illinois senator winning the White House. An informal survey
of more than two dozen U.N. staff members and foreign delegates
showed that the overwhelming majority would prefer that Sen. Barack
Obama win the presidency, saying they think that the Democrat would
usher in a new agenda of multilateralism after an era marked by
Republican disdain for the world body.
Coordinated European action needed to tackle financial crisis says the
European Parliament
European Parliament (October 22, 2008)
- MEPs say the EU needs a coordinated response on a range of fronts in
order to tackle the financial crisis and limit its impact on economic
growth, jobs and small businesses. In a resolution on last week's EU
summit, they also call for measures to improve financial supervision and
look at issues from climate change to the Caucasus. The resolution was
adopted with 499 votes in favour, 130 against and 67 abstentions. | EU/UN /
4th Kingdom
|
Economic Crisis
|
Post-'excellent' speech euphoria at the UN
The Jerusalem Post
(October 22, 2008) - Father Miguel
D'Escoto Brockmann, the 75-year-old Nicaraguan Catholic priest, winner
of the International Lenin Peace Prize and newly elected president since
September 16 of the UN General Assembly for the current session, is not
just a "fan of plain words," he is also a fan of heroic deeds. On
September 23, we were witnesses to a 21st-century chamber of horrors at
the 63rd session of the UN General Assembly, when he said: "On behalf of
the General Assembly, I wish to thank his excellency the president of
the Islamic Republic of Iran and request the representatives to remain
seated while I greet the president." |
Iran
|
Israel
|
Islam
|
EU/UN /
4th Kingdom
|
MEPs debate EU response to world crises with French president Sarkozy
European Parliament (October 21, 2008)
- At a debate with MEPs on the EU summit of 15-16 October, EU
President-in-Office Sarkozy said the Russo-Georgian war and the
financial crisis had strengthened the case for a united European
response to major world problems. He rejected any idea that the EU
should backtrack on its climate change commitments because of the
crisis. While the main EP political groups broadly supported him, some
felt the roots of the financial crisis went back a long way and queried
the role of unbridled free markets.
Training A Socialist Army of World Servers Part II
News With Views
(October 21, 2008) -
Click here for part
1 Mind Change and Collective Service
"Obama.... plans to double the Peace Corps' budget by
2011 and expand AmeriCorps, USA Freedom Corps, VISTA, YouthBuild
Program, and the Senior Corps. ...he proposes to form a Classroom Corps,
Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, Veterans Corps,
Homeland
Security Corps, Global Energy Corps, and a Green Jobs Corps."[1]
Obama's Civilian National Security Force
"Jesus was a community organizer." (A visitor's
response to "Training
a Socialist Army of World Servers") "[A community] organizer... does not have a fixed
truth -- truth to him is relative and changing. ... To the extent that
he is free from the shackles of dogma, he can respond to the realities
of the widely different situations...."[2]
Rules for
Radicals by Saul Alinsky, the Marxist "organizer" whose disciples
mentored Obama “Jesus said... 'If you abide in My word, you are My
disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make
you free.'” John 8:31-32 "I was shocked," wrote one of our visitors, "when I
read your first article on
Obama's
service programs. "Why is this getting a free ride in the press?" The simple answer is that Obama's revolutionary values
match those of the
mainstream media and the
power
brokers behind it. [3] Contrary voices are
ignored or ridiculed. Perceptions are swayed by suggestions and exciting
images, while facts become increasingly irrelevant. And as discernment
drowns in this postmodern muddle, illusion reigns -- and few even care!
Without facts we'll lose our freedom! A sobering 1970
prediction by
Professor Raymond Houghton, a spokesman for "progressive education,"
may soon be reality: "...absolute behavior control is imminent.... The
critical point of behavior control, in effect, is sneaking up on mankind
without his self-conscious realization that a crisis is at hand. Man
will... never self-consciously know that it has happened."[4] STEPPING STONES TO RADICAL CHANGE At the dawn of
Stalin's deadly reign
in the 1930s -- when
Communist leader Antonio Gramsci was writing his cunning formula for
transforming the West[5] -- numerous European
Marxist were searching for effective strategies for mass control. As
Hitler rose to power, some fled to America where they fine-tuned their
tactics at "progressive" institutions like Columbia University. Welcomed
by "progressive"
educators, they found plenty of opportunity to test and teach their
theories. Others merely exported their research to fellow
revolutionaries in America. Their names --
Adorno,
Marcuse,
Lukács and
Lewin -- don't ring many bells today, but no one can escape their
impact on our nation.[6] Their radical schemes fit right into the
dialectic process. Like
Saul
Alinsky, their followers would "unfreeze"
minds from uncompromising Truth, fill them with a passion for
collectivism, "and refreeze" them with the new ideology. Before long,
the mind-changing tactics that transformed the Soviet masses became the
centerpiece of "service
learning" in American schools and communities. Remember, the primary goal behind such group service
is "service learning," NOT compassion for the poor. The latter is mainly
a feel-good incentive for group participation in a
communal
purpose, vision, activity and transformation. This scheme matches the old
Nazi
model. Young Germans from age 10 to 19 had to serve in the Hitler
Youth program. And, as Hitler affirmed back in 1933, 'the whole of
National Socialism [Nazism] is based on Marxism."[7]
His brainwashed servants, who became anything but compassionate, just
copied the Communist strategies: "The purpose of labor service was partly practical --
to... provide a source of cheap labor -- but mainly ideological. It was
part of the cult of community current in the youth movement now
manipulated by the Nazis for their own end."[8] But shouldn't we gladly and willingly serve the needy
and each other? Yes, of course! But not in ways that prompt us to twist,
compromise or hide His Word under the banner of unity or charity.
LOVING THEIR SERVITUDE "Belongingness" is the "ultimate need of the
individual," wrote William Whyte, co-author of The Organization Man. His
benchmark book -- a bestseller back in the sixties -- describes group
thinkers who would gladly trade their home-taught convictions for the
warm fuzzies of "belongingess." According to Whyte, "man exists as a unit of society,"
and "only as he collaborates with others does he become worth while."[9]
That sad assumption provided a useful "crisis"
that spurred vast numbers of transformational "leadership
training" conferences everywhere. As Whyte said, "What is needed is an administrative elite, people
trained to recognize that what man really wants most is group solidarity
even if he does not realize it himself. ... They won't push him around;
they won't even argue with him... They will adjust him. Through the
scientific application of human relations, these... technicians will
guide him into satisfying solidarity with the group so skillfully and
unobtrusively that he will scarcely realize how the benefaction has been
accomplished."[9] Two decades earlier, Aldous Huxley had shared his
concern about such "belongingness." Knowing the manipulative tactics
behind collectivism, he wrote in Brave New World, "The most important Manhattan Projects of the future
will be vast government-sponsored enquiries into what the politicians
and the participating scientists will call 'the problem of happiness' —
in other words, the problem of making people love their servitude....
"The love of servitude cannot be established except as
the result of a deep, personal revolution in human minds and bodies. To
bring about that revolution we require... First, a greatly improved
technique of
suggestion.... Second, a fully developed science of
human
differences.... (Round
pegs in square holes tend to have dangerous thoughts about the
social system and to infect others with their discontents.)"[10] Today's
leadership
training and
continual
assessments help our managers assess and track "human resources"
everywhere -- even in churches. Those assessments of "human differences"
help facilitators create the conflicts and stir tension needed for
change. As Saul Alinsky wrote, "...the organizer is constantly creating new out of
the old. He knows that all new ideas arise from conflict [tension]; that
every time man has had a new idea it has been a challenge to the sacred
ideas of the past and the present and inevitably a conflict has raged."[11] Alinsky taught his "organizers" (or facilitators) to
lead "with a free and open mind
void of certainty, hating dogma."[11] Do those words sound familiar? They would if you've
read our excerpts from
UNESCO: Its purpose and Its Philosophy by Julian Huxley (Aldous'
brother). As head of this powerful UN agency, he wrote, "The task before UNESCO... is to help the emergence of
a single world culture.... [At] the moment, two opposing philosophies of
life confront each other.... individualism versus collectivism...
capitalism versus communism... Christianity versus Marxism. Can these
opposites be reconciled, this antithesis be resolved in a higher
synthesis? ... If we are to achieve progress, we must learn to
uncrystallize our dogmas."[12] That's the aim of the dialectic process: to "uncrystalize
our dogmas." Its success is evident in today's
post-modern
generation that rejects the very notion of
truth and
certainty. Though he claims to be Christian, Obama fits this
picture. During a 2004 interview with Chicago Sun-Times religion editor
Cathleen Falsani for her book, The God Factor, Obama said, "I’m rooted in the Christian tradition. I believe
there are many paths to the same place, [emphasis mine see ] and that is a belief that there
is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people.'"[13] This is the new pluralism! Unity over Truth! Any path
is okay -- unless it clashes with the
ground
rules for the dialectic process -- the foundation for Obama's
expansive service plan. His website gives us a glimpse of that plan: Obama will expand AmeriCorps from 75,000 slots today
to 250,000.... He will establish a Classroom Corps to help teachers and
students.... and a Homeland Security Corps to help communities plan,
prepare for and respond to emergencies. ... Obama will double the Peace Corps to 16,000 by 2011.
He will work with the leaders of other countries to build an
international network of overseas volunteers so that Americans work
side-by-side with volunteers from other countries. ... Obama will set a goal that all middle and high school
students do 50 hours of community service a year. He will develop
national guidelines for service- learning and will give schools better
tools both to develop programs and to document student experience."[14]
Read full story... | EU/UN /
4th Kingdom | NewWorldOrder | America
| Thanks for the story JB, and he
brings to light the connection of Obama with the
Alliance of Civilizations. To find out some more on the AoC,
please check out
Richard
Peterson's blog. To read the story from Obama's website in
context to what the AoC stands for, read:
An Alliance of Civilizations Could Make Friends for Obama's
America Official
Obama Website (February 1,
2008) - "As an American residing in Spain,
the Alliance of Civilizations (AoC), a United Nations
initiative underway since 2004, sounds as tailor-made for Barack
Obama as those trendy gray suits he wears. US participation
in the Alliance or in some other similar peace initiative, led
by an Obama Administration, could result in peace and
understanding winning out over war and extremism." Keep in mind that "extremism"
to the AoC is defined as claiming sole ownership to the Truth,
something the Bible does, and so anyone who associates themselves to
absolutely becomes an "extremist." John 14:6 Revelation 13:1-9 For more on the beast from the
sea with the seven heads and 10 horns, examine
this chart and read about
Daniel's prophesied fourth kingdom. Rome has been reborn as
prophesied and now is coming to power as described with
a seven-year confirmed covenant with many, including Israel, and
is led by
one man who has been given the power to speak for Europe with one
voice. And Obama is very aligned with the policies coming from
Europe. Is McCain any
better? While not as vocal, he is a member of the CFR and also
has globalist leanings. So from where I stand today it appears that
either way the globalists will get what they want, but it also
appears that Obama has captured the minds of much of the nation and
the globalists and the rest of the world couldn't be happier. I'm
glad my hope is not in this world or I might fall apart with it,
where is yours? Are you watching?
Bush backs EU
plan on global financial reform
EU Observer
(October 20, 2008) - US President George W. Bush
has backed the European idea of a series of global talks on reform of
the world's financial system, with the first summit set to be held
shortly after the US presidential elections in November.
Europeans signal clash with US over global capitalism
Telegraph UK
(October 19, 2008) - World leaders will meet in
the United Sates next month to find a fix for the international
financial crisis after President George W. Bush bowed to European calls
for a global economic summit. Mr Bush bowed to demands from French
President Nicolas Sarkozy, current holder of the EU's rotating
presidency and José Manuel Barroso, President of the European
Commission, at his Camp David presidential retreat. In light of the
Glenn Beck show regarding Biden's comments,
what I've been feeling about an Obama win would fit quite well into
the further integration of America into the global economy as a step
to a new global financial system not run on paper currency, but
electronically tracked data based on a unique ID system to label
individuals in a global database. Crazy? You bet, and every day it
seems a step closer in this climate of fear and uncertainty. My
guess is that much of the world will accept this solution as an only
way out. Time will tell - keep watching.
Ireland to
work with EU lawyers on Lisbon opt-outs
EU Observer
(October 17, 2008) - Irish Taoisach Brian Cowen
said his government is consulting with EU council legal services on
drafting possible "opt-outs" to the Lisbon treaty, speaking after an
EU summit in Brussels on Thursday (17 October). "We are prepared to
go into that process in good faith," he said, the Irish Times
reports, with the structure of the European Commission, EU military
integration, taxation and civil rights the likely areas of concern.
Gordon Brown expects news on global regulation plans in the 'next few
days' Citywire
(October 15, 2008) - Prime Minister Gordon Brown
has said he expects progress towards a cocoordinated approach to cross
order regulation of the financial markets in 'the next few days.' Taking
time out from his meeting with EU leaders in Brussels, he told
journalists that leaders needed to work together to create a new
‘financial vision’ to ensure that the current crisis in financial
markets does is not repeated.
Jalili's letter to Solana circulated as UN Security Council document
Tehran Times
(October 12, 2008) - Iran's letter to EU foreign
policy chief Javier Solana and foreign ministers of the 5+1 group has
been circulated as the UN Security Council's document. America bad, Europe good is
what I see here from Iran.
EU flag and anthem revived by MEPs
Telegraph UK
(October 12, 2008) - The flag, a politically
correct motto and Beethoven's Ode to Joy will all be used more by
the European Parliament as it tries to help citizens identify more
easily with the EU.
Glenn Beck: What happened?
Glenn Beck
(October
7, 2008) - Yes, another email letter from your crazy brother. You
raised a lot of questions in your last email and I am going to try to
answer all of them. I think all of your questions fall into three areas:
(1) how did we get here; (2) what's coming; and (3) what can I do to
prepare myself and my family.
Iceland turns to Russia for bailout
RIA Novosti
(October 10, 2008) - Russia has agreed to bail out
Iceland by granting this small island state a huge stabilization loan at
an unbelievably low interest rate. Is it an act of wanton generosity, or
a far-sighted geopolitical step? And in general, four billion euros, is
it a lot or a little? The fate of Iceland has until recently not
concerned Russia one bit. Now only a lazy person is not discussing the
incredible sum the "island of stability" is going to inject into the
economy of a sinking island of geysers. There are several reasons why
Russia should agree to issue the loan to Iceland. The first and
overwhelming one is geo-economic. Leaders in many countries are
gradually beginning to understand that a world caught in the maelstrom
of a financial crisis could be saved only by cooperative efforts. This
was a theme running through a three-day world policy conference in
Evian; it will certainly be taken up at an annual meeting of the
International Monetary Fund and World Bank. |
Iran
|
Gog/Magog
|
EU/UN /
4th Kingdom
| America
|
Economic Crisis
| Proverbs 22:7 This principle is how I believe
the world will be forced into a global fix for the economic failures
by those who are the lenders. Perhaps the servants will be offered a
clean slate in exchange for participation in the new system. I
wouldn't be surprised because ultimately the spirit behind this is
not worried about making money, but pulling souls away from their
Creator and according to scripture, those who accept the terms of
the new cashless system that relies on a mark make not only an
immediate decision, but one that affects their eternity. Revelation 14:9-11 It seems to me the house of
cards is falling and everything that they try to do in order to prop
it back up fails to do anything to stop it. How close are we to
being indentured servants as a nation who will be offered a new
financial system as a way out? I don't know for sure, but there are
already globalization talks going on for the financial system:
Foreign economists urge 'global plan'
Berlusconi says leaders may close world’s markets
Bloomberg
(October 10, 2008) - Italian Prime Minister Silvio
Berlusconi said political leaders are discussing the idea of closing the
world's financial markets while they "rewrite the rules of international
finance." "The idea of suspending the markets for the time it takes to
rewrite the rules is being discussed," Berlusconi said today after a
Cabinet meeting in Naples, Italy. A solution to the financial crisis
"can't just be for one country, or even just for Europe, but global."
The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell as much 8.1 percent in early
trading and pared most of those losses after Berlusconi's remarks. The
Dow was down 0.5 percent to 8540.52 at 10:10 in New York.
Interview: EU to govern Internet of the future
Euractiv
(October 9, 2008) - The European Commission will
roll out a range of initiatives in the coming months to promote the
Internet of the Future, while remaining highly vigilant in protecting
citizens and networks, Information Society Commissioner Viviane Reding
told EurActiv in an interview.
European electronic ID framework gathers pace
vnunet
(October 9, 2008) - Further details of a new
European electronic ID interoperability scheme were revealed this week
at the ISSE 2008 security event in Madrid, with pilots set to go live as
early as 2010. In the first public discussion of the project, meeting
chair work group leader Miguel Alvarez Rodriguez claimed that the
Stork framework
would ultimately enable cross-border e-government services for
individuals and businesses. "Our mission is to develop and test common
specifications for secure and mutual recognition of national electronic
ID schemes," he said. "We will try to interact with other EU
institutions to maximise the usefulness of electronic ID services."
New World Order: Global co-operation, nationalisation and state
intervention - all in one day
The Scotsman
(October 9, 2008) - IT WAS a day of desperate
global action, unprecedented in both scale and cost, intended to stymie
the international devastation being wrought by the financial crisis. As
the London stock market steeled itself to open again following days of
vicious battering, Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, rose to stake the
future of the country and the Cabinet on an audacious £500 billion
banking bail-out. Eight UK banks and building
societies – including Royal Bank of Scotland, Halifax Bank of Scotland,
Barclays, Lloyds TSB and Nationwide – have pledged to increase their
capital by £25 billion but the government will pump in the funds if
called upon. The Treasury also stands ready to make at least another £25
billion available, if necessary. The Bank of England – alongside its
interest rate cut – is taking emergency action to help ensure banks have
enough cash to run their day-to-day activities. It has increased to £200
billion the size of its special liquidity scheme that lets banks swap
risky assets for Treasury bonds. | EU/UN /
4th Kingdom |
NewWorldOrder |
America
|
Economic Crisis
|
Federal Reserve, ECB and Bank of England make emergency interest rate
cuts Telegraph UK
(October 8, 2008) - The Federal Reserve, the
European Central Bank and the Bank of England have all cut interest
rates in an emergency move to restore confidence in the global financial
system. The Fed cut its benchmark rate by a half point to 1.5 pc, the
central bank said in a statement. The ECB and central banks of the U.K.,
Canada, Sweden and Switzerland are also reducing rates, the Fed added.
"The recent intensification of the financial crisis has augmented the
downside risks to growth and thus has diminished further the upside
risks to price stability," according to a joint statement by the central
banks. "Some easing of global monetary conditions is therefore
warranted." The move comes as the turmoil in financial markets deepens
and the UK today unveiled a £500bn rescue package for the country's
banking sector.
National Interests and European Foreign Policy
Council of the European Union - Javier
Solana
(October 7, 2008) - I would like to thank the
Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik for convening this conference. It
follows a good tradition. For many years it has hosted the NATO Review
Conference. As NATO General Secretary I valued these intense political
brainstormings. It is timely to launch a similar exercise for our Common
Foreign and Security Policy. Europe is being set up as the
model for which the rest of the world should follow suit in working
together and better integrating to make a better world. It sounds
great, but as we've seen historically the leaders with the power
misuse it to the detriment of the people and according to Bible
prophecy, the ultimate incarnation of this will be seen in the man
of sin who will rise to power from the
revived Roman Empire and from among
10 kings to gain global influence and eventually control the
world by his policies.
See chart Just a quick review, the man delivering this
"intervention" has held and holds the following positions: President of the
Council of the European Union (July-December, 1995) 9th
Secretary-General of NATO (December 5, 1995 - October 6,
1999) 1st European Union
High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy
(October 18, 1999 - Present) Secretary-General of the
Council of the European Union (October 1999 - Present)
Presiding over: Secretary-General of the
Western European Union (November 20, 1999 - Present) Ever heard of
him?
So could this really be coming to pass now under the
radar of the world and even Christians? As the financial collapse
helps push international cooperation along with business deals
(shipping jobs and manufacturing overseas) and the war on terror,
are we being smoothly nudged into the New Age that's been talked
about for many years? Considering all the signs from many angles,
I've only been more convinced as time goes on that we indeed are at
that point in the history of mankind as foretold in the Bible. Keep
watching and praying!
George Bush to summon leaders to emergency finance summit
Telegraph UK
(October 7, 2008) - The prospect of a high-level
global meeting came as the US central bank launched a new bid to
unfreeze credit markets by effectively lending billions of dollars to US
companies. The Federal Reserve moved after lending in the commercial
paper market - where companies raise money from the open money markets -
all but ceased, raising a serious threat to many American businesses'
operations. "This facility should encourage investors to once again
engage in term lending in the commercial paper market," the Fed said.
European Crisis Deepens; Officials Vow to Save Banks
Bloomberg
(October 6, 2008) - The credit crunch deepened in
Europe as government leaders pledged to bail out troubled banks and
protect depositors. BNP Paribas SA will take control of Fortis's units
in Belgium and Luxembourg after government efforts to ensure the
company's stability failed, while Germany's government and financial
institutions agreed on a 50 billion euro ($68 billion) rescue package
for Hypo Real Estate Holding AG. U.K. Chancellor of the Exchequer
Alistair Darling said Britain is "ready to do whatever it takes" to help
its banks. Deposit Guarantees
| EU/UN /
4th Kingdom
| NewWorldOrder |
America
|
Economic Crisis
|
Panic engulfs global stock markets
AFP
(October 6, 2008) - World markets suffered massive
losses Monday, striking four-year lows, as panic-stricken investors
doubted whether a Wall Street bailout package would stem the global
financial crisis. London, Frankfurt and Paris all tumbled more than six
percent approaching the half-way mark while a 15-percent dive in Moscow
forced a halt to Russian trading. "We have a seriously weak and fear
driven market at our hands," said Tom Hougaard, chief market strategist
at City Index. "It is anyone's guess where we will end the day."
Four
European nations call for new EU body to supervise banks
Breitbart.com
(October 4, 2008) - Four major European nations
agreed Saturday to set up within the European Union a body to supervise
banks as part of their efforts to stem the spread of the financial
turmoil, triggered by the U.S. subprime mortgage crisis, in Europe. In a
statement released after an emergency summit in Paris to deal with the
financial crisis, leaders of Britain, France, Germany and Italy said
mechanisms should be established within the European Union to oversee
cross-border European financial institutions and enhance international
cooperation.
Syria rebuffs nuclear inspectors
BBC News
(October 3, 2008) - The head of Syria's nuclear
programme has said that the country's military sites will remain
off-limits to international nuclear inspectors. Damascus said it would
co-operate with an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inquiry
only if it did not threaten its national security. The watchdog is
investigating claims of a secret Syrian nuclear programme. Syria's
announcement comes after it dropped a bid to win a place on the board of
the IAEA.
Rebuilding EU-US relations
Euractiv
(October 3, 2008) - "There is a new window of
opportunity to rebuild relations between the US and the EU as the Bush
era draws to a close," according to Ronald D. Asmus, executive director
of the Brussels-based Transatlantic Centre, a think tank. To do this,
the United States and Europe need to define a common strategic agenda,
argues Asmus's November paper. Deepening their economic integration
ranks highly among the issues on which they must cooperate more,
believes Asmus.
NATO and EU to
pool helicopters and air carriers
EU Observer
(October 2, 2008) - Both the EU and NATO seek to
pool their defence capabilities drawn from the same European countries,
after having experienced similar shortfalls in helicopters and air
carriers in their missions in Chad and Afghanistan. The idea has been
championed by the French EU presidency, which hopes to see several
concrete initiatives adopted in November by EU defence ministers. The French connection | EU/UN /
4th Kingdom | NewWorldOrder | America
|
Foreign economists urge 'global plan'
The Washington Times
(October 1, 2008) - Leaders and economists from
Western Europe to East Asia Tuesday urged the United States to go beyond
reviving a failed domestic bailout and start working on a new global
financial system. Associated Press Traders at MICEX, the Moscow
Interbank Currency Exchange, watch and wait during a tense session in
Moscow on Tuesday when stock indexes sank despite a two-hour trading
halt. "The Americans don't have a choice — they must absolutely have a
global plan," Christian Noyer, head of the French central bank, said in
Paris.
France's Sarkozy battles fallout from financial crisis
AFP
(September 29, 2008) - President Nicolas Sarkozy
on Monday battled to contain fallout from the global financial crisis,
moving ahead with plans for a world summit and calling a meeting of
French banking and insurance chiefs. France will host a meeting of
European officials to prepare a summit "in the coming weeks to establish the basis of a new international financial system," said
Sarkozy, whose country holds the presidency of the European Union.
Officials from Britain, France, Germany and Italy -- the EU members of
the G8 -- will meet in Paris in the coming days to lay the groundwork,
he said on the sidelines of an EU-India summit in the southern city of
Marseille.
MEPs to ask US
Congress about funding for Irish No vote
EU Observer
(September 26, 2008) - The European Parliament's
delegation to the US will on its next trans-Atlantic visit ask Congress
about allegations that the Irish anti-Lisbon Treaty campaign was funded
out of America. The parliament's political group leaders - the
"conference of presidents" - made the decision on Thursday (25
September) following calls for transparency by the Irish and French
governments and the European Commission.
U.S. losing financial superpower status: Steinbrueck
Market Watch
(September 25, 2008) - Germany's finance
minister on Thursday laid the blame for the global banking crisis on the
Anglo-American free-market model's quest for ever-higher near-term
profits, predicting the United States would soon lose its role as the
world's dominant financial power. Something to consider regarding
the "multi-polar" global financial system, it is still all run by
central banks with the power to create currency, or perhaps do away
with currency as we know it all-together in favor of a replacement
system with global control. Power corrupts and absolute power
corrupts absolutely. There is a conspiracy in the works by the
mystery of iniquity,
2 Thessalonians 2, to bring
about consolidation of power to hand to the man of sin.
Statewatch: The Shape of Things to Come
Statewatch EU Future Report: Analysis by Tony
Bunyan - “Every
object the individual uses, every transaction they make and almost
everywhere they go will create a detailed digital record. This will
generate a wealth of information for public security organisations,
and create huge opportunities for more effective and productive
public security efforts.”
| (EU Council Presidency paper) This analysis looks at the ideology in
the Future group report, Freedom, Security and Privacy - the area of
European Home Affairs. The EU is currently developing a new five
year strategy for justice and home affairs and security policy for
2009-2014. The proposals set out by the shadowy ‘Future Group’
include a range of extremely controversial measures including
techniques and technologies of surveillance and enhanced cooperation
with the United States. (Future group report:
Freedom, Security and Privacy - the area of European Home Affairs)
This examines the proposals of the
Future Group and their relation to existing and planned EU policies. It
shows how European governments and EU policy-makers are pursuing
unfettered powers to access and gather masses of personal data on the
everyday life of everyone – on the grounds that we can all be safe and
secure from perceived “threats”. From the
Statewatch
website: EU: FUTURE
GROUP REPORT: An interesting postscript on the Council's (EU
governments)
Freedom, Security, Privacy - European Home Affairs in an open
world (pdf)
report is that the Council Presidency (France) sent this report
to COREPER (high-level committee of Brussels-based
representatives of all EU member states) and the Council
(Ministers) in a document dated 9 July 2008 - it was discussed
at the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 24-25 July. However,
it was not "archived" (made publicly available) on the Council's
public register of documents until 11 September 2008 - two
months later and the same day that Statewatch released
its report on the Future Group's report on European Home
Affairs:
The Shape of Things to Come
Statewatch had put this document on its website:
Future Report: Freedom, Security, Privacy – European Home
Affairs in an open world
(pdf) on 7 August 2008. Tony Bunyan, Statewatch editor,
comments: "The Council's report on the future direction of EU
justice and home affairs policies raises fundamental questions
on privacy, civil liberties and the kind of society we want to
live in. Statewatch's analysis on "The Shape of Things to Come",
was published on 11 September, by which time over 10,000 copies
of the EU Future Group's report had been downloaded from our
website. The very same day the Council made the report available
to the public - but if Statewatch had not published "The Shape
of Things to Come" when would the Council have made it public?" With the
financial situation facing the world over, and the
technology already present to implement a marking system and
RFID readers are already appearing in businesses everywhere. The
Alliance of
Civilizations is working to bring the religions of the world
together and reject those who claim sole ownership to the truth.
With everything else coming together, I'm becoming more and more
convinced that we may indeed be less than six months away from the
beginning of the time of great tribulation. This time and the day of
the Lord come suddenly to an unsuspecting world and as I continue to
watch and see the signs, I also see very few people recognizing the
signs as well. For some time I have questioned myself because of
this, but the closer we get the more things seem to be coming
together. Is this timeline accurate? I still can't say for sure, but
we should know before this year is out, more likely by fall
sometime. Do you know anyone who might want to know what is
happening? Keep watching! (Thanks to
Constance
Cumbey for her diligent watching!)
UN chief calls for 'global leadership'
Breitbart.com
(September 23, 2008) - UN chief Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday
stressed the need for "global leadership" as he pressed world leaders
not to pursue narrow national interests in the face of hard economic
times. "I see a danger of nations looking more inward, rather than
toward a shared future," he said at the opening of the UN General
Assembly's annual debate. He spoke of a "challenge of global leadership"
to tackle the world's worsening financial, energy and food crises.
Islam, Secularism and the Gospel
The Christian Post
(September 23, 2008) - While Britons may think of America as
its juvenile and impetuous offspring, Great Britain has surely become
our senile grandmother. Through repeated acts of self-condemnation and
political correctness, the British are systematically capitulating to
all things Islamic. In essence, our British forbearers are committing
cultural suicide. In what may appear to be deferential considerations to
their growing Muslim population, British authorities are slowly
conforming to the demands of an increasingly outspoken and violent
minority. Already in Britain, Muslim men with multiple wives have been
given the go-ahead to claim extra welfare benefits following a year-long
government review. Even though bigamy is a crime in Britain, the
decision by British authorities means that polygamous marriages can now
be recognized formally (not to mentioned subsidized) by the state, so
long as the weddings took place in countries where the arrangement is
legal. And yes, polygamy remains a norm in the Muslim world.
The coming 1-world currency
WorldNet Daily
(September 21, 2008) - On Wednesday, finance chiefs of five
of the six-member, oil-rich Gulf Cooperation Council approved a proposal
to create a monetary union as a move toward adopting a single currency,
according to the AFP. The six Islamic states constituting the Gulf
Cooperation Council are Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and
the United Arab Emirates. Oman pulled out of the agreement last year.
Five states in the compact have agreed to set 2010 as the target date
for the creation of a monetary union and the adoption of common
currency. In 2002, the finance ministers of the Gulf Cooperation
Council states sought out the assistance of the European Central Bank,
as the model for their single currency,
according to
BBC reports. The council was created in 1981 to promote the
development of the member countries. The monetary union will entail the
creation of a central bank to issue the single currency. At the Wednesday meeting in the Saudi Red Sea city of
Jeddah, the finance and economy ministers reviewed the European Union's
response to the council's view on eliminating obstacles that have
blocked a long-stalled free trade agreement with the EU. Progress was
also made on key convergence factors required to underpin the common
currency, including setting the ratio of budget deficit and public debt
to the gross domestic product, target interest rates and reserve
requirements. Progress yet remains in reaching a consensus on inflation,
the last remaining stumbling block to creating the common currency. International Monetary Fund Chief Dominique
Strauss-Kahn, who met with the Gulf Cooperation Council finance
ministers in Jeddah, hailed the move by the Gulf states toward economic
integration, though he continued to express doubts the single currency
would be adopted within two years. "Achieving monetary union by 2010 will be a major
challenge, as much remains to be done to enable the creation of a single
currency within two years," Straus-Kahn. "Overcoming the current
inflationary pressures, developing a clear vision of the powers of the
future common central bank, choosing an exchange regime of the common
currency, and harmonizing financial regulations and structures will be
critical in this process." One factor easing the transition toward a
single currency is that the six Gulf Cooperation Council member states
all currently peg their currencies to the U.S. dollar. For more on how globalists are pushing regional
currencies toward a one-world currency, read
Jerome Corsi's
Red Alert, the premium, online intelligence news source by the WND
staff writer, columnist and author of the New York Times No. 1
best-seller,
"The Obama Nation."
Darkest day for Scottish banking as the Bank of Scotland
faces its end
The Scotsman
(September 18, 2008) - FOR Scotland's oldest bank, it was the
suddenness of its rout that stunned. That and the silence at the top.
That and the invisibility of leadership. That and the short-selling
frenzy that descended on HBOS shares yesterday, like vultures on a
corpse. This was the blackest day in Scottish banking. An appalling day
of shock, confusion and disbelief.
Juncker rules
out Lisbon treaty before 2010 EU Observer
(September 17, 2008) - The European Union's Lisbon Treaty
will not enter into force before the European Parliament elections in
June 2009, as was initially hoped, and is unlikely to do so before 1
January 2010 either, Luxembourg's Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker
said in Brussels on Wednesday (17 September). | EU/UN /
4th Kingdom
| NewWorldOrder | I’ll bet that if something like
Isaiah 17 and Ezekiel 38,39 were to transpire, Europe would coalesce
and give their power to a foreign minister able to deal with the
increasing situations in the Middle East and Europe. Remember there
are potentially some big earth-changing events on the near horizon
and what may seem impossible now can change in an instant. It’s
happened before and it will happen again. We’ve got the current
financial situations globally, Israel-“Palestine” issues, Iran,
Russia – all working toward the desired goal of peace and security.
The only ones who don’t want it are those working chaos to take
control and the more ignorant the population, the easier it is to
take control.
(David
Icke’s interview - Listen
here)
Solana: political pressure an option for EU to push forward Mideast
peace process China View
(September 14, 2008) - Visiting EU senior official Javier
Solana said here that the European Union would use the political
pressure to achieve what can be achieved in the Palestinian-Israeli
peace talks, the official news agency Petra reported on Sunday.
EU flag and anthem revived by MEPs
Telegraph UK
(September 12, 2008) - MEPs have decided to
revive symbols of the European Union like the flag and the anthem in
an attempt to foster greater pride in the institution. The flag, a
politically correct motto and Beethoven's Ode to Joy will all be
used more by the European Parliament as it tries to help citizens
identify more easily with the EU. But Nigel Farage, leader of the UK
Independence Party and an MEP himself, has accused his parliamentary
colleagues of "trying to ram them down our throats". MEPs said:
"Symbols are vital elements of any communication process." The
politicians stated they "convey an emotional image of the underlying
values of the organisations they represent." With this in mind, they
have decided to make more use of the flag and the motto "United in
Diversity." It is to be printed on all material emanating from the
European Parliament. More controversially, the finale from
Beethoven's Ninth Symphony, Ode to Joy, is also to be played more at
official occasions. It has unfortunate associations, having been
used previously to celebrate Adolf Hitler's birthday and as the
anthem of a socially divided Rhodesia under Ian Smith. Chancellor
Angela Merkel of Germany had said that eliminating the use of
symbols was a key difference between the EU constitution, which was
rejected in French and Dutch referenda in 2005, and the Lisbon
Treaty which followed. David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, has
also welcomed their reduced importance, telling the House of Commons
last July: "It is good that the symbols, flags and anthems, which
distracted attention from the discussion of the European
constitutional treaty, are done away with so that we can focus on
what will make the EU useful to this country - jobs, climate and
energy, the issues that matter to ordinary people." Mr Farage told
The Times: "We were told that the symbols would disappear .. now
they are trying to ram them down our throats."
The Feds are Running Scared
The Daily Reckoning
(September
11, 2008) - The fog of war – that is, in the “war” between
inflation and deflation – is lifting. We’re beginning to see more
clearly which way the battle is going. “America’s giant mortgage
companies nationalized,” is how Le Monde treated Monday’s big story.
“The biggest bailout in history...” it went on. But what does it
mean when the world’s most free-market government nationalizes its
largest finance industry? It means a couple things: First, that the
days of “laissez-faire”, even ersatz laissez-faire, are over. No
more deregulation. No more tax cuts. No more free trade agreements.
Second, that the feds are running scared. They are in retreat. The
battle between a natural market correction...and an unnatural,
inflationary boom...is going against them. We were right all along –
or almost right; when the dot.com bubble burst it marked the
beginning of the end – the end of the bull market on Wall
Street...the end of the credit expansion that began in ’82...and the
peak of American power and influence in the world. The decline since
then has been delayed and disguised – by a flood of new liquidity
from the feds. But now, there’s no stopping it. And it’s much worse
than it would have been 8 years ago. Because Americans became more
and more used to spending money they didn’t have; now they have more
debt than ever. And because the Chinese and other foreigners became
more and more used to selling things to people who couldn’t pay for
them; now their new apartment buildings are empty and their new
factories are quiet. And now, the downturn is global...and it will
be longer, and harder, than practically anyone imagines. This just
in: “Top China developer’s sales fall sharply.” Maybe it was the
distraction of the Olympics, but China’s biggest listed property
developer, Vanke, said sales fell 35% last month. And this too:
Yesterday, gold fell more than $30 – to $757. The euro rose to
$1.40. Oil is rising this morning, on fears of Hurricane Ike, but it
closed yesterday at $102. Our guess is that it will sink to the $70
range. And here’s Le Monde again: “Good news, finally...almost
everywhere, inflation remains under control and in retreat.” Wrong.
Wrong. Wrong. Inflation may be in retreat. But it’s not good news.
It means the whole world is sinking into a slump – not just the US
and Britain. And that’s what the feds are afraid of. Sec. Paulson
justified the takeover of Mac and Mae on the grounds that the
markets and the taxpayers needed “protection from a systemic risk.”
What was the risk? That both Freddie and Fannie would go broke, that
houses would fall to what they were really worth, and that – when
the federally-chartered agencies stopped paying their debt to
foreign lenders – the whole world financial system would melt down.
Driven by fear...Paulson took the bold action... more...
Taxation
Nation: Now You Own Fannie and Freddie
McAlvany Weekly Commentary
(September
10, 2008) - "It seems to me in one sentence, two things. We're
right in the midst of the greatest financial crisis in the history of
our country - number one - and number two; we're probably already over
the line to becoming socialistic state, the USSA, the United Socialist
States of America." - Jim Deeds After listening to this, you
probably already know where I think we're headed - a global cashless
society where perceived wealth and prosperity are provided by the
globalist government, the New World Order. This ½ hour show goes
into the socialist steps that will bring us there and how the
financial instability we are currently experiencing will lead us
there.
Former German president bashes EU court
EU Observer
(September
10, 2008) - The European Court of Justice needs to be stopped
from undermining national jurisdiction, former German President
Roman Herzog and Lüder Gerken, the director of the Centre for
European Policy, have warned in a comment published by the
EUobserver. The sharp words come in the wake of similar arguments
coming from Denmark and Austria accusing the court of stepping
beyond its bounds. Several cases analysed by Mr Herzog prove, in his
view, that the European Court of Justice "systematically ignores
fundamental principles of the Western interpretation of law", that
it "ignores the will of the legislator, or even turns it into its
opposite" and "invents legal principles serving as grounds for later
judgements". One key judgement, known as the Mangold case, is set to
be analysed by the German Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe and will
set the tone for future relations between the ECJ and national
courts, writes Mr Herzog. Mr Mangold, a 56-year-old lawyer, was
employed in June 2003 on a permanent contract, in compliance with a
temporary provision to the German labour law, which lowered the
minimum age for temporary contracts from 58 to 52 years, in an
attempt to encourage employers to hire more older workers. Mr
Mangold argued that this particular piece of German legislation
contravened the principles within the EU's Equal Treatment Framework
Directive adopted in 2000, as it was clearly age discriminatory. The
ECJ ruled in November 2005 that the provisions of the German labour
market reform were indeed infringing the directive, although it
accepted that member states still had until December 2006 to
transpose it into national law. However, according to the ECJ
ruling, in the period leading up to the transposition of the
directive, member states "must refrain from taking any measures
liable to seriously compromise the attainment of the result
prescribed by that directive." Mr Herzog argues however that both
labour market policy and social policy are under the jurisdiction -
or in Brussels jargon - 'core competences' of the member states:
"This case clearly demonstrates to what extent EU regulation and EU
jurisdiction nevertheless interfere in the governing of these core
competences." In order to justify its judgement, the ECJ also
resorted to a "somewhat adventurous construction", that a ban on age
discrimination was included in the "constitutional traditions common
to the member states" and "various international treaties", notes
the former German president. However, this was a "fabrication", he
believes, as only in two of the then 25 member states - Finland and
Portugal - was there any reference to a ban on age discrimination,
and no international treaty mentions this at all. "To put it
bluntly, with this construction, which the ECJ more or less pulled
out of a hat, they were acting not as part of the judicial power but
as the legislature," he says. The former German president proposes
the setting up of an independent EU court to deal with competence
questions, since the ECJ is "not appropriate" to watch over the
subsidiarity principle and the matters of member states. "The ECJ
was created with the aim of providing a arbitrator to mediate in the
interests of the EU and those of the member states," but on the
other hand, it is bound by the EU Treaty to act towards achieving a
closer Union, and therefore it is "no wonder" it overrides national
competences, he argues. more...
Brussels approves GMO bean despite public fears
EU Observer (September
9, 2008) - The European Union has approved the import of a
strain of genetically modified soybean, a move announced on Monday
(8 September) by the European Commission. The bean, which bears the
moniker A25704-12 and was developed by German biotechnology firm
Bayer Cropscience, is now authorised to be brought to Europe to be
used in food or animal feed for the next 10 years. The decision was
arrived at by the EU's executive, the commission, after ministers
from the EU member states could not come to an agreement on the
subject. When ministers are blocked over approval of a particular
genetically modified product, the decision passes over to the
commission. Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are a sensitive
topic in Europe. While a strong majority of European citizens have
concerns about such biotechnology - with only 27 percent in favour
of GM products according to a 2006 Eurobarometer poll, ministers
themselves are sharply divided. The commission has repeatedly given
its approval using this procedure, following the opinions of the
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). In August 2007, EFSA said
that Bayer's A25704-12 soybean was safe for import, awarding the
product a "positive safety assessment." The authority has long been
accused of being biased in favour of the biotech industry, both by
environmental groups and by certain EU member states, who say the
body gives its OK to GMOs without the required research. Anti-GMO
campaigners complain that EFSA bases its investigations on data
provided by the GM industry itself. It has always declared any GM
crops it has studied to be safe. The crop is to be planted widely
across the United States next year. Without such authorisation,
farmers in the 27-country bloc would not have been able to purchase
soybeans due to contamination worries. Soybeans are commonly used
for the protein they add to animal feed.
Ireland may consider EU defence opt-out to pass Lisbon Treaty
Irish Times
(September
8, 2008) - The government is exploring the possibility of opting
out of European security and defence policy in an effort to make the
Lisbon Treaty more palatable to the public. But Minister for Foreign
Affairs Micheál Martin has admitted that this course of action would
have serious consequences for the Defence Forces, and he is personally
against it. "Irish troops have received praise across the board for the
neutrality, objectivity and sensitivity with which they go about their
task. It has helped our Defence Forces to modernise" he told journalists
at an EU foreign ministers' meeting in Avignon, France. "We don't want
to damage or undermine the capacity of the Irish Army to function as
effective peacekeepers." A decision to opt out completely from European
security policy would mean that the Defence Forces may not be able to
take part in EU peacekeeping missions overseas, such as the operation in
Chad. Mr Martin said isolation was no longer the way forward for
countries such as Ireland, as there was an increasing interdependence
between economic and security policies. "You cannot isolate the issues
or categorise them as conveniently as some people would like us to do,"
he said. But he added the Government had to explore all the options open
to it following the public's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty in June, and
this was the reason his officials visited Copenhagen last month to
assess the consequences of Denmark's decision in 1992 to completely opt
out of EU defence. Another option the Government may consider is
negotiating a declaration insisting that Irish people could never be
conscripted into any future EU force. "Conscription as an issue isn't
going to happen because of Lisbon, but the point is it raises the fact
that people have concerns about the defence and military nature. So how
do we deal with that is the question. Do we reassure people on
conscription per se?" said Mr Martin. He added that most Irish people
held a noble view of the Defence Forces' participation in EU missions.
Any proposal to opt out of EU defence is likely to be opposed by the
Defence Forces. Minister for Defence Willie O'Dea last night warned that
a withdrawal from all EU military co-operation would have serious
consequences for Ireland's future United Nations role. The UN is
increasingly subcontracting peacekeeping missions to regional bodies,
such as the EU - as has happened already in Chad. "We are very
well-respected internationally because of our peacekeeping activities.
Naturally, I would not like to se anything that would diminish that," Mr
O'Dea told The Irish Times. He said that "nobody had approached" him
with a proposal that Ireland should pull out of such military
co-operation. The Government's decision to explore its role in EU
security and defence policy coincides with a wider EU review of
strategy. At the foreign ministers' meeting in Avignon, EU foreign
affairs chief Javier Solana presented a paper outlining reforms to the
EU's 2003 security strategy - the key document outlining the principles
behind the EU's policy in the area. The discussion paper proposes a
redraft of this strategy to add climate change, energy shortages and
cybercrime as new threats to the security of the EU. Meanwhile, Minister
for European Affairs Dick Roche will meet German foreign minister
Frank-Walter Steinmeier today to update him on how Ireland intends to
respond to its rejection of the Lisbon Treaty. He will tell a conference
of German diplomats he believes the Irish people are gradually
reflecting more on the possible consequences of their vote and how they
might move ahead in a way that serves both their national interest and
the interests of their EU partners.
Solana to reveal his updated European Security Strategy
UE2008.fr
(September
5, 2008) - The Friday afternoon working session (14.30-18.00)
will be dedicated to a debate on the future of relations between the
European Union and the United States, notably in terms of major
international issues ranging from regional crises to global challenges.
Bernard Kouchner will hold a press conference with Javier Solana, the
High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, and the
European Commissioner for External Relations and European Neighbourhood
Policy, Benita Ferrero Waldner, on 5 September at 18.00. During the
Saturday morning working session (9.30 – 12.30), the ministers will
examine the Georgian crisis, in the wake of the extraordinary European
Council meeting of 1 September. More specifically, they will consider
the European Union’s involvement in Georgia in terms of humanitarian
aid, reconstruction and a political settlement. Against this backdrop,
ministers will also raise relations between the European Union and
Russia in view of the forthcoming EU-Russia Summit scheduled for 14
November 2008. Javier Solana will present his ideas on the updating of
the European Security Strategy at the end of the morning session. The
working lunch will be devoted to the Middle East Peace Process and the
European Union's role in this region. The European Commissioner for
Enlargement, Olli Rehn, and Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, Chairman of the
European Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, will participate in
this discussion, which will also be attended by Axel Poniatowski,
Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committees of the French National
Assembly. The foreign ministers from the three candidate countries
(Croatia, Turkey, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia), will take part
in some of the morning’s discussions. The Presidency’s concluding press
conference will be held at 14.30. The Gymnich takes place once every six
months and takes its name from the German castle in which the very first
European Union foreign ministers' meeting was held in 1974 under the
German Presidency. This informal meeting, inasmuch as it allows
participants to engage in free and detailed exchange, does not produce
conclusions but enables better preparation of European diplomatic
positions over the months to come.
Syria makes peace proposal to Israel
Associated Press
(September
4, 2008) - Syria's leader said Thursday he offered a proposal for
peace with Israel but also refused to break off ties with Hezbollah and
militant Palestinians — a key Israeli demand. President Bashar Assad
also said indirect negotiations with Israel were on hold until that
country chooses a new prime minister and that direct talks would have to
wait until a new U.S. president takes office. Assad's comments came
after meetings with France's leader and regional mediators in talks
focusing on Mideast peace and Iran's nuclear program. France hopes that
warmer relations with Syria, Iran's ally, could help the West in its
efforts to persuade Iran to curb its nuclear program. Assad said his
proposal for Israel was intended to serve as a basis for direct talks.
He said he would wait for a similar document laying out Israel's
positions before any face-to-face talks. So far, negotiations between
the two foes have been held indirectly through Turkish mediators.
Although Assad didn't divulge details of his proposal, the move
reflected a desire to break with Syria's past policies. The quest was
given a boost by France's President Nicolas Sarkozy, who visited
Damascus on Wednesday and Thursday, becoming the first Western leader in
several years to come to Syria. Sarkozy has encouraged face-to-face
Syria-Israel negotiations and offered to sponsor such talks in the
future. The French president has been trying to forge better relations
with both Syria and Libya, a longtime international pariah that has
significantly improved ties with the West. Assad and Sarkozy were joined
Thursday in a four-way summit by Turkey's prime minister and the leader
of Qatar, a key broker in inter-Arab disputes, to discuss Mideast
stability and peace. Washington made clear it expects more from Syria
before any warming of ties. "Overall what we'd like to see out of Syria
is for it to play a much more productive role in the region. It hasn't
until now. We'd like to see it not meddle in the affairs of the
sovereign government of Lebanon," State Department spokesman Robert Wood
said. He said the U.S. "would like to see" Syria reach a peace with
Israel and establish diplomatic relations. In an interview with French
television, Assad ruled out any recognition of Israel before a peace
deal. But "when there is a peace accord, of course there will be
reciprocal recognition. This is natural," he said. Syria and Israel have
held four rounds of indirect talks through Turkish mediation in the last
year. Assad said at the summit that in the peace proposal, given to
Turkish mediators, Syria outlined six points on the issue of the
"withdrawal line" — a reference to the extent of an Israeli withdrawal
from the Golan Heights. In Israel, an official said contacts were
already being made to set up more talks. He said Israel has a "genuine
intention to reach an agreement." The official declined to be identified
because the diplomatic efforts are ongoing. Israeli officials have
insisted that Syria also must end its support for militant groups
opposed to Israel, namely Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Palestinian Hamas
and the Islamic Jihad. But Assad on Thursday sought to reassure the
groups that he would continue to back what he described as the
"resistance" against Israeli occupation. "We don't see any interest in
abandoning the resistance," he told Hezbollah's Al-Manar television.
"Our position has always been clear. Our position toward the resistance
against any occupation in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine is firm and has
not changed." more...
Solana: EU plans civilian mission in Georgia
Xinhuanet (September
1, 2008) - The European Union (EU) is planning to deploy a
civilian mission in Georgia to help monitor the ceasefire, EU top
diplomat Javier Solana said on Monday. "I hope very much that by the
next (summit) on the 15th of October, we will have all the decisions
finalized" for the mission, he told reporters before a special EU summit
on Georgia. A fact-finding mission of about 40 people are currently on
the ground, Solana said. "We would like to have a new mission deployed
soon" across areas controlled by Georgian troops to see that a
France-brokered ceasefire agreement was properly implemented after the
Georgia-Russia conflict over South Ossetia, he added. "It will be a
mission in the hundreds, not a huge one," Solana said, adding that the
Monday summit and an informal meeting of foreign ministers later this
week will discuss the civilian mission and a plan to send peacekeepers.
Georgia would expect the EU peacekeepers to replace Russian troops in
South Ossetia and Abkhazia, where Russian peacekeepers have been present
since an outbreak of violence in the early 1990s. However, the EU can
not deploy military peacekeepers in the regions without a UN Security
Council resolution. Russia, which has a veto power in the Council, has
rejected such a notion. Last week, Moscow recognized the independence of
the two breakaway Georgian regions, a move that has drawn strong
condemnation from the West. Solana said he would soon go to Moscow and
Tbilisi, capital of Georgia, to see how the EU could help settle the
crisis.
America's demonization next step in New World Order?
Old-Thinker News
(August 27, 2008) -
Georgia is the graveyard of America's unipolar world "Why that should be so isn't hard
to understand. It's not only that the US and its camp followers have
trampled on international law and the UN to bring death and
destruction to the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan... For the
rest of us, a new assertiveness by Russia and other rising powers
doesn't just offer some restraint on the unbridled exercise of
global imperial power, it should also increase the pressure for a
revival of a rules-based system of international relations."
Related:
Australian paper proclaims: A New World Order as U.S. prosperity
falls After the recent Georgian incursion
into South Ossetia, discussion has been rampant regarding America's
influence and dominance on the world scene. Some are proclaiming that
Russia has
laid to
rest aspirations for a so called New World Order. From one angle
this may appear to be the case, but there is a bigger picture needs to
be examined. The United States is going to - and to a degree already is
- be held up as an example of why "global mechanisms" and a "world
structure" need to be in place to prevent such actions as the invasion
of Iraq and U.S. support of Georgian forces in the invasion of South
Ossetia. We've been presented with a problem, now globalist think tanks
and organizations like the Council on Foreign Relations will provide us
with a solution. National sovereignty has no place in this era, so we're
told. We must "share power". Former President of the Soviet Union,
Mikhail Gorbachev,
has stated that he sees the U.S. led Iraq war as an example
of the need for a "new world order" to manage the globe.
"Look at the US in Iraq, everybody
was opposed, even their allies, but they did not listen and what
happened? They do not know how to get out of it now. Now we
understand that... we are all linked to the US and if it falls apart
it would be a real collapse. We have to help them to get out of
there. That means that cooperation is needed, a new world order is
necessary and global mechanisms to manage it." Turkish President Abdullah Gul has
made similar statements recently in response to the Georgia-Russia
conflict.
As the AFP reports, "Turkish President Abdullah Gul
predicted "a new world order" of joint international action, in an
interview published in the U.K. on Saturday... He added that the
conflict in Georgia shows the U.S. can no longer shape global
politics on its own, and that it should start sharing power with
other nations." The 2008 election gives us an idea of
the current trends underway and provides a window into the
establishment's long term game-plan. Both Barack Obama and John McCain
have openly indicated that globalist policy will be pursued if either of
them are elected president. John McCain
discussed his proposed "League of Democracies" at the Hoover
institution in May of 2007. McCain stated in part, "This League of Democracies would
not supplant the United Nations or other international
organizations. It would complement them. But it would be the one
organization where the world's democracies could come together to
discuss problems and solutions on the basis of shared principles and
a common vision of the future. If I am elected president, I will
call a summit of the world's democracies in my first year to seek
the views of my democratic counterparts and begin exploring the
practical steps necessary to realize this vision." Barack Obama
made his globalist stance known during his highly publicized
speech in Berlin on July 24th. He said,
"Yes, there
have been differences between America and Europe. No doubt, there
will be differences in the future. But the burdens of global
citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in
Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans
and Europeans alike will be required to do more -- not less.
Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the
one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance
our common humanity... In this new world, such dangerous currents
have swept along faster than our efforts to contain them. That is
why we cannot afford to be divided. No one nation, no matter how
large or powerful, can defeat such challenges alone." The more sophisticated branch of
globalist elites who see the route to power through slower, deliberate
and incremental steps are now making their move. The aggressive Neocons
have served their purpose and are making the establishment nervous with
further provocative actions. The corruption and wars that have tarnished
the American people's name will now be used to further the aims of the
global elite. America's demonization, and in turn its use as an example
of the necessity of global governance, may very well be the next stage
of the establishment's plan for world government. It is increasingly becoming the
status quo that a globalized world is the only way. Both
presidential candidates hold this view and according to the Bible,
it is the inevitable end. However the Biblical version is not as
pretty as the globalists try to paint it today. How will we get from
their vision to Biblical reality? I believe fear and the desire for
peace and safety will be used to direct the world toward the
ultimate end according to scripture. The New Age Movement has a goal
of bringing all belief to an ecumenical position that excludes what
are termed exclusionary and fundamentalist. Already there is the
Alliance of Civilizations working with religions around the world
from apostate Christianity to Buddhist and everything in between to
essentially remove the fundamentalist aspects from all belief
systems and label those who refuse as incompatible with the new age
of peace they are trying to build on earth. Those who remain true to
God's Word, which says that Yeshua is the only way to salvation will
become more and more shunned and those who agree in rejecting the
Truth will band together against those who refuse to conform.
Perhaps you think I go a little too far, but remember that according
to the Bible the ultimate end of a global government is centered
around worship of a New Age Christ, a false Messiah who the world
will adore while rejecting the God of Love because they had no love
for the Truth. John 14:23-29 John 15:12-22
Irish seek Denmark's advice on EU treaty opt-outs: report
Breitbart.com
(August 28, 2008) - Ireland has sought
advice from Denmark on how Dublin could opt-out of key parts of the EU
Lisbon Treaty, as a way of unblocking the Irish-triggered limbo, a
report said Thursday. Ireland sent shockwaves through the European Union
in June when 53 percent of Irish voters rejected the key reform treaty,
in the only popular vote on the text within the 27-nation bloc. The
Irish Times reported that the government was actively considering
opt-outs from certain aspects of EU co-operation as a possible way of
resolving the impasse created by the outcome of the June referendum.
Officials from the foreign ministry and the attorney general's office
visited Copenhagen to discuss the technical legal provisions of the
Danish agreement from 1993, the newspaper reported. In 1992 the Danish
government responded to the rejection of the Maastricht Treaty by its
electorate by coming up with a proposal to opt out of four key areas of
EU activity. A second Danish referendum in 1993 approved the treaty in
tandem with the proposal to opt out of the euro currency as well as
defence, justice and common EU citizenship arrangements established
under the treaty. "If Ireland proceeds down the road of seeking opt-outs
from the (Lisbon) treaty on issues like defence and the Charter of
Fundamental Rights, which provoked such controversy during the
referendum campaign, the approval of all 26 EU partners would be
required," the newspaper said. A government spokesman refused to comment
on the report. The Irish government is due to receive next month a
specially commissioned analysis of why people voted "No" for the treaty.
Prime Minister Brian Cowen is also due to travel to Paris for talks with
French President Nicolas Sarkozy -- whose country currently holds the
EU's rotating presidency -- on how to resolve the bloc's institutional
crisis. EU leaders are set to discuss the Irish rejection again at an
October summit in an effort to overcome the impasse ahead of elections
next year to the European Parliament.
Ireland shoots
down idea of swift Lisbon revote
EU Observer (August
27, 2008) - The Irish government has insisted that no second
referendum on the Lisbon Treaty is in the works after Europe minister
Dick Roche on the weekend told press that another vote on the text would
be "appropriate." "Nothing whatsoever has been decided vis-a-vis the
next step, because we're only in the process of analysis at this stage,"
the Irish Times quotes an unnamed government spokesperson as saying.
"People who are saying 'another referendum or legislation,' they are all
jumping ahead to an outcome, and the government isn't anywhere near
that." Meanwhile, the UK's Financial Times reports that Irish government
officials have privately conceded that any second referendum, should one
take place, would not occur before next year's European Parliamentary
elections, but rather in the second half of 2009. The government
clarification comes after a storm of criticism attacking Mr Roche's
comments from campaigners for both the Yes and No sides in the failed
June referendum as well as all main opposition parties. Irish Europe
minister Dick Roche had told the Irish Independent newspaper earlier
this week: "A referendum is the appropriate response to the position we
are in", while stressing that it was his "personal view at this stage."
"The government has made it clear that no option has been ruled in or
out. We cannot exclude that at some stage and in the right circumstances
it may be necessary to consult the people once again." In response, the
Labour Party's deputy leader, Joan Burton, described the minister's
comments as "unwise and unhelpful," adding: "There can be no question of
simply putting the same proposition to the people once again." "There is
no basis for believing that a second referendum would produce a
different outcome to the one we got on 12 June," she said, saying the
government should not be "threatening to ram another referendum down
people's throats". more...
Europe into the breach
International Herald Tribune
(August
26, 2008) - Some diplomatic movement has returned to the Middle
East. Under American supervision, Israelis and Palestinians have been
negotiating again since the end of 2007. Syria and Israel have begun an
indirect negotiation process with Turkey as a mediator. In Lebanon, a
new government including all relevant political factions has finally
been formed. This would not have been possible without a green light
from Syria. And this green light would not have come had Damascus not
been convinced that its own negotiations with Israel could, in the
medium term at least, lead to a bilateral agreement and also bring about
an improvement of Syrian-American relations. Individual European Union
states have already honored this constructive about-turn of Syrian
policies. For all those engaged in Middle East diplomacy - this goes for
the Arab-Israeli fold as well as for the Iranian nuclear file - the U.S.
political calendar is always present: No one expects the current U.S.
administration to settle any of the conflicts in the region or to bring
any of the ongoing diplomatic processes there to a conclusion during the
rest of its term. This is explicitly so for the Syrian-Israeli
negotiations: Syria has already declared that it would not move from
indirect to direct talks before the inauguration of a new American
administration ready to actively engage with such a process.
Implicitly, however, the same applies to the Annapolis process between
Israel and the Palestinian Authority. President Bush has repeatedly said
that he wants the two sides to reach an agreement while he is still in
office. Israel's outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and the Palestinian
president, Mahmoud Abbas, who lead the talks, are both aware of the
contours of a possible, mutually acceptable agreement, and they seem to
have come closer with regard to some of the particularly difficult
so-called final-status issues. Nonetheless, even under the most positive
scenario, the best one could expect is a further narrowing of the gaps.
A comprehensive agreement that would sort out such complex issues as the
future of Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, future borders between Israel
and Palestine, or infrastructural links between the West Bank and the
Gaza Strip, will not be reached within only a couple of months. And
neither Israel's prime minister nor the Palestinian president would
today have the authority and the necessary majorities to ratify, let
alone to implement a peace agreement. All this does not speak
against the process, only against exaggerated expectations. The process
is extremely fragile, and it could easily break down - particularly in
the absence of sustained external "care," of guidance and support from a
third party both able and prepared to drive the process forward and
encourage the negotiating parties to continue their efforts even in the
face of domestic opposition. The current U.S. administration will cease
to play its role after the November elections; many of its
representatives will by then be looking for new jobs. The new U.S.
president will first have to get his senior officials confirmed by
Congress, and a foreign policy review, before he begins any major policy
initiative. As a result, we should expect a time-out for any active
American involvement in the Middle East peace process between the end of
this year and at least March or April 2009. Herein lays Europe's
challenge. As an active partner in the so-called Middle East Quartet
with the United States, Russia and the United Nations, the EU has helped
to bring about the current talks between Israelis and Palestinians.
The EU and several of its member states are contributing to the process
through the support of state- and institution-building in the
Palestinian territories, particularly in the security and justice
sectors. But beyond that, the EU must now prepare itself to keep the
process alive from the end of this year through to next spring.
Considering such a task we also have to be aware of the particular
structures of the Union. President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, which
currently holds the rotating presidency of the EU, has already announced
a more active support for the Middle East peace process. But the French
presidency ends in December 2008, and the Czech government, which takes
over in January 2009, is unlikely to summon the same energy and
resources for the Middle East. The EU's special representative for the
Middle East, the Belgian diplomat Marc Otte, does not have enough
political weight to assume a role that so far has been played by the
U.S. secretary of state. Individual EU states like France, Germany or
Spain would have the resources and diplomatic skills and could even be
interested in temporarily guiding the process until a new American
administration resumes this function. In practice, however, jealousy
among EU states would make it impossible for any one of them to act for
Europe in this or any other important foreign-policy field, unless this
country happens to hold the EU presidency. EU states that want to
promote a consensual and common European approach would therefore not
even try to assume this role; others that might want to take it on would
not be able to fill it. This does not make the EU incapable of acting.
[Who ya gonna call?] The Union,
through its Council of Foreign Ministers, should as soon as possible
give a mandate to Javier Solana, the High Representative for the Common
Foreign and Security Policy of the EU, to make himself available, with
the approval of Israel, the Palestinians, and the current U.S.
administration, as a temporary mediator for Israeli-Palestinian
negotiations from the end of the year. Solana would not take such an
initiative on his own, but he can do so with a mandate from the Council.
His staff is familiar with the subject matter and his diplomatic skills
are beyond doubt. Any coalition of willing EU states could support him
by delegating some of their own experienced diplomats to his office for
the task. Solana and the EU would not be expected to make peace or to
bring the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations to a conclusion and to dispel
any opposition to an agreement. This cannot be done by the EU, simply
because, compared to the United States, it has less influence over
Israel and cannot give security guarantees to either Israel or the
Palestinians. The EU, however, can act as a temporary trustee for the
process, thereby preventing it from breaking down and, given its
knowledge of the regional situation, help the parties to find practical
solutions for some of the most complicated final-status questions - for
example, the political division of Jerusalem as the future capital of
two states - only to hand back the process and the role of external
guidance to Washington once the new administration there is ready for
it. As an active trustee in this sense, the EU could not only show that
it lives up to its own claim of contributing to crisis management
through preventive diplomacy, it would also demonstrate to the new U.S.
administration how high a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict ranges on the European list of priorities, and how useful it
can be for the United States to cooperate on this with its
trans-Atlantic partners. I agree with Fulfilled Prophecy
regarding the must-read nature of this story and thank them for
their watching of the many things I would miss were it not for their
diligence. I wonder what would happen if some kind of Middle East
war were to break out and through it all, a particular person who
helped author part of the roadmap were to actually bring the
peace agreement to fruition and divide Israel? I believe he could be
seen as an incredibly good diplomat and give further credibility to
give him more power to bring peace in the world. Keep watching...
Explosion severs Azerbaijan-Georgia-Europe fuel railway link
DEBKAfile
(August
24, 2008) - The train hit a mine Sunday, Aug. 24 at the village
of Skra, 5 km west of Gori, on the main track of the railway line
linking Eastern and Western Georgia – a vital trade route for oil
exports from Azerbaijan to European markets. Responsibility for the
sabotage has not been determined. The blast deals a serious blow to
Georgia’s efforts to recover from its ten-day war over South Ossetia in
the face of the continuing Russian military presence. Georgian officials
suggested Russian forces which pulled out of the area two days ago left
a road mine on the railroad. Azerbaijan restored its oil consignments
via Georgia only two days ago; their interruption during the fighting
robbed the Saakasvhili government of valuable revenue, which the attack
has suspended again. In another development Sunday, the guided missile
destroyer USS McFaul docked at the Georgian port of Batumi carrying
supplies such as blankets, hygiene kits and baby food. Two more US ships
are due to dock later this week. The American vessels were supposed
originally to put in at the Black Sea port of Poti, 80 km to the north,
but changed direction to avoid meeting Russian troops who are fortifying
their positions at Poti further up the coast. Russia says it entitled to
keep its forces in a buffer zone around the breakaway territories of
Abkhazia and South Ossetia, citing the truce and other international
agreements as covering unspecified “additional security measures,” over
and above their pre-conflict positions. French President Nicolas
Sarkozy, Moscow claims, approved the buffer zones which they organized
before the ceasefire was signed (as revealed by DEBKAfile on Aug. 17)
Russia acknowledges that Poti is outside the ceasefire’s terms and its
peacekeeping mandate. Saturday, the Russian missile cruiser Moskva
returned to its base in Ukraine. DEBKAfile reported on Aug. 20 from
official Russian sources that the warship was part of a large flotilla
heading for the Mediterranean port of Tartus in Syria. The defense
ministry in Moscow later detached the Moskva from the contingent and
sent it back to the Black Sea.
Beirut to petition UN on Jerusalem threats
The Jerusalem Post
(August
22, 2008) - Lebanon's unity cabinet on Friday approved a decision
to formally complain to the United Nations about what it perceived as
recent Israeli threats against Lebanon. "To hear what Israeli officials
say, one would think Israel was showering Lebanon with roses during its
last aggression," Prime Minister Fuad Saniora said of the Second Lebanon
War. Saniora was apparently referring to comments this week by Prime
Minister Ehud Olmert who warned that Israel would hit back harder than
before if Hizbullah attacked again. Olmert said Israel did not use all
its means to respond then, but "if Lebanon becomes a Hizbullah state,
then we won't have any restrictions in this regard." Lebanon's new
national unity government has given Hizbullah and their allies veto
power over all major decisions and also upheld Hizbullah's right to
retain its weapons. Also Friday, the Lebanese cabinet formally approved
diplomatic ties with Syria and the opening of a Lebanese embassy in
Damascus. Information Minister Tarek Mitri said following a Cabinet
meeting late Thursday that Lebanon's foreign minister has been entrusted
with following up on the mechanism to set up the embassy. He did not set
a time frame. The move was yet another step in ending the long chill
between the two estranged neighbors, who earlier this month agreed to
establish full diplomatic ties for the first time since they gained
their independence from France in the 1940s. The agreement on diplomatic
ties came during a landmark visit last week by Lebanese President Michel
Suleiman to Damascus for talks with Syrian President Bashar Assad. It
was the first visit by a Lebanese head of state in three years. During
the visit, the two countries also agreed to negotiate the demarcation of
their border, a standing Lebanese demand from its longtime dominant
larger neighbor. Syria controlled Lebanon for nearly 30 years until its
direct hold was broken in 2005.
NATO Says Russia Has Cut All Military Ties With Western Alliance
Fox News
(August 21, 2008) - Russia has halted all
military cooperation with NATO, the Western alliance said Thursday, in
the latest sign of East-West tension over the invasion of Georgia. NATO
spokeswoman Carmen Romero said the alliance had received notification
through military channels that Russia's Defense Ministry had taken a
decision "to halt international military cooperation events between
Russia and NATO countries until further instructions." She said NATO
"takes note" of the decision, but had no further reaction. On Tuesday,
NATO foreign ministers said they would make further ties with Russia
dependent on Moscow making good on a pledge to pull its troops back to
pre-conflict positions in Georgia. However, they stopped short of
calling an immediate halt to all cooperation. Under a 2002 agreement
that set up the NATO-Russia Council, the former Cold War foes began
several cooperation projects. They include sharing expertise to combat
heroin trafficking out of Afghanistan, developing battlefield
anti-missile technology, joint exercises and help with rescue at sea.
Romero said she was unaware of any specific events under the cooperation
agreement scheduled before early September. NATO itself decided last
week to suspend plans for a Russian warship to join NATO
counterterrorism patrols in the Mediterranean Sea, deciding it was
inappropriate in the wake of the eruption of fighting in Georgia.
Monitor: UN peacekeepers in Lebanon co-opted by Hizbullah
World Tribune (August 20, 2008) - A consultant to the
United Nations said its peace-keeping force in Lebanon has been
effectively paralyzed. An independent monitoring group, registered as a
consultant to the UN, said UNIFIL could not act without permission of
Hizbullah and the Lebanese government it now controls. "They [UNIFIL]
mustn't accept Hizbullah blackmailing," Toni Nissi, general coordinator
of the Lebanese Committee for UN Security Council Resolution 1559 said.
[On Aug. 19, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Israel would lift
any limitations on military operations should Lebanon turn into what he
termed a Hizbullah state. Olmert said Israel had restrained itself
during the 2006 war with Hizbullah to avoid damage to Lebanon.] In a
briefing on Aug. 16, Nissi said UNIFIL has become a hostage of
Hizbullah. He said the government of Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad
Siniora has refused to grant permission to UN peace-keepers to halt
Hizbullah weapons smuggling or deployment south of the Litani River, a
key element of Security Council resolution 1701, which ended the
Israeli-Hizbullah war in 2006. "1701 also calls for the implementation
of [Security Council resolution] 1559, especially the disarmament of the
militias, and calls for sealing the border between Lebanon and Syria and
forbidding the entering of arms and weapons via the border, especially
to Hizbullah," Nissi said. "So Hizbullah is violating 1701 big time, and
not only by hiding its weapons in warehouses in the south. Also, we
haven't seen any weapons coming out of the south after the war of 2006.
So did Hizbullah throw its weapons used in the 2006 war into the sea?"
The monitoring group, with representatives in Lebanon and other
countries, disputed an assertion by UNIFIL commander Maj. Gen. Claudio
Graziano that Hizbullah was honoring resolution 1701. Graziano also said
UNIFIL maintained excellent relations with the militia. "Is the UNIFIL
mandate to coordinate with Hizbullah or to kick Hizbullah out south of
the Litani?" Nissi responded. Former UNIFIL adviser Timor Goksel said
the 13,500 international peace-keeping force has sought to avoid
friction with Hizbullah. Goksel told a briefing in Beirut that Hizbullah
has established a major presence in southern Lebanon. "I know they are
careful not to challenge UNIFIL and there is practically no visible
Hizbullah fighter to be seen," Goksel said. "As far as UNIFIL is
concerned, this is compliance."
Norway: Russia to cut all military ties with NATO
Associated Press
(August 20, 2008) - Russia has informed
Norway that it plans to suspend all military ties with NATO, Norway's
Defense Ministry said Wednesday, a day after the military alliance urged
Moscow to withdraw its forces from Georgia. NATO foreign ministers said
Tuesday they would make further ties with Russia dependent on Moscow
making good on a pledge to pull its troops back to pre-conflict
positions in Georgia. However, they stopped short of calling an
immediate halt to all cooperation. The Nordic country's embassy in
Moscow received a telephone call from "a well-placed official in the
Russian Ministry of Defense," who said Moscow plans "to freeze all
military cooperation with NATO and allied countries," Espen Barth Eide,
state secretary with the Norwegian ministry said. Eide told The
Associated Press that the Russian official notified Norway it will
receive a written note about this soon. He said Norwegian diplomats in
Moscow would meet Russian officials on Thursday morning to clarify the
implications of the freeze. "It is our understanding that other NATO
countries will receive similar notes," Eide said. The ministry said the
Russian official is known to the embassy, but Norway declined to provide
a name or any further identifying information. A Kremlin official
declined to comment on the report, and the Russian ambassador to NATO
did not reply to messages left on his cell phone. But the Interfax news
agency, citing what it called a military-diplomatic source in Moscow
whom it did not identify, reported that Russia is reviewing its 2008
military cooperation plans with NATO. Officials at NATO headquarters in
Brussels said Moscow had not informed the alliance it was taking such a
step. Washington described the reported move as unfortunate. more...
Lisbon treaty would have helped in Georgia crisis, says France
EU Observer
(August 18, 2008) - French president
Nicolas Sarkozy has used the ongoing crisis between Russia and Georgia
to put the case for the EU's new treaty, currently facing ratification
difficulties. In an opinion piece in Monday's edition of French daily Le
Figaro, Mr. Sarkozy, who currently holds the EU's six month presidency,
wrote that the Lisbon Treaty would have given the bloc the tools it
needed to handle the Moscow-Tbilisi war. "It is notable that had the
Lisbon Treaty, which is in the process of being ratified, already been
in force, the European Union would have had the institutions it needs to
cope with international crises." He named the most important innovations
as being the "stable" European Council President - instead of the
current half-yearly system - " a High Representative endowed with a real
European diplomatic service and considerable financial means in order to
put decisions into force in coordination with member states. " The short
pitch for the Lisbon Treaty also revealed a little how the French
president views the role of the EU's first long-term president of the EU
- a post that can be held for up to five years. The treaty itself is
ambiguous about the president's exact role with the potential for
conflict rife with member states and EU officials divided about whether
the position should be ceremonial or have real teeth. Entwined in this
question is how much the president should represent the EU in external
policy, a policy area that is foreseen for the EU's foreign policy
chief. In the Figaro article, Mr. Sarkozy suggests that the president's
position in such crises as the Russia-Georgia one would be one of
"acting in close consultation with the heads of state and government
most affected." This would very much put the President in the foreign
policy field. It would also foresee a formal hierarchy among member
states as it would give priority to those considered most affected. This
kind of scenario has been predicted by some smaller member states who
fear that the president would have an all-powerful role, reducing the
say of certain governments, although the working principle of the bloc
is that member states are equal. But Mr. Sarkozy's words of support for
the Lisbon Treaty come amid doubt that it will ever come into force.
Although ratified by the vast majority of national parliaments, it was
rejected by Irish voters in a referendum in June. All member states need
to ratify the document for it to go into place. At the moment, Dublin is
considering its options. It could either put the treaty to another
referendum or try and figure out a legal contortion allowing it to use
parliamentary ratification only. But the January 2009 deadline by which
governments had hoped to have the treaty in place is certain to be
missed. I wonder if the unfolding of
the Magog invasion will be what spurs the acceptance of the Lisbon
Treaty in Europe out of fear of being unable to deal with situations
such as this. It certainly seems that it could end up working in
favor of the Lisbon Treaty and ultimately the center of power being
designed to run from Europe. Keep watching!
Europe's major
economies contract BBC News
(August 14, 2008) - The 15 economies of the
eurozone contracted by 0.2% between April and June, heightening fears
that the euro area is sliding towards recession. The eurozone's first
decline since it was created in 1999 was driven by a slowdown in exports
and consumer spending. The German economy, Europe's largest, shrank by
0.5% in the second quarter compared with the previous quarter. And in
both France and Italy GDP shrank by 0.3% in the second quarter. The
slowdown was less pronounced in the wider European community of 27
nations including the UK, which contracted by 0.1%. However Estonia,
where the economy contracted for the second consecutive quarter, is now
considered to be in recession. Ireland, whose economy contracted in the
first quarter of the year, has not yet released its second quarter
growth figures. Compared to the second quarter of 2007, the eurozone
economies grew by 1.5% and the 27 European Union countries grew by 1.7%.
The news weakened the euro, which was already well down from its recent
highs against the dollar. But high eurozone inflation, which was
unchanged on the month, made it unlikely that the European Central Bank,
which raised interest rates last month, will reverse its stance. Spain
was the only one of the major eurozone economies to see its economy
expand between April and June. It grew by 0.1% compared with the
previous quarter. Figures also released on Thursday showed that prices
across the euro area rose by 4% in July compared to a year earlier. The
European Central Bank increased interest rates in July by 025% to 4.25%
in a bid to combat rising prices. The July figure is the same as June's
inflation rate, but although the rate of increase is not quickening,
economists said rising prices were still a concern. "Although inflation
has been stable at 4.0 % in July, it is still way above target," said
Jörg Radeke from the Centre for Economics and Business Research. "Hence,
the possibility that the European Central Bank is cutting interest rates
in 2008 to support the sickening economy is remote." more... America isn't the only economy
that will be need to be replaced by a global cashless economy if it
is truly global. The question is if this is the time of collapse
just before the introduction. I don't know, but I'm still watching.
Is the U.N. advocating homosexuality and pedophilia?
One News Now
(August 11, 2008) - The United Nations has
granted consultative status to two homosexual activist groups. For at
least a decade now, activist groups have hammered away at the United
Nations for recognition and they have finally won. Matt Barber of Liberty
Counsel finds that unacceptable. "They are associated with pedophile
groups like
NAMBLA
and others, and have advocated lowering the age of consent to levels
that would essentially foster pedophilia," he explains. Barber believes
it is wrong to equate homosexual behavior with the color of one's skin,
or their gender, and give them special status. "For the U.N. to side
with radical homosexual activists, in this case, has only served to
further discredit the U.N., and I think it's problematic in further
damaging their reputation," he contends. Activists, according to Barber,
will be trying to use the United Nations and the International Court to
force their agenda on an international level, including imposing it on
Christians who believe homosexuality is a sin.
EU under
pressure to shed light on expert panels
EU Observer
(August 11, 2008) - A transparency campaign
group has written to seven European commissioners to pressure them
to make good on a promise to reveal the names of the people who sit
on the expert groups that influence EU legislation in key areas.
ALTER-EU, made up of 160 organisations, on Friday (8 August) sent
letters to the commission president, vice-president, and
commissioners in charge of industry, energy, research, health and
environment to ask whether the commission intends to take the
name-publishing step "by the summer" as it promised earlier this
year. It said it is "deeply concerned about the lack of progress so
far on the issue of over-representation," referring to advisory
groups where business lobbyists outnumber NGOs and civil society
groups. The transparency group says that the only way to avoid
"privileged access for certain specific interests" is to establish
consistent membership criteria and called in the letters for an
"open and transparent process" for the selection of such expert
groups. It also asks commission president Jose Manuel Barroso what
he intends to do about those groups where it is already clear that
there is an over-representation of business interests. According to
the group, EU industry commissioner Guenter Verheugen is responsible
for 127 expert groups but only 19 of these include membership
details. As an example, it points to the expert group on
biotechnology which has 20 industry representatives, six academics
and no NGOs. Meanwhile, his research colleague Janez Potocnik
oversees 97 groups of which just 17 have their details listed while
energy commissioner Andris Piebalgs is in charge of 36 groups of
which three contain membership details. For health commissioner
Androulla Vassilou, the tally is 70 closed groups to eight public
groups while environment commissioner Stavros Dimas is said to
preside over 95 closed groups and only three open ones. The
commission promised earlier this year that the process of collecting
and publishing the names of members of the different groups shall be
completed by the summer. It also pointed out that experts from
national governments and agencies made up two-thirds of those in the
panels. more...
Russia Deploys Ships, Expands Georgia Bombing Blitz
Fox News
(August 10, 2008) - Russia battled Georgian
forces on land and sea, reports said late Sunday, despite a Georgian
cease-fire offer and its claim to be withdrawing from South Ossetia, the
separatist Georgian province battered by days of intense fighting.
Russia claimed to have sunk a Georgian boat that was trying to attack
Russian vessels in the Black Sea, and Georgian officials said Russia
sent tanks from South Ossetia into Georgia proper, heading toward a
strategic city before being turned back. Russian planes on Sunday twice
bombed an area near the Georgian capital's airport, officials said. The
violence appeared to show gargantuan Russia's determination to subdue
diminutive, U.S.-backed Georgia, even at the risk of international
reproach. Russia fended off a wave of international calls to observe
Georgia's cease-fire, saying it must first be assured that Georgian
troops have indeed pulled back from South Ossetia. International envoys
were heading in to try to end the conflict before it spreads throughout
the Caucasus, a region plagued by ethnic tensions. But it was unclear
what inducements or pressure the envoys could bring to bear, or to what
extent either side was truly sensitive to world opinion. Georgian
President Mikhail Saakashvili said one of the Russian raids on the
airport area came a half hour before the arrival of the foreign
ministers of France and Finland — in the country to try to mediate.
Georgian Interior Ministry spokesman Temur Yakobashvili said Russian
tanks tried to cross from South Ossetia into the territory of Georgia
proper, but were turned back by Georgian forces. He said the tanks
apparently were trying to approach Gori, but did not fire on the city of
about 50,000 that sits on Georgia's only significant east-west highway.
Russia also sent naval vessels to patrol off Georgia's Black Sea coast,
but denied Sunday that the move was aimed at establishing a blockade.
The ITAR-Tass news agency quoted a Russian Defense Ministry spokesman as
saying that Georgian missile boats twice tried to attack Russian ships,
which fired back and sank one of the Georgian vessels. South Ossetia
broke away from Georgian control in 1992. Russia granted passports to
most of its residents and the region's separatist leaders sought to
absorb the region into Russia. Georgia, whose troops have been trained
by American soldiers, began an offensive to regain control over South
Ossetia overnight Friday, launching heavy rocket and artillery fire and
air strikes that pounded the regional capital Tskhinvali. Georgia says
it was responding to attacks by separatists. In response, Russia
launched massive artillery shelling and air attacks on Georgian troops.
Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin said more than 2,000
people had been killed in South Ossetia since Friday, most of them
Ossetians with Russian passports. The figures could not be independently
confirmed. The scope of Russia's military response has the Bush
administration deeply worried. "We have made it clear to the Russians
that if the disproportionate and dangerous escalation on the Russian
side continues, that this will have a significant long-term impact on
U.S.-Russian relations," U.S. deputy national security adviser Jim
Jeffrey told reporters. The U.S. military began flying 2,000 Georgian
troops home from Iraq after Georgia recalled them, even while calling
for a truce. "Georgia expresses its readiness to immediately start
negotiations with the Russian Federation on a cease-fire and termination
of hostilities," the Georgian Foreign Ministry said in a statement,
adding that it had notified Russia's envoy to Tbilisi. But Russia
insisted Georgian troops were continuing their attacks. Alexander
Darchiev, Russia's charge d'affairs in Washington, said Georgian
soldiers were "not withdrawing but regrouping, including heavy armor and
increased attacks on Tskhinvali." "Mass mobilization is still under
way," he told CNN's "Late Edition." President Bush sought to contain the
conflict in Georgia on Sunday as the White House warned that "Russian
aggression must not go unanswered." Bush, in Beijing for the Olympics,
has pressed for international mediation and reached out Sunday to French
President Nicolas Sarkozy, who heads the European Union. The two agreed
on the need for a cease-fire and a respect for Georgia's integrity, a
White House spokesman said. more...
EU keeps ticking
without Lisbon treaty, report says
EU Observer
(August 8, 2008) - Europe continues to work
without the Lisbon treaty and the demise of the document would not be a
catastrophe for the bloc, an influential think tank has said. In an
assessment of Ireland's referendum rejection of the EU treaty published
on Thursday (7 August), the London-based Centre for European Reform
concludes that "Europe works fairly well in many areas with the current
treaties." It notes that the 27-nation bloc continues to achieve results
and "integrate" using intergovernmental bodies such as the European
Defence Agency and through new laws such as those on liberalising the
energy market in Europe or the Emissions Trading Scheme. But the paper
suggests that the EU would be "much better off" with the Lisbon Treaty -
already ratified by 23 member states - as it would clear up the
"dreadful arrangements" for managing EU foreign policy, currently a
mishmash of personalities and responsibilities. It would also allow
easier decision-making in the area of justice and home affairs and give
more power to national parliaments, writes Charles Grant, the author of
the report and director of CER. His assessment concludes that there are
three possible options ahead, with the treaty needing ratification by
all member states if it is to go into place. Under the third "most poisonous" scenario, Ireland
would hold a second referendum and vote No, leading to "internal
divisions," with countries such as Britain and central European states
likely to block any attempt to kick the country out of the EU. The paper
predicts that whatever eventually happens with the Lisbon Treaty, it is
likely to be the last attempt by the EU to adopt a "big, comprehensive"
treaty. Instead the bloc will probably opt for sectoral treaties in
areas such as energy or migration policy in future. more...
Sept launch for bid to crack secrets of universe
Reuters
(August 7, 2008) - The world's most
powerful particle accelerator, aimed at unlocking secrets of the
universe, will be launched on September 10, the European Organization
for Nuclear Research (CERN) said on Thursday. The Large Hadron Collider
(LHC), housed in an underground tunnel 27 kilometers (17 miles) in
circumference, will recreate conditions just after the Big Bang which
many scientists believe gave birth to the universe. It will seek to
collide two beams of particles at close to the speed of light. "The
first attempt to circulate a beam in the Large Hadron Collider (LHC)
will be made on September 10," the Geneva-based CERN said in a
statement. The LHC will study a new frontier of physics, producing beams
with seven times more energy than any previous machine. But starting it
up is not as simple as flipping a switch. Each of its eight sectors must
be cooled to their operating temperature of minus 271 degrees Celsius
(minus 456 degrees Fahrenheit), colder than outer space. This phase is
reaching a successful conclusion but electrical testing must follow.
"We're finishing a marathon with a sprint," said LHC project leader Lyn
Evans. "It's been a long haul and we're all eager to get the LHC
research program underway." Scientists hope the experiment will help
explain fundamental questions such as how particles acquire mass. They
will also probe the mysterious dark matter of the universe and
investigate why there is more matter than antimatter. Some 10,000
scientists from around the world have worked on the complex 10 billion
Swiss franc ($9.5 billion) apparatus since construction began in 1994, a
spokesman said.
Libya says
Mediterranean Union will divide Africa
EU Observer
(August 5, 2008) - Libya's leader Muammar
Gaddafi has reaffirmed his critical stance towards the Union for the
Mediterranean - the brainchild of French President Nicolas Sarkozy -
saying it will divide the 53-nation African Union. "We have good
relations with European countries, with the European Union, but I do not
accept integration into the Union for the Mediterranean," Colonel
Gaddafi said on Monday (4 July), AFP reports. Libya's head of state -
once isolated by the West - added he did not agree with "cutting up
Africa for hypothetical prospects with Europe" referring to a possible
split between north African countries and the rest of the African Union.
Muammar Gaddafi was the only leader who refused to attend the launch of
the Mediterranean union in Paris in July. Mr Sarkozy's plan brings
together 43 states - the 27-member EU as well as Algeria, Egypt,
Morocco, Tunisia, Jordan, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, Syria,
Turkey, Israel, Albania, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro,
Monaco and Mauritania. The aim is to boost ties between the EU and its
southern neighbours. At the moment, it is focussed on six specific
projects, including the cleaning up of Mediterranean pollution, the
development of maritime and land highways and the setting up of a joint
civil protection programme on prevention and response to disasters. But
Muammar Gaddafi, who came to power in 1969 and has become the Arab
world's longest serving leader, has labeled the participation of African
countries in the Mediterranean project a "violation" of resolutions by
the African Union. In addition, he has accused the EU of wanting to
dominate its southern partners, once under European colonial rule.
Lebanese gov't: Hizbullah can use force to 'liberate' territory
The Jerusalem Post
(August 1, 2008) - In a display of
Hizbullah's extended involvement in conflicts throughout the Middle
East, Coalition Special Forces captured two members of the group during
a raid over the weekend in eastern Baghdad. According to the
Multinational Force Iraq, the raid targeted the home of an individual
suspected of serving as a member of a Hizbullah cell - called "Kata'ib
Hizbullah" or "Hizbullah Brigades" - suspected of making videos of
attacks on coalition forces. The videos are then used to raise funds and
resources for additional attacks against coalition and Iraqi forces.
According to media reports, the Hizbullah Brigades have been active for
over a year in Iraq and like Hizbullah in Lebanon, the group is trained
and financed by Iran, likely via the Hizbullah's Al Kuds force, which
was commanded by its chief operations officer Imad Mughniyeh who was
assassinated in Damascus in February. "The Hizbullah Brigades receive
support from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Command for financing,
weapons, training and guidance," the Multi-National Force in Iraq said
in a statement in response to a Jerusalem Post inquiry. "They have
claimed responsibility for attacks against coalition forces and Iraqi
Security Forces as early as late 2005." On videos that it has posted on
the Internet, the Hizbullah Brigades group uses a logo very similar to
the Lebanese Hizbullah flag, showing a raised arm holding a Kalashnikov
assault rifle, although coalition forces said they were not sure of the
nature of the relationship with the Lebanese Hizbullah. This is not the
first time that Hizbullah operatives have been captured in Iraq. In July
2007, coalition forces apprehended Ali Mussa Daqduq, a senior Hizbullah
leader and explosives expert, in Basra where he was reportedly training
forces and even participated in several deadly attacks against US
troops. Daqduq, a veteran of the Al-Kuds Force, was reportedly in Iraq
to train and evaluate the performance of anti-US Shi'ite militias. Also
Friday, Sheikh Nabil Kaouk, Hizbullah military commander in Southern
Lebanon, told the Daily Telegraph that the group was stronger today than
before the Second Lebanon War and was prepared for conflict with Israel.
"The resistance is now stronger than before and this keeps the option of
war awake," he told the paper. "If we were weak, Israel would not
hesitate to start another war... We are stronger than before and when
Hizbullah is strong, our strength stops Israel from starting a new
war... We don't seek war, but we must be ready." Israel has claimed that
since the war Hizbullah has tripled its missile arsenal and today has
more than 30,000 rockets, some of which are capable of reaching almost
anywhere within Israel and as far south as Dimona. Last week, Defense
Minister Ehud Barak met with United Nations Secretary-General Ban
Ki-Moon and warned him that Security Council Resolution 1701 had
collapsed and that UNIFIL was not effective in curbing Hizbullah's
military build-up. "To our disappointment we are witnessing that over
the past two years the number of missiles in Hizbullah's hands has
doubled and maybe even tripled," Barak told Ban. "The ranges of the
missiles have been extended and this is mainly due to close Syrian
assistance."
Managing Global Security per German Foreign Minister Walter Steinmeier
Constance Cumbey
(July 29, 2008) - This was a telling speech
given to the latest "Managing Global Insecurity" conference. It was
delivered at the Berlin site of the MGI July 14-15 Conference co-held by
the Brookings Institution and the Bertelsmann Foundation. It was given
by German Foreign Minister Walter Steinmeier. As it says, they are now
'singing from the same sheet." Having read and listened so very many
times to Javier Solana's launching speech delivered
March 21, 2007 in Washington, D.C., I cannot help but notice the
deep similarities to the speech given now by one of the constituent
foreign ministries to Javier Solana's European wide one. You may read
Solana's launching speech last year by
clicking here. As a former political speech writer, I wonder who
composed this one? As you can see from the context, they have BIG
PLANS for 2009. Stay tuned!
"Responsible
Sovereignty in an Era of Transnational Threats",
Rede von Bundesaußenminister Steinmeier anlässlich der Konferenz
"Managing Global Insecurity" der Bertelsmann Stiftung, Berlin "Mr. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Mr. Pachauri,
Javier [Solana], Mr. [Strobe] Talbott, Mr Thielen, Mr. Ischinger,
Excellencies, distinguished friends, First of all, I would like to
thank you most warmly for this opportunity to speak to you this
evening. And I would like to extend a special welcome to our guests
from abroad. I am delighted to welcome you to Berlin! This really is
an impressive gathering of foreign and security experts tonight!
Ladies and gentlemen, If we look back only 20 years, nobody could
have predicted what this place, this area would look like today:
This used to be a place of division, the Berlin Wall just a couple
of hundred metres down the road. Now exchanges of free thoughts and
ideas - such as ours tonight - are possible just across the street
from where some of the most important institutions of communist East
Germany used to have their seat: the Central Committee in the
building now occupied by the Federal Foreign Office, the People"s
Chamber and the State Council. There are signs that 20 years from
now the world will have changed dramatically again. And I share with
you, Mr Talbott, and your partners in the Managing Global Insecurity
Project, the strong conviction that today we have an opportunity and
a duty to try to shape this future. I really appreciate the
undertaking led by the Brookings Institution and I am looking
forward to the results and proposals you present. Ladies and
gentlemen, as we all know now, after the fall of the Iron Curtain,
the world did not enter a phase of "capitalist peace". Neither did
it mean the end of history, as some analysts and prophets used to
put it. Instead, from the early nineties to the present day
globalization has been the name of the game, shifting the
traditional patterns of geo-economic and geo-political realities.
The tragic events of 11 September 2001 and the ongoing struggle
against fundamentalism [emphasis added] and
international terrorism in Afghanistan and beyond is a constant
reminder of the threats we still face today. And it seems that the
scope of threats undermining peace and stability is widening.
International terrorism has been joined by a new cluster of
challenges, jolting the very basis of our system of global
governance. Food insecurity, climate change, growing competition for
resources as well as global financial turmoil are undermining global
stability, international law and democratic transition worldwide.
That has rarely been more obvious than in the last few months. And
what these last few months have shown is that our current system of
global governance is not sufficiently prepared to deal with these
new challenges. We are in the midst of a global reorientation, a
collective process of adjustment in reaction to these new
challenges. We need to come up with new concepts to master them.
'Responsible Sovereignty' - as you term it in your project - refers
to the most important part of this new approach: shared
responsibility among the members of the international community,
maximizing the opportunities and minimizing the risks brought about
by the changed international situation. Indeed, we are singing from
the same sheet. I have called in my recent speeches for a Global
Responsibility Partnership in the world’s search for a new global
order... One thing is clear: no country and none of the traditional
alliances - present or future - can shoulder these tremendous tasks
alone. By global we mean truly global. We cannot manage the new
challenges without integrating the emerging powers of Asia, Latin
America and Africa into rules-based global regimes. We need to think
about possible designs for a renewed international framework of
institutions. A framework that can handle both old and new threats,
hard and so-called soft security issues. In all these challenges we
either win together or we fail together. Therefore, we need to come
up with a way to not only link up our capacities to anticipate and
prevent threats but also to identify our joint political interests,
to forge global consensus and to strengthen international
cooperation. Responsibility and Cooperation - these are the key
terms for shaping the 21st century. Ladies and gentlemen, This world
needs a fresh approach to global governance - an approach that is
more holistic, more inclusive, more proactive and more focused on
the real challenges of the 21st century. And, ladies and gentlemen,
the time is ripe to work towards such a new approach: 2009 is the
year of opportunities. A newly elected President in Russia, a new US
President, China after the Olympics: all these changes push open a
window of opportunity to create a legitimate and effective world
order for the 21st century. Let me just make one brief remark
regarding the G8. In the coming year, the G8 plus 5 Heiligendamm
process will be reviewed during Italy"s G8 Presidency. I have said
before that we need to both deepen and broaden the outreach process.
I advocate making the outreach format more inclusive - let’s make it
a G 13! - and, at the same time, strengthening the conclave
character of the G8. more... | EU/UN /
4th Kingdom
|
Solana
| NewWorldOrder |
Barack Obama and the UN’s Drive for Global Governance
Christian Worldview Network
(July
18, 2008) - Senator Barack Obama has introduced a dangerous
bill and it’s on the fast track to Senate passage, probably because
of his high profile position as the expected Democrat presidential
nominee. Obama hasn’t done much legislatively in his freshman Senate
term, but this one is very telling about what we can expect from a
President Obama. The bill is the “Global Poverty Act” (S.2433) and
is not just a compassionate bit of fluff that Obama dreamed up to
help the poor of the world. This bill is directly tied to the United
Nations and serves as little more than a shakedown of American
taxpayers in a massive wealth redistribution scheme. In fact, if
passed, The Global Poverty Act will provide the United Nations with
0.7% of the United States gross national product. Estimates are that
it will add up to at least $845 billion of taxpayer money for
welfare to third world countries, in addition to the $300 billion
Americans spent for the same thing in 2006. The situation is urgent
because the Global Poverty Act has already passed the House of
Representatives by a unanimous voice vote on September 25, 2007. The
senate version has been passed out of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee by unanimous consent and ready for a full Senate vote. Of
course the United States has had an ongoing program of supplying
foreign aid and assistance to the poor for decades. And the U.S.
pays most of the bills at the UN for its herd of programs. So what’s
new about Obama’s bill, and why is it dangerous? Some history that
led up to the Global Poverty Act. In 1999 and 2000 non-governmental
organizations, NGOs held numerous meetings around the world to write
what became known as the Charter for Global Democracy. The document
was prepared to be a blueprint for achieving global governance. In
reality it was a charter for the abolition of individual freedom,
national sovereignty and limited government. The Charter for Global
Democracy outlined its goals in 12 detailed “principles:” Principle One called for the
consolidation of all international agencies under the direct
authority of the UN. Principle Two called for UN regulation
of all transnational corporations and financial institutions,
requiring an “international code of conduct” concerning the
environment and labor standards. Principle Three explored various
schemes to create independent revenue sources for the UN –
meaning UN taxes including fees on all international monetary
transactions, taxes on aircraft flights in the skies, and on
shipping fuels, and licensing of what the UN called the “global
commons,” meaning use of air, water and natural resources. The
Law of the Sea Treaty fits this category. Principle Four would restructure the
UN by eliminating the veto power and permanent member status on
the Security Council. Such a move would almost completely
eliminate U.S. influence and power in the world body. In turn
Principle Four called for the creation of an “Assembly of the
People” which would be populated by hand-picked non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) which are nothing more than political
groups with their own agendas (the UN calls NGOs “civil
society”). Now, the UN says these NGO’s will be the
representatives of the “people” and the Assembly of the People
will become the new power of the UN. Principle Five would authorize a
standing UN army. Principle six would require UN
registration of all arms and the reduction of all national
armies “as part of a multinational global security system” under
the authority of the UN. Principle Seven would require
individual and national compliance with all UN “Human rights”
treaties and declarations. Principle Eight would activate the UN
Criminal Court and make it compulsory for all nations -- now
achieved. Principle Nine called for a new
institution to establish economic and environmental security by
ensuring “Sustainable Development.” Principle Ten would establish an
International Environmental Cort Principle Eleven demanded an
international declaration stating that climate change is an
essential global security interest that requires the creation of
a “high level action team” to allocate carbon emissions based on
equal per-capita rights -- The Kyoto Global Warming Treaty in
action. Principle Twelve demanded the
cancellation of all debt owed by the poorest nations, global
poverty reductions and for the “equitable sharing” of global
resources, as allocated by the UN -- here is where Obama’s
Global Poverty Act comes in. Specifically, the Charter for Global Democracy was
intended to give the UN domain over all of the earth’s land, air and
seas. In addition it would give the UN the power to control all
natural resources, wild life, and energy sources, even radio waves.
Such control would allow the UN to place taxes on everything from
development; to fishing; to air travel; to shipping. Anything that
could be defined as using the earth’s resources would be subject to
UN use-taxes. Coincidentally, all twelve principles came directly
from the UN’s Commission on Global Governance. more...
Sarkozy: no Mideast peace without sharing Jerusalem
Arab News
(June 23, 2008) - French President Nicolas
Sarkozy said an agreement between Palestinians and Israelis is possible,
tomorrow, and that agreement would allow the two peoples to live
side-by-side in peace and security. During their meeting on diplomatic
affairs, Sarkozy stressed that the peace process between Israel and the
Palestinian Authority should progress. "Those who will make peace in the
end will be Israelis and Palestinians," the French president said. At
the start of a three-day visit to Israel, Sarkozy said it is important
for the Palestinians to establish a state of their own. Referring to the
settlements, Sarkozy said that it must be said loudly the decision to
build settlements in East Jerusalem is not good for Israel. "I believe
that the path to peace lies there before us, that the path to peace is
not blocked. I have come to bring my support and that of France and the
European Union, your partners in the negotiations." Meantime, Sarkozy
said according to the The Washington Post today that "there could be no
Mideast peace unless Israel drops its refusal to cede sovereignty over
parts of Jerusalem claimed by the Palestinians." This coincides with a
report of the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) that said
that the total Palestinian refugeed is more than six million. According
to UN organization UNRWA, Palestinian registered refugees totaled to
4.56 million at end of 2007, of whom about 41.7% in Jordan, 9.9% in
Syria and 9.1% in Lebanon. About 1.5 million Palestinians refugee are
estimated to be non-registered refugees.
U.S. companies vulnerable to foreign buyers
Reuters
(July 29, 2008) - With a record volume of international takeovers
of U.S. companies, it almost appears America itself is up for sale.
The weak dollar and slumping stock prices of U.S. companies has
created a window of opportunity for international buyers to snatch
up American icons such as beer brewer Anheuser-Busch Cos Inc and the
landmark Chrysler Building in New York. "The dollar has depreciated
so much that America is on the sale rack," said Sung Won Sohn, a
professor of economics at California State University. "America has
such an appetite for foreign goods -- Chinese imports and oil --
that U.S. dollars have gone overseas. Now, many Americans aren't
happy that foreign companies are buying pieces of America with the
money we gave them in the first place," Sohn said. In the second
quarter, acquisitions of U.S. companies by international buyers
totaled $124.3 billion, marking the highest total for any second
quarter on record and jumping 23 percent over the year-earlier
quarter, according to research firm Dealogic. International
takeovers represented 22 percent of all U.S. merger activity in the
first half of the year, up from 17 percent in the first half of
2007, according to research firm Dealogic. InBev NV's deal to
acquire Anheuser-Busch for $52 billion gave Belgium the distinction
of being the most active foreign buyer of U.S. assets in the first
half of this year, followed by Spain and Canada, Dealogic said. The
Anheuser-Busch deal ranked as the second-biggest cross-border
acquisition of a U.S. company in history, following Vodafone Group
Plc's $60.3 billion acquisition of AirTouch Communications in
1999, according to Thomson Reuters. Other U.S. assets recently
falling into international hands include Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc,
which agreed to be acquired by Israel's Teva Pharmaceutical
Industries Ltd, the world's largest generic drug company, for $7.46
billion; and eye care company Alcon Inc which is being bought by
Switzerland's Novartis AG for about $27.7 billion. Earlier this
month, Swiss drugmaker Roche AG made a bid to acquire the shares of
its U.S. partner Genentech Inc it does not already own for $43.7
billion. Even the Pennsylvania Turnpike awarded long-term leasing
rights to a Spanish-led investor group for $12.8 billion. Although
some investment bankers and analyst pin the spike in cross-border
activity to the weak dollar, others contend that strategy and the
desire to expand globally were the motivators behind many of these
recent corporate deals. "Strategic buyers don't wake up in the
morning and say: 'This currency is cheap. I'm going to go do a
deal.' They do a deal because it's strategic and makes sense," said
Herald Ritch, president and co-chief executive officer of investment
bank Sagent Advisers. "There's no question that, on the margin,
currency levels tend to influence decisions, but strategic deals get
done because they fit a company's strategy," Ritch said. European
companies have been the most active buyers of U.S. assets, with 314
deals so far this year, compared with 117 deals by Asian acquirers,
and 33 by African and Middle Eastern buyers, according to Thomson
Reuters. "Europe and the U.S. dominate deal activity globally, so it
makes sense that deals between those areas would predominate," Ritch
said. Although some investment bankers view the second quarter's
record pace of U.S. takeovers as an anomaly, Sohn said the
13-percent depreciation of the dollar against major currencies over
the past 18 months should fuel more acquisitions. "There are
trillions of dollars overseas that have to be put to work. This is
just the tip of the iceberg," Sohn said. How does Europe become the
international power and authority Bible prophecy says it will
be? Slowly and surely, bit by bit. Sung Won Sohn makes the
statement that "America has such an appetite for foreign goods
-- Chinese imports and oil -- that U.S. dollars have gone
overseas." Have you noticed that you can't buy anything that
isn't made in China today? I certainly haven't had any great
desire to see manufacturing go overseas as it has, but policy
has pushed it there because it's cheaper and this world,
especially the business world, runs on money. America doesn't
have many options when it comes to its desire for Chinese
imports because business and government have created it this
way. Is there an over-arching plan behind it? Given what Bible
prophecy says and where we're headed, it's hard for me to deny
the dots are connected. There's so much more out there relegated
to "conspiracy theory" as well which all points toward the same
conclusions. America is being sold out and this will help prop
Europe up as the center it is prophesied to be.
America is ceding power to Europe and being drained of its
manufacturing ability and strength. Business and law are moving
internationally, globally and what is a possible end to this? A
nation in debt who will be forgiven that debt along with the
rest of the world if they just
take a mark and worship the
man of sin who claims to be God. The technology and
methodology is already present and easily implementable while
the conditions that would call for its implementation are fast
approaching in line with
other signs of the times. Bible prophecy isn't fairy tales,
it's foreknowledge dictated by God for the benefit of those who
trust God's Word and to make us aware and awake as the time
draws near. Keep watching!
Solana: EULEX operational by autumn
New Kosova Report
(July
21, 2008) - European Union’s mission in Kosovo EULEX will be
fully operational within fall, said EU’s foreign policy chief Javier
Solana after the statement by Ban Ki-Moon that allows EULEX’s operation
according to Resolution 1244. Solana said that in Kosovo currently there
are 400 members of EULEX and “until this mission is completely
established, UNMIK will have all the responsibilities.” He added that
EU’s aim is to have the mission completely operational by autumn. Solana
made these statements immediately after the United Nations Secretary
General, Ban Ki-Moon, announced that he had made recommendations for the
start of reconfiguration of the UNMIK mission in Kosovo. Ki-Moon will
present a more detailed quarterly report on Kosovo to the UN Security
Council on 25 July. "The
European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX) is the
largest civilian mission ever launched under the European
Security and Defence Policy. The central aim is to assist and
support the Kosovo authorities in the rule of law area,
specifically in the police, judiciary and customs. The mission
is not in Kosovo to govern or rule. It is a technical mission
which will mentor, monitor and advise whilst retaining a number
of limited executive powers. The ESDP mission will assist the
Kosovo authorities, judicial authorities and law enforcement
agencies in their progress towards sustainability and
accountability. It will further develop and strengthen an
independent and multi-ethnic justice system and a multi-ethnic
police and customs service, ensuring that these institutions are
free from political interference and adhering to internationally
recognised standards and European best practices. The mission,
in full co-operation with the European Commission Assistance
Programmes, will implement its mandate through mentoring,
monitoring and advising, while retaining certain executive
responsibilities."
Javier Solana, EU High Representative for the CFSP, signs agreement on
security of information with the European Space Agency
Council of the European Union
(July 18, 2008)
- Javier SOLANA, EU High Representative for the Common Foreign and
Security Policy (CFSP), signed an agreement today, on behalf of the
European Union, with the European Space Agency (ESA) on arrangements for
exchanging classified information. The agreement, signed with the
Director General of ESA, Mr Jean-Jacques Dordain, marks a further
milestone in EU/ESA relations and will facilitate the work of those
involved in advancing European policies and industries in the space
sector. Background The European Space Agency (ESA) is Europe's
gateway to space. early all of the 17 members of this international
organisation are also members of the EU. Its mission is to shape the
development of Europe's space capability and ensure that investment in
space continues to deliver benefits to the citizens of Europe. ESA's
programmes are designed to find out more about the earth, its immediate
space environment, our solar system and the universe, to develop
satellite-based technologies and services and in so doing to promote
European industries. Although ESA is an independent organisation it
maintains close ties with the EU. For example, the joint EU/ESA European
Space Policy sets out a basic vision and strategy for the space sector
and tackles issues such as security and defence, access to space and
exploration. On the back of this policy ESA is able to provide the tools
needed for Europe's activities in space. Cooperation between the ESA and
the EU is formalised in particular through the ESA/European Commission
Framework Agreement, which establishes a common basis and appropriate
practical arrangements for efficient and mutually beneficial cooperation
between the two. Recent tangible joint initiatives that have come about
as a result of cooperation with ESA include the European global
navigation satellite system, or 'Galileo', and the Global Monitoring for
Environment and Security services, known as the 'GMES'. Under these
joint EU/ESA initiatives there is a pressing need for the EU to be able
to exchange classified information with ESA. While to a limited extent
this was already possible under an administrative arrangement dating
from 2003, last year it was decided that the EU ought to have a
fully-fledged agreement with ESA on the security and exchange of
classified information.
EU Lisbon treaty officially ratified by UK
The Independent
(July 17, 2008)
- Britain has officially ratified the controversial Lisbon Treaty, it
was announced today. The Government confirmed that the final stages of
passing the agreement have been completed. But the future of the deal is
still in doubt as EU leaders consider how to respond to Ireland's
surprise referendum "no" vote last month. Under the UK's ratification
process, both houses of Parliament must pass the treaty. The Queen then
gives Royal Assent, and signs goatskin "instruments of ratification"
along with the Foreign Secretary. These are then sealed, bound in blue
leather, and deposited with the Italian ministry of foreign affairs in
Rome. A spokesman for the Foreign Office said all these stages had now
been completed. "The documents were lodged in Rome yesterday," he said.
Foreign Secretary David Miliband is due to deliver a statement to
Parliament on the matter later. The process had been stalled while a
High Court challenge was considered over the Government's refusal to
hold a referendum on the treaty, but that was dismissed last month.
Under EU rules, all 27 member states must ratify the Treaty before it
comes into effect.
Dinars for Dollars: Arabs Buying Out Collapsing Western Banks
Israel National News
(July 16, 2008) - First it was Citibank.
Now it's Barclay's and New York City's Chrysler Building skyscraper.
Muslim Arabs are buying out collapsing Western banks and businesses and
gaining growing international power, but some Arab investors are worried
their investments may go down the drain with the American economy. The
current financial crisis in the United States has spread to other
countries because of a massive debt that was not backed by enough real
and liquid collateral. Banks and businesses gasping for financial breath
are up for sale at basement prices, but no one is certain if the
basement is the bottom. "The possibility remains that more Arab white
knights will be sought to rescue ailing financial institutions," wrote
Dr. Mohammed Ramady, a former banker and Visiting Associate Professor at
the King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals in the Financial
Adviser magazine. He said he fears that Arab investors will end up
chasing their investments with more money to keep them from going under.
The Abu Dhabi Investment Council of the oil-rich United Arab Emirates
kingdom of Abu Dhabi last November announced it was bailing out the
mammoth Citibank financial institution, formerly headed by Bank of
Israel Governor Prof. Stanley Fischer, with $7.5 billion. Next in line
was Britain's Barclay's Bank, which raised $9 billion from investors in
the oil-rich kingdom of Qatar and in Asian countries. The Abu Dhabi
Investment Council last month forked out approximately $800 million for
a 75 percent stake in New York City's 1,046-foot-tall Chrysler Building,
which was the world's tallest building for a year until the Empire State
Building surpassed it in the 1930's. The purchase of American banks by
foreigners has been blocked in the past by security and political
considerations, but the barriers have come down, wrote Dr. Ramady. "How
long this lasts is only a matter of guesswork, as once again, the
specter of foreign takeovers of 'national' symbols will be hard to
accept," he added. In a more serious vein, The Australian
editor-at-large Paul Kelly wrote earlier this month that the foreign
investments, headed by Arabs, signal a major change in international
power. "The energy, financial and political woes that grip the U.S.
signal a decisive shift in world power, mocking the liberal delusion
that Barack Obama or John McCain can return American prestige and power
to its pre-Bush year 2000 nirvana," he wrote. "There is no such nirvana.
There is instead a new reality: the greatest transfer of income in human
history [and] the rise of a new breed of wealthy autocracies that
cripple U.S. hopes of dominating the global system and demands on the
U.S. to make fresh compromises in a world where power is rapidly being
diversified." more...
Euro soars to $1.60 against U.S. dollar, a new record high
Associated Press
(July 15,
2008) - The European single currency leapt to a record high above
1.60 dollars here on Tuesday as investor fears grew over the state
of the US economy and its financial services sector, dealers said.
In late morning London deals, the euro jumped to 1.6038 dollars,
which beat the previous all-time peak of 1.6019 that was set on
April 22.
43 nations creating Mediterranean union
Associated Press
(July 13, 2008) - French President Nicolas
Sarkozy urged the disparate and conflicted countries around the
Mediterranean Sea on Sunday to make peace as European rivals did in the
20th century, as he launched an unprecedented Union for the
Mediterranean. Yet the summit did not mask all the divisions that
crisscross the region: Syria's President Bashar Assad left the enormous
table before Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert gave his speech to the
more than 40 leaders seated around it, Israeli government officials said
on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. It
was the first time the two men had sat at the same table. "The European
and the Mediterranean dreams are inseparable," Sarkozy told leaders from
more than 40 nations in Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. "We
will succeed together; we will fail together." The union Sarkozy
championed as a pillar of his presidency brought together around one
table for the first time dignitaries such rival nations as Israel and
Syria, Algeria and Morocco, Turkey and Greece. Coping with age-old
enmities involving their peoples and others along the Mediterranean
shores will be a central challenge to the new union encompassing some
800 million people. "We will build peace in the Mediterranean together,
like yesterday we built peace in Europe," Sarkozy said. He insisted the
new body would not be "north against south, not Europe against the rest
... but united." Sarkozy went to special efforts to bring Syria into the
international fold for the summit: Assad met Lebanese President Michel
Suleiman and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, separately, both for the
first time. And he met Sarkozy, after years of chill between their
countries. Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak, co-presiding the summit with
Sarkozy, said: "We are linked by a common destiny." He said the union
has better chances of success than a previous cooperation process
launched in Barcelona in 1995 because the new body focuses on practical
projects parallel to efforts toward Mideast peace. more...
Iran says Solana nuclear talks July 19 in Geneva
AFP
(July 11,
2008) - Iran said on Friday that its top nuclear negotiator and
EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana will hold their next talks on
ending the nuclear standoff on July 19, despite Western concern over the
test-firing of several missiles by Tehran. "They are to continue their
negotiations about the package on Saturday, July 19" in Geneva, said
Ahmad Khadem al-Melleh, spokesman for the secretariat of Iran's supreme
national security council, according to the state-run IRNA agency. World
powers -- Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States
-- last month presented Iran with a package aimed at ending the
five-year-old nuclear crisis, notably offering Tehran technological
incentives in exchange for suspending the sensitive process of uranium
enrichment. "The trip of Dr Jalili to Geneva is taking place after the
world powers welcomed the continuation of the talks on common points in
the two packages that have been proposed," the spokesman added. Iran has
proposed its own package -- a more all-embracing attempt to solve the
problems of the world including the nuclear standoff -- and has made
much of the common ground between the two proposals. The French foreign
ministry has, however, confirmed that Iran does not say in its response
that it is prepared to suspend uranium enrichment, which world powers
say they fear could be used to make a nuclear weapon. Solana's
spokeswoman Cristina Gallach declined to confirm the date, saying "we
are continuing to work on the meeting and we are in the process of
holding discussions" with Iran. But she reaffirmed that a meeting was
still scheduled by the end of this month. more...
U.N. scheme to make Christians criminals
WorldNet Daily
(July 10,
2008) - Dozens of nations dominated by Islam are pressing the
United Nations to adopt an anti-"defamation" plan that would make
Christians criminals under international law, according to a United
States organization that has launched a campaign to defend freedom of
religion worldwide. "Around the world, Christians are being increasingly
targeted, and even persecuted, for their religious beliefs. Now, one of
the largest organizations in the United Nations is pushing to make a bad
situation even worse by promoting anti-Christian bigotry," the
American Center for Law &
Justice said yesterday in announcing its petition drive. The
discrimination is "wrapped in the guise of a U.N. resolution called
'Combating Defamation of Religions,'" the announcement said. "We must
put an immediate end to this most recent, dangerous attack on faith that
attempts to criminalize Christianity." The "anti-defamation" plan has
been submitted to the U.N. repeatedly since about 1999, starting out as
a plan to ban "defamation" of Islam and later changed to refer to
"religions," officials said. It is being pushed by the 57-member
Organization of the Islamic Conference nations, which has adopted the
Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, "which states that all
rights are subject to sharia law, and makes sharia law the only source
of reference for human rights." The
ACLJ petition, which is to be delivered to the United Nations High
Commissioner on Human Rights, already had collected more than 23,000
names in just a brief online existence. The ACLJ's European division,
the European Center for Law & Justice, also has launched its work on the
issue. It submitted arguments last month to the U.N. in opposition to
the proposal to institute sharia-based standards around the globe. "The
position of the ECLJ in regards to the issue of 'defamation of religion'
resolutions, as they have been introduced at the U.N. Human Rights
Council and General Assembly, is that they are in direct violation of
international law concerning the rights to freedom of religion and
expression," the organization's brief said. "The 'defamation of
religion' resolutions establish as the primary focus and concern the
protection of ideas and religions generally, rather than protecting the
rights of individuals to practice their religion, which is the chief
purpose of international religious freedom law." "Furthermore,
'defamation of religion' replaces the existing objective criterion of
limitations on speech where there is an intent to incite hatred or
violence against religious believers with a subjective criterion that
considers whether the religion or its believers feel offended by the
speech," the group continued. Interestingly, in nations following Islam,
the present practice is to use such laws to protect Islam and to attack
religious minorities with penalties up to and including execution, the
brief noted. "What should be most disconcerting to the international
community is that laws based on the concept of 'defamation of religion'
actually help to create a climate of violence," the argument explained.
more... What happens when the world is
worshipping the man of sin foretold in scripture? Remember that most
of the world will be deceived... Revelation 13:4-5, 15
EU Governments Endorse Capability Plan for Future Military Needs, Pledge
Joint Efforts European Defense Agency
(July 8, 2008)
- European Union governments today endorsed a Capability Development
Plan (CDP) defining the future military needs and priorities of European
Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) and agreed to use it to guide future
national defence investment decisions and to seek opportunities to
collaborate so as to address their short-to-longer-term military
requirements coherently. The CDP, developed over the past 18 months by
the European Defence Agency, its 26 participating Member States (pMS),
the EU Military Committee and the EU Council General Secretariat,
contains a significant body of analysis from which conclusions and an
initial tranche of practical proposals for action have been derived. It
was presented to a meeting of the EDA’s Steering Board, made up of
directors of capability planning from the 26 pMS. “The CDP provides the
picture all Member States need to take into account when planning future
capability development agendas and finding the right balance between
ambition and resources. Linking theory to practice is a job for
everyone,” said Javier Solana, Head of the Agency. “It is quite clear,
however, that the CDP is not a supranational military equipment or
capability plan which aims to replace national defence plans and
programmes. It should support, not replace national decision-making,” he
added. The CDP is an attempt to address the well-documented
fragmentation in demand for European military capabilities, caused in
part by a lack of coordinated military requirements and comprehensive
priorities. It builds on the EDA’s Long-Term Vision report, published in
2006. Among its principal conclusions are the importance of intelligence
and information-sharing during operations in complex environments; the
need for flexible and agile responses to unpredictable threats; the
requirement to coordinate military and civilian activities in crisis
management operations; and the challenge of recruiting talented and
well-qualified personnel for the armed forces. more...
Javier Solana: What Kind of Palestine?
Middle East Times
(July 4, 2008) - Israeli and Palestinian
negotiators have now been talking to each other for more than six
months, since the peace process was re-launched at Annapolis in November
2007, with the stated aim of reaching agreement on a Palestinian state
before this year is out. The final status issues of borders, Jerusalem
and refugees are back on the agenda, and the outlines of a two-state
solution are visible. There have recently been some encouraging signals:
Egypt has mediated a truce between Hamas and Israel in Gaza; there are
signs of inter-Palestinian dialogue; and there appears to be movement on
the Israeli-Syrian track. We have to grasp the opportunity for peace.
Comprehensive peace in the Middle East is the strategic goal of the
European Union, and resolving the Israeli-Arab conflict on the basis of
a two-state solution is the key to achieving this. Europe wants, and
needs, to see the creation of an independent, democratic, and viable
Palestinian state living in peace alongside Israel. For this, the
foundations and the structures of a Palestinian state have to be
created, which is where the European Union is playing a distinctive
role. It is leading international efforts to assist the Palestinians
with their state-building efforts under a major strategy adopted by the
EU last year. An important part of this strategy is devoted to
developing security and the rule of law, which are the cornerstones of
the fledgling Palestinian state and the theme of a large international
conference of foreign ministers hosted in Berlin on June 24. The EU is
making a tangible difference on the ground. It is helping the
Palestinians strengthen their civilian security capabilities not just
with words or money but also with people. Our police mission, EUPOL
COPPS, has been active in the Palestinian territories since November
2005, advising and mentoring the Palestinian Authority in its efforts to
build up a civil police force and establish law and order. Canada,
Norway and Switzerland are supporting the mission and we are working in
close coordination with our U.S. partners. We are now about to increase
the mission in size and expand its scope to the broader rule of law
sector, embracing in particular the penal and judiciary systems. A
democratic Palestinian state needs a properly equipped, trained and
disciplined civil police and it needs functioning law courts and
prisons. The EUPOL COPPS is not the only EU security mission in the
Middle East. Our border assistance mission, EUBAM Rafah, established at
the Rafah crossing point between Egypt and Gaza in 2005, is currently on
standby and ready to deploy as soon as circumstances permit and EU
member states form the backbone of the United Nations force in Lebanon
(UNIFIL). Our efforts are bearing fruit and are helping to make a real
difference on the ground. In the past year alone, the EU mission has
trained 800 civil police officers in public order, refurbished police
stations and contributed to the communications network of the civil
police. The Palestinian Authority has begun to deploy forces in major
urban areas such as Nablus and is gradually taking over responsibility
for security in the West Bank. Palestinian and Israeli security forces
are cooperating and this cooperation must continue and increase. These
measures in the area of security and rule of law are part of a wider
effort to improve conditions for the Palestinian people and revive the
economy. For democracy to take root, the people must see that their
lives are improving. Roadblocks must come down, trucks must be able to
transport goods freely, people must be able to travel to work, to school
and to hospitals unhindered, farmers must be able to grow and sell
produce, investors must be encouraged to come with foreign capital, and
businesses must be set up. And, of course, it is not only the
Palestinians who gain from this. Israel's security interests can only
stand to gain from a peaceful, democratic, and ultimately prosperous
Palestinian state. In truth, the entire region will be stabilized if the
Israelis and Palestinians resolve their 60-year-old conflict. The EU is
doing everything it can to help with this.
'UN report ignores Hizbullah violations'
Jerusalem Post
(July 1, 2008) - The quarterly report on
UNSC resolution 1701 submitted by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
Tuesday does not accuse Hizbullah of violating the terms of the
cease-fire, despite Israeli allegations that the Shi'ite militia has
retaken its border positions and continues to amass rockets and other
arms banned under the resolution. "Israel maintains that Hizbullah is
continuing to build its military presence and capacity [not only] north
of the Litani River but also in [the] UNIFIL area of operations, in both
open and urban areas, including private houses," the report states. "To
date, it [UNIFIL] has found no evidence of new military infrastructure
in the area of operations." However, the report goes on to list a number
of incidents, including one involving "armed elements," though it stops
short of mentioning Hizbullah by name. The report states that UNIFIL did
encounter "unauthorized armed personnel" on one occasion during the
night of March 30-31. According to the report, when UNIFIL began
following a suspicious truck towing a trailer near the village of Jubal
al-Butum, "two cars with five armed elements arrived at the scene and
blocked the road." Though "the armed elements" left three minutes later,
the truck managed to escape. In the report, the Secretary General says
he "continues to believe that the disarmament of Hizbullah and other
militias should take place through a Lebanese-led political process."
Deputy Permanent Representative of Israel to the UN Dani Carmon said "We
attach great importance to the implementation of 1701, and these reports
are an important instrument of the international community which could
improve even more the implementation of the resolution." "As long as
this UN report will paint a clear and comprehensive picture of the
situation in South Lebanon where Hizbullah is redeploying and where the
embargo is being violated, the better, because it will be apparent where
implementation should be improved." Pieced together, the incidents
mentioned in the report paint a picture of the situation South of the
Litani River, but the UN Secretary General remains hesitant when it
comes to drawing any conclusions. more...
U.S. and EU near deal on sharing data
International Herald Tribune
(June 28, 2008) - The United States and the
European Union are nearing completion of an agreement that would allow
law enforcement and security agencies to obtain private information -
including credit card transactions, travel histories and Internet
browsing habits - about people on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.
Seeking to improve information-sharing to fight crime and terrorism,
government officials have been meeting since February 2007 to reach a
pact. Europe generally has more-stringent laws restricting how
governments and businesses can collect and transfer personal data, which
have led to high-profile disputes over American demands for such
information. Negotiators have largely agreed on draft language for 12
major issues that are central to a "binding international agreement"
making clear that it is lawful for European governments and companies to
transfer personal information to the United States, and vice-versa,
according to an internal report obtained by The New York Times. American
and European Union officials are trying to head off future
confrontations "by finding common ground on privacy and by agreeing not
to impose conflicting obligations on private companies," said Stewart
Baker, the assistant secretary for policy at the Department of Homeland
Security, who is involved in the talks. "Globalization means that more
and more companies are going to get caught between U.S. and European
law." Paul Schwartz, a law professor at the University of California,
Berkeley, said such a blanket agreement could transform international
privacy law by eliminating a problem that has led to negotiations of
"staggering" complexity between Europe and the United States. "The
reason it's a big deal is that it is going to lower the whole
transaction cost for the U.S. government to get information from
Europe," Schwartz said. "Most of the negotiations will already be
completed. They will just be able to say, 'Look, we provide adequate
protection, so you're required to turn it over."' But the prospect that
the agreement might lower barriers to sending personal information to
the U.S. government has alarmed privacy-rights advocates in Europe. The
Bush administration and the European Commission, the EU's executive
body, have not publicized the talks. But in a little-noticed paragraph
deep in a joint statement following a summit meeting between President
George W. Bush and European leaders in Slovenia this month, the leaders
hailed their progress. Issued June 10, the statement declared that "the
fight against transnational crime and terrorism requires the ability to
share personal data for law enforcement," and it called for the creation
of a "binding international agreement" to facilitate such transfers
while also ensuring that citizens' privacy is "fully" protected. In
addition, businesses that operate on both sides of the Atlantic are
pushing to eliminate the prospect of getting caught between conflicting
legal obligations. "This will require compromise," said Peter Fleischer,
the global privacy counsel for Google. "It will require people to agree
on a framework that balances two conflicting issues - privacy and
security. "But the need to develop that kind of framework is becoming
more important as more data moves onto the Internet and circles across
the global architecture." more...
PLO Sees Bush's Exit as Chance for EU To Take Over
One News Now
(June 24, 2008) - Hind Khoury, French
ambassador of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), said Monday
that next year's exit of American President George W. Bush from office
will allow France and the rest of the European Union (EU) to exercise a
more powerful role in the Middle East. Khoury noted that French
diplomats have expressed they are prepared to "shake hands with
Hizbullah." French President Nicolas Sarkozy met on Monday with
Palestinian Authority (PA) leaders, including Khoury, at the French
consulate in Jerusalem.
Scientist: 'Global warming' scheme to push global tax
WorldNet Daily
(June 19, 2008) - A scientist whose
reservations about "global warming" have been officially endorsed by
tens of thousands of other scientists is accusing the U.N. of using "mob
rule" to generate fear-mongering climate change reports intended to
scare national leaders into submitting to its worldwide taxation
schemes. "Science has always progressed on the basis of observations,
experiments, and thoughts published by individual scientists and
sometimes pairs or small groups of scientific coworkers," Art Robinson,
a research professor of chemistry and co-founder of the Oregon Institute
of Science and Medicine, said in a recent column in Human Events. Except
at the U.N., he said. Robinson's concern over the political manipulation
of science earlier led him to launch the
Petition
Project, a compilation of more than 31,000 scientists – with more
names arriving daily – who have voluntarily signed their names to the
following statement: "There is no convincing scientific evidence that
human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases
is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic
heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's
climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that
increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial
effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the
Earth." He said the scientific process begins with the results
of individuals' work and their distribution of their ideas. "A few of
these published articles are especially valuable; a greater number,
while not remarkable, provide relative mundane studies that add to the
infrastructure of science; many are not useful at all; and some are
completely wrong. As individual scientists read these articles, they use
their own wisdom, knowledge, and judgment to separate new information
that they find valuable from information that they find of no use,"
Robinson said. Eventually, the good, accurate and valuable information
is advanced. "Always, scientific progress is a result of a large number
of individual decisions that trend in a specific direction," he said.
Not so, however, at the United Nations. Especially with the
organization's
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which has generated many
of the claims of catastrophic results of man's use of hydrocarbon fuels,
including submerged coastlines and a deadly, massive expansion of
African deserts. The IPCC website boasts of sharing the 2007 Nobel Peace
Prize with Al Gore Jr. for "efforts to build up and disseminate greater
knowledge about man-made climate change." It also notes its goals are to
eradicate poverty and hunger, achieve universal primary education,
promote gender equality, reduce child mortality, improve mothers'
health, combat HIV/AIDS, ensure environmental sustainability and others.
"The IPCC provides its reports at regular intervals and they immediately
become standard works of reference, widely used by policymakers, experts
and students," the organization itself says. "The primary requirement
for selection is a willingness to participate in the United Nations' new
'process' and the agenda behind it," Robinson said. "These people study
and discuss the current and past research literature concerning climate
and climate prediction. … These emanations are closely observed by a
very select small group of United Nations operatives." At the end of the
meetings, "this small group of observers combines the products of the
meeting into a large important-looking report – carefully editing the
report so that it supports United Nations political objectives,"
Robinson said. "At no time is this report submitted to the 600-plus
'scientists.'" The results then are distributed as "settled science," he
said, "regardless of the fact that the scientists involved do not agree
upon the text. … The elite few who oversaw the meeting and interpreted
its results are special. They are the U.N.'s anointed messengers of the
truth." A spokeswoman for the United Nation's Secretary General Ban
Ki-Moon declined to respond to WND questions about the process,
referring those questions to the IPCC office in Geneva. There a
spokeswoman confirmed for WND the process that has a small number of
specially appointed U.N. operatives write reports following "scientific"
meetings. Also, "science" has become devalued. "And nowhere is it more
abused than in the United Nations, where institutionalized mob rule is
called 'science,'" he said. "In its headlong drive to gain the power to
tax and ration world energy (and thereby control world technology –
sharing taxation authority with other governments in return for their
support) the United Nations has created a 'process,' which it calls
'science,'" he said. In real science, however, "truths are never
determined through such meetings; unsolved scientific questions are
never resolved by such meetings; and scientific articles are never
published unless every putative or listed author has personally approved
every word of the publication," Robinson said. "Scientific truth is
never decided by meetings organized to decide which ideas are true and
which are false. more...
Ireland to hold second referendum
The Australian
(June 23, 2008) -
THE Irish Government is expected to bow to Franco-German pressure and
hold a second referendum to try to rescue the Lisbon treaty that voters
rejected this month. The plan for a possible new vote in Ireland, being
discussed by some ministers in Dublin, will be greeted with outrage by
opponents of the treaty in Britain. Irish ministers say they might be
able to rescue the treaty if they can secure concessions from Europe to
placate voters on a list of issues. "A yes vote can be achieved if the
Irish people are offered guarantees on issues like defence and
taxation," said one senior Irish official. "The no campaign will be
picked off one by one. Everyone has a price." The likely time for a new
referendum is next spring so that the treaty can come into force before
the June 2009 European election campaign for the Brussels parliament.
The date is favoured by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German
Chancellor Angela Merkel. If the Irish vote no again, British Prime
Minister Gordon Brown would have to choose between siding with Ireland
to stop its citizens being turned into second-class Europeans or siding
with France and Germany to push ahead with further EU integration.
Concessions likely to be sought by Ireland include guarantees to protect
its neutrality in the event of European armed forces being created, the
reinstatement of its right to a European commissioner, and the right to
set its own abortion laws and corporate tax rates. Mr Sarkozy is
determined to "save" the EU as France takes over the rotating presidency
on July 1. "It is not written down in the summit conclusions, but
everyone agreed that we need to get out of this before next year's
European elections," Mr Sarkozy said last week. He said European leaders
had already mandated France to ensure the EU "does not grind to a halt".
Both Mr Sarkozy and Ms Merkel have exerted subtle pressure on Ireland
and its potential allies by threatening the end of the EU's enlargement
east if theLisbon treaty does not come into force. The French President
will visit Ireland on July 11 for talks with Brian Cowen, the Taoiseach,
or Prime Minister. "We will try to make this 'no' an opportunity," he
said, pledging to use "English pragmatism" to find a solution. The Irish
Government has to decide its next move before the European Council
meeting on October 15. more...
RBS issues global stock and credit crash alert
Telegraph UK
(June 19, 2008) -
The Royal Bank of Scotland has advised clients to brace for a
full-fledged crash in global stock and credit markets over the next
three months as inflation paralyses the major central banks. "A very
nasty period is soon to be upon us - be prepared," said Bob Janjuah, the
bank's credit strategist. A report by the bank's research team warns
that the S&P 500 index of Wall Street equities is likely to fall by more
than 300 points to around 1050 by September as "all the chickens come
home to roost" from the excesses of the global boom, with contagion
spreading across Europe and emerging markets. Such a slide on world
bourses would amount to one of the worst bear markets over the last
century. RBS said the iTraxx index of high-grade corporate bonds could
soar to 130/150 while the "Crossover" index of lower grade corporate
bonds could reach 650/700 in a renewed bout of panic on the debt
markets. "I do not think I can be much blunter. If you have to be in
credit, focus on quality, short durations, non-cyclical defensive names.
"Cash is the key safe haven. This is about not losing your money, and
not losing your job," said Mr Janjuah, who became a City star after his
grim warnings last year about the credit crisis proved all too accurate.
RBS expects Wall Street to rally a little further into early July before
short-lived momentum from America's fiscal boost begins to fizzle out,
and the delayed effects of the oil spike inflict their damage. "Globalisation
was always going to risk putting G7 bankers into a dangerous corner at
some point. We have got to that point," he said. US Federal Reserve and
the European Central Bank both face a Hobson's choice as workers start
to lose their jobs in earnest and lenders cut off credit. The
authorities cannot respond with easy money because oil and food costs
continue to push headline inflation to levels that are unsettling the
markets. "The ugly spoiler is that we may need to see much lower global
growth in order to get lower inflation," he said. more...
EU Presses Ahead With Treaty Ratification Despite Irish "No"
Deutsche Welle
(June 18, 2008) -
Ahead of a summit in Brussels, the European Union called Wednesday
for the ratification process of the Lisbon Treaty to continue despite
its crushing rejection by Irish voters last week. A planned two-day
European Union summit which opens on Thursday, June 19, meant to focus
on weighty topics such as rising oil prices is likely to be overshadowed
by the institutional crisis plaguing the bloc after Irish voters last
week resoundingly rejected the Lisbon treaty. Ireland plunged the
European Union into chaos last week when 53 percent of voters rejected
the treaty meant to streamline the bloc's cumbersome institutions and to
make it more efficient after a recent eastward expansion. Slovenian
Prime Minister Janez Jansa, who will act as chair for the last time as
president of the European Union, insists that "not a single item has
been dropped from the official agenda because of what happened in
Ireland." "Leaders will want to show that they are paying attention to
what matters to consumers, which is oil and food prices," one diplomat
told news agency DPA. Yet despite their best intentions, EU leaders will
inevitably focus on the institutional chaos sparked by Ireland's
rejection of the Lisbon Treaty. European Commission President Jose
Manuel Barroso called on the EU heads of state and government to take
time at Thursday and Friday's summit in Brussels to find a consensus
together with Ireland. "We must work very closely with the Irish
government to help solve this problem," Barroso told members of the
European Parliament in Strasbourg on Wednesday after being harangued by
a group of deputies wearing green sweat shirts emblazoned: "Respect the
Irish Vote." But the Social Democrats warned of a "crisis of trust" in
EU institutions. It was worrying that all the major Irish parties had
called for a yes vote and the electorate had still voted no, Social
Democrat faction leader Martin Schulz said. According to leaked results
of an EU survey published on Tuesday by the Irish Independent, many of
the people who voted no in the referendum did so either because they did
not understand the treaty, or because they had other concerns, such as
immigration and unemployment. Moreover, 70 percent of those who rejected
the treaty thought it could be easily renegotiated. One possible
solution is for Ireland to be granted a number of concessions before
being asked to vote again, either in the autumn or early next year. In
the meantime, leaders have called for the remaining eight national
parliaments to ratify the treaty and have avoided talking about a
"two-speed Europe," whereby some member states would go ahead with
further integration, leaving the sceptics behind. "We want to continue
with a one-speed Europe," Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Jansa said on
Tuesday. more...
Eye on the EU: The Trouble With Iron and Clay
Fulfilled Prophecy
(June 14, 2008) -
The Lisbon Treaty was rejected Thursday by Irish
voters. What does their vote mean for the EU and for the
WEU Ten? Guest columnist Mishael Meir — an
attorney with interest in EU legal development — answers this
question. Ireland’s “No” vote on the Lisbon Treaty tells us just how
brittle the EU structure really is. The existing EU treaties gave
rise to a power-thirsty oligarchic government that overlays 27
sovereign democracies. It’s quite a brittle blend of iron and clay,
an iron fist attempting to rule over the pliable clay of democracy.
Having bullied the vote on the Lisbon Treaty out of citizens’ hands
from all but one democracy, the EU heads of state concocted a bait
and switch: get Ireland to say yes by hiding their plans for
expansion of the EU military and security mechanisms until after the
Irish had voted. See
here,
here and
here. Up until the vote results came in early Friday morning, EU
leaders had been huddled behind closed doors, divvying up the power
they hoped would soon be handed over by the member states under the
Lisbon Treaty. As reality sets in and finger pointing begins, the EU
leaders may again pressure the Irish to reconsider and hold a second
referendum, just like they did in 2001 when they agreed to insert
stronger provisions to preserve Ireland’s neutrality as incentive
for the Irish to approve the Nice Treaty on their second vote. More
immediately, the EU will press its member states to continue with
the remaining ratifications through 2008. Without these outcomes,
the EU won’t be able to assess how much work is needed to fashion
yet another means to what they call “institutional efficiency.” See
here. But more on that later. What could deepen this crisis even
further is that the EU could see more “No” votes in coming months.
Thus far, 18 state parliaments have voted “Yes,” Ireland’s citizens
have voted “No,” and eight parliamentary votes remain. Citizens in
the UK and the Netherlands will bring increasing pressure on their
governments to allow them to vote instead of their parliaments. See
here and
here.
Without getting the Irish on board and collecting the remaining
ratifications, it will be nearly impossible for the EU to enact the
failed constitution/Lisbon Treaty under yet another treaty or by
legislation. See
here.
That’s because for EU power to have legitimacy, it has to have at
least the semblance of democratic consent. See
here. It
doesn’t look like it is going to get it. Meanwhile, the
WEU Ten Is the Only Alliance Standing.
more...
Ireland's no vote: Europe is not going away
Times Online
(June 14, 2008) - It took hundreds of
pages of the Federalist papers, a few dozen men locked for weeks in
a sealed room in Philadelphia and a bloody civil war for the US
constitution to be accepted. So the little local difficulties in
France, the Netherlands and now Ireland must be seen in a broader
perspective. Anti-Europeans are lacing their champagne with Guinness
as they celebrate the “no” vote and proclaim with W.B. Yeats “all
changed, changed utterly”. Yet the EU, its Commission, existing
treaties and directives will still be in place tomorrow. Europe has
been here before and will be again. Ireland's “no” campaigners
accused the wordy Lisbon treaty of introducing abortion and high
taxes, and abolishing peat-cutting, union rights and Irish
neutrality. Then Alistair Darling gave a speech saying that
Ireland's beloved Common Agricultural Policy should be pruned and
Peter Mandelson promised to reduce agricultural protectionism to
help the Doha trade talks. The chance to kick British bigwigs and
their own former prime minister, now helping the authorities with
their inquires, was too tempting. As the money men, the Socialist
Workers' Party, the Unite union and Sinn Fein enjoy their weekend of
joy, Ireland and the rest of Europe will wake up on Monday with a
headache but not much else. Not a single Eurocrat will lose his job.
The bloated 27-strong Commission may even breathe a sigh of relief
as a little-noticed clause in the treaty cut its size. The loss of a
guaranteed EU Commission seat for Ireland was one argument used by
the “no” campaign to defeat the treaty - the first time that
Eurosceptics have sprung to the defence of the Brussels bureaucracy
instead of wanting it slimmed down. The big losers are Turkey and
Croatia. British Tory Eurosceptics hypocritically proclaim their
support for Turkish accession, but know that demanding referendums
on future treaties means an end to enlargement. No EU treaty can
come into force until all signatory nations ratify it. But Ireland
represents 1 per cent of the EU's total population and some
old-fashioned democrats may feel that 1 per cent does not outweigh
the rest of Europe's nations which are saying “yes” to the treaty.
But the rules are clear. Had the Irish voted “yes” and the British
Parliament voted “no”, it is unlikely that Open Europe and Stuart
Wheeler would describe the Irish popular vote as superior to one by
Britain's sovereign parliament. But amid the clamour from anti-EU
campaigners in Britain and other nations to ignore sovereign
parliamentary decisions, some way forward will have to be found. So
what now? First, the Irish Government must tell its 26 EU partners
what happened and why. Secondly, other European nations must stay
calm, despite the screeching of the “no” camp for instant
repudiation of the treaty. Many countries have voted not once but
twice for a new EU rule book. They will be sore that the French and
the Dutch, and now the Irish, have blocked new rules deemed
necessary to make Europe work better. more...
It will be
interesting to see how this plays into the development of Europe.
With Turkey also losing even more the opportunity to join the EU,
where might they turn to ally themselves if Europe rejects them?
Nicolas Sarkozy plans to bypass Irish no vote
Telegraph
UK
(June 13, 2008) - Nicolas Sarkozy, the
French President, is working with European Union officials and diplomats
to plan a special "legal arrangement" to bypass Ireland's referendum
rejection. Mr Sarkozy takes over the EU's rotating presidency in July
and will be tasked with resurrecting, for a second time, Lisbon Treaty
proposals first contained in the European Constitution rejected by
French and Dutch voters three years ago. Diplomats and officials have no
intention of letting the Irish no vote sink a blueprint to boost the
EU's powers on the international stage and to create a President of
Europe. Gordon Brown has already phoned Paris to promise Mr Sarkozy that
Britain will ignore Ireland to continue parliamentary ratification of
the EU Treaty.
Jean-Pierre Jouyet, the French Europe Minister, has hinted that
Paris already has a legal "fix", such as plans revealed in The Daily
Telegraph on Wednesday, to keep the EU Treaty alive. "The most important
thing is that the ratification process must continue in the other
countries and then we shall see with the Irish what type of legal
arrangement could be found," he said. "We must remain within the
framework of the Lisbon treaty." Eight countries are still engaged in
parliamentary ratification of the Treaty but are expected to have
finished, without any upsets by the autumn. Plans to find a "mechanism"
keeping Ireland within the EU but temporarily outside the Lisbon Treaty
will then be tabled at an October or December meeting of Europe's
leaders. "Ireland must not stop the process of getting the Treaty
through. Then we can take stock," said a diplomat close to negotiations.
Mr Brown will join Mr Sarkozy and other EU leaders at a Brussels summit
next Thursday to vow that it is business as usual on pushing the Treaty
through. There are advanced plans in Brussels for a "bridging mechanism"
to allow Ireland to be removed from the list of signatories to the
Lisbon Treaty after the EU's 26 other member states have ratified it.'
Ireland will continue to remain in the euro and be covered by existing
Treaties but will be left out of the creation of an EU president and
foreign minister, which would proceed as planned. more...
Lisbon No vote: What happens next?
RTE News
(June 13, 2008) - With Ireland's
rejection of the Lisbon Treaty, politicians and pundits in Ireland and
across Europe are talking about what will happen next. Government
leaders have described the situation post-vote as 'uncharted territory'.
Taoiseach Brian Cowen said he did not have an answer to what happens
next, but would have to go to next week's European summit to see if
there is a consensus on the way forward.
Mr Cowen appeared to rule out a second referendum during the
campaign, but speaking to RTÉ's Bryan Dobson this evening he said that
at this point he could not rule anything 'out or in, up or down'. The
fact that Ireland has already been made to vote again once after it
rejected the Nice treaty in 2001 makes the idea improbable, but not
impossible. Minister John Gormley said this treaty was Plan B and he
does not know what Plan C is. Minister Gormley said it would be
problematic to go back to the people because he does not know what could
be added. He said that Ireland cannot gain any more concessions. He said
that under Nice each country will still lose a commissioner. In the
short term, the Irish vote means the new positions of a permanent
president of the European Council of EU leaders and a stronger foreign
policy chief with a real diplomatic service will be delayed. The EU will
be weakened internationally, notably in dealings with difficult powers
such as Russia and Iran, by having to limp on with dysfunctional foreign
policy and defence institutions, and by the sheer loss of face,
diplomats said. Pending legislation to fight climate change, promote
energy efficiency and open the EU internal energy market to more
competition should not be delayed by the Irish vote, they said. It
remains unclear exactly what course the EU and Ireland will follow, but
the ratification process in other countries looks set to continue. The
ratification of the Lisbon Treaty 'must continue' in other member states
despite Ireland's rejection in a referendum, European Commission chief
Jose Manuel Barroso has stressed. 'The ratification process is made up
of 27 national processes, 18 member states have already approved the
treaty, and the European Commission believes that the remaining
ratifications should continue to take their course,' Mr Barroso told
journalists. France's European affairs minister Jean-Pierre Jouyet said
the EU could negotiate a 'legal arrangement' with Ireland to avert a
crisis. But he agreed, along with other European leaders who have made
statements, that 'the most important thing is that the ratification
process must continue in the other countries.' 'Then we shall see with
the Irish what type of legal arrangement could be found,' the French
minister said. The Netherlands, which rejected the EU constitution three
years ago, will continue ratifying the Lisbon treaty despite its
apparent rejection by Ireland, Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende said.
The Head of the Socialist Grouping in the European Parliament has said
he is very worried about the information coming from Ireland. Speaking
in Brussels, German MEP Martin Schulz said that if there was a No vote
in Ireland it would be one of the biggest problems in the EU for a long
time. He said that it is now up to the Irish Government to explain to
Europe how we should proceed. Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek
warned that the Irish result would lead to 'political complications'.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said even with a No vote on the Lisbon
Treaty, the EU would look for ways to bring the treaty into effect. He
said the referendum in Ireland won't disqualify the treaty. Antonio
Missiroli of the European Policy Centre think tank said the vote
triggered a European political crisis that required strong leadership in
Ireland, in Brussels and key member states.
Fate of Lisbon Treaty rests on Irish referendum
Telegraph UK
(June 13, 2008) - The fate of Europe
lay in the hands of the Irish electorate after they were given the
opportunity of a vote denied to the British people. The outcome of
the referendum, which will see Ireland's 2.8 million registered
voters determine the future of the EU's 495 million citizens, was
still too close to call when the polls closed on Thursday night. A
low turnout threatened to see the major European Union (EU) reform
defeated. While the Yes campaign took comfort in the fact voting
levels increased from the earlier low of 20 per cent, initial
indications estimated a turnout of 40 per cent. Academics who have
studied earlier Irish polls predicted a 45 per cent turnout was the
minimum required to deliver a Yes vote, but while in Dublin there
were signs of levels reaching the 40-45 per cent, outside the
capital, estimates were often lower. A vigorous "no" campaign led by
Declan Ganley, the multimillionaire leader of the Libertas group and
a son of Irish emigrants, had seen the rival camps draw level in
opinion polls. Ireland's main political parties urged their
supporters to back the treaty and the formidable political machine
of the ruling Fianna Fail party rallied supporters. The contest
even saw a Papal intervention, with Pope Benedict XVI appearing to
encourage Catholic Ireland to vote yes. In St Peter's Square,
the Pontiff paid tribute to St Columbanus, a monk from Co Meath who
led a mission into Europe in AD500. "With his spiritual strength,
with his faith, with his love of God and neighbour, he became one
of the Fathers of Europe, showing us today the way to those roots
from which our continent may be reborn," the Pope said. A no
vote could delay or doom the painstakingly negotiated pact, which
must be ratified by all 27 states. Implementation would see the
number of EU commissioners reduced from 27 to 18 and require
foreign, defence and security decisions to be taken unanimously.
We can reduce risk in the financial system
Financial Times
(June 8, 2008) - Since last summer,
we have lived through a severe and complex financial crisis. Why was the
financial system so fragile? What can be done to make the system more
resilient in the future? The world experienced a financial boom. The
boom fed demand for risk. Products were created to meet that demand,
including risky, complicated mortgages. Many assets were financed with
significant leverage and liquidity risk and many of the world’s largest
financial institutions got themselves too exposed to the risk of a
global downturn. The amount of long-term illiquid assets financed with
short-term liabilities made the system vulnerable to a classic type of
run. As concern about risk increased, investors pulled back, triggering
a self-reinforcing cycle of forced liquidation of assets, higher margin
requirements, increased volatility. What should be done to strengthen
the system in the future? First, when we get through this crisis we have
to increase the shock absorbers held in normal times against bad
macroeconomic and financial outcomes. This will require more exacting
expectations on capital, liquidity and risk management for the largest
institutions that play a central role in intermediation and market
functioning. They should be set high enough to offset the benefits that
come from access to central bank liquidity, but not so high that they
succeed only in pushing more capital to the unregulated part of the
financial system. Second, we have to improve the capacity of the
financial infrastructure to withstand default by a big institution. This
will require taking some of the risk out of secured funding markets,
increasing resources held against default in the centralised clearing
house, and encouraging more standardisation, automation and central
clearing in the derivatives markets. Third, the regulatory framework
cannot be indifferent to the scale of leverage and risk outside the
supervised institutions. I do not believe it would be desirable or
feasible to extend capital requirements to leveraged institutiions such
as hedge funds. But supervision has to ensure that counterparty credit
risk management in the supervised institutions limits the risk of a rise
in overall leverage outside the regulated institutions that could
threaten the stability of the financial system. And regulatory policy
has to induce higher levels of margin and collateral in normal times
against derivatives and secured borrowing to cover better the risk of
market illiquidity. Fourth, we need to streamline and simplify the US
regulatory framework. Our system has evolved into a confusing mix of
diffused accountability, regulatory competition and a complex web of
rules that create perverse incentives and leave huge opportunities for
arbitrage and evasion. The blueprint by Hank Paulson, Treasury
secretary, outlines a sweeping consolidation and realignment of
responsibilities. The institutions that play a central role in money
and funding markets – including the main globally active banks and
investment banks – need to operate under a unified framework that
provides a stronger form of consolidated supervision, with appropriate
requirements for capital and liquidity. To complement this, we
need to put in place a stronger framework of oversight authority over
the critical parts of the payments system – not just the established
payments, clearing and settlements systems, but the infrastructure that
underpins the decentralised over-the-counter markets. Because of its
primary responsibility for the stability of the overall financial
system, the Federal Reserve should play a central role in such a
framework, working closely with supervisors in the US and in other
countries. At present the Fed has broad responsibility for financial
stability not matched by direct authority and the consequences of the
actions we have taken in this crisis make it more important that we
close that gap. The big central banks should put in place a standing
network of currency swaps, collateral policies and account arrangements
that would make it easier to mobilise liquidity across borders quickly
in a crisis. As we reshape the incentives and constraints for
risk-taking in the financial system, we have to recognise that
regulation has the potential to make things worse. Regulation can
distort incentives in ways that may make the system less safe. One of
the strengths of our system is the speed with which we adapt to
challenge. It is important that we move quickly to adapt the regulatory
system to address the vulnerabilities exposed by this financial crisis.
We are beginning the process of building the necessary consensus here
and with the other main financial centres. more...
EU foreign policy expected to enter 'new era' EU Observer (April 6, 2008) - The European Parliament is seeking to bolster its role in the bloc's common foreign and security policy (CFSP), with senior MEPs saying it is time for Europe to become a "player and not just a payer" on the world stage. Polish centre-right MEP and head of the foreign affairs committee, Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, says that EU foreign is moving "from one era to another" with the new Lisbon Treaty, due to kick in next year. The proposed new EU foreign minister and diplomatic service as well as the possibility for a group of member states to move ahead in defence cooperation mean foreign policy is "one of the most innovative parts of the treaty." The fact that Javier Solana, the EU's foreign policy chief, will for the first time be present at the MEPs' annual debate on CFSP on Wednesday (4 June) is in itself a "turning point," said the Pole at a briefing on Tuesday. Euro-deputies will today debate a report that sets out principles for the EU's foreign policy - such as respect for human rights - calls for certain issues to be prioritised and says that the CFSP budget from now until 2013 is "insufficient." "Either we have to beef up foreign policy financially, or we have to rethink whether we really want to be a global player," said Mr Saryusz-Wolski, who next week will travel to Paris to discuss the issue with the incoming French EU presidency. "We ask why is nothing ready, prepared for the events that will happen if the treaty [comes into force], and we haven't had an answer," he said. "We are asking this question also: do you have any hidden reserves? What's your view? How to finance the new set up? No answer." Democratic oversight The report also calls for parliament to be given greater democratic oversight over the area, which to date has remained firmly the domain of member states. It suggests that the foreign minister "regularly" appear before MEPs and that the parliament be "fully consulted" on who the foreign minister should be, as well as what the diplomatic service should look like. Deputies are also urging the future EU foreign minister to inform the parliament before any "common actions" are taken. "If we start sending soldiers into danger, it is up to the parliament to give its blessing," says Mr Saryusz-Wolski. The report also takes a more long-term view of the future of common foreign and security policy, with the head of the foreign affairs committee urging the bloc to stop acting like a "fire brigade" rushing to put out emergencies here and there and to think more of the "long-term strategic interests of the Union…20–30 years ahead." EU army Mr Saryusz-Wolski, who believes the union will
gradually develop its own army, says it is no longer enough that the
bloc exercises its traditional role as a soft power. "Too often we spend
money without any conditions being attached. I am against Europe being a
payer and not a player," he said. But he admits there is a "fear" in
the parliament that the foreign minister and the new permanent president
of the European Council may add to the trill of voices of on the EU
stage all claiming to speak for Europe and may not turn Europe into a
player. The potential for overlap between the two posts – starting
in January - and for rivalry with the European Commission president is
high. Debates on the posts are expected to start in earnest in autumn
and be wrapped up by December. In time-honoured EU fashion, balancing
who wins the posts will have to involve the consideration of a series of
factors, including nationality, whether a candidate comes from an old or
new member state or a small or big member state, and the person's
political hue.
European HQ heads Sarkozy plan for greater military integration
Guardian UK
(June
7,
2008) - France has proposed a battery of measures aimed at
boosting European military integration - including the EU's first
permanent operational headquarters in Brussels for planning military
missions abroad - threatening a bruising battle with the British
government. The proposals, circulated to European governments in a
five-page document detailing Paris's security policy priorities, include
common EU funding of military operations, a European fleet of military
transport aircraft, European military satellites, a European defence
college, and the development of exchange programmes for officers among
EU states. Since 2004, the British have resisted the headquarters idea,
seeing it as a French ploy to undermine the Nato alliance and boost
common European defence by establishing a European rival to Nato's Shape
planning headquarters at Mons in Belgium. The prime minister's spokesman
said yesterday the British government is committed to Nato remaining the
cornerstone of European defence, but also supports permanent structured
cooperation on defence within the EU so long as it does not duplicate
the work of Nato, or remove the UK veto. The two governments are already
negotiating quietly over President Nicolas Sarkozy's defence proposals,
sources said, adding that Washington is privately pressing the Brown
government to reach a deal with the French. In a speech to Greece's
parliament, Sarkozy said the EU must be able to defend itself, but he
said: "It is not a case, nor will it ever be a case of competing with
Nato. We need both. A Nato and European defence that oppose each other
makes no sense." Details of the French proposals, obtained by the
Guardian, confirm that Sarkozy is determined to use his six-month EU
presidency, starting in three weeks, to drive forward his military
agenda for Europe. The French have sought to keep their proposals
private for the moment so as not to derail ratification of the EU
treaty. Ireland is holding its referendum on the Lisbon treaty next week
and British peers are due to vote on whether to demand a similar
referendum next Wednesday. The British government insisted the document
was a set of preliminary proposals for discussion with the British and
Germans, and did not represent French government policy. Most
sensitively, Paris is insisting on the new Brussels headquarters
coming under the authority of Europe's foreign policy supremo, a
post whose powers are considerably boosted under the EU's reform treaty
and which is currently held by Javier Solana of Spain.
Ultimately, the Brussels headquarters would plan and control EU missions
abroad. "Solana thinks we need a more permanent structure in Brussels.
There's no doubt about that. The big problem is the Brits," said an EU
foreign policy official. more...
'Undemocratic' EU needs to be tamed
Gulf Daily News
(June
6,
2008) - The famous 40th anniversary of the May 8, 1968
storming of the Parisian establishment by the revolutionary students
came and went like a damp squib. No Daniel Cohn Bendick here. But, in
1968 real issues of freedom were being addressed across Europe. Now it
is more sulky objections to Sarkozy's proposal that the students and
public sector work a little harder. Hardly a moral imperative to protest
in favour of doing nothing. The old joke rings true; 'How many people
work in the EU?' 'Oh about 30 per cent says the businessman, the rest
are paid by the state'. So they are too feather-bedded to do a "68". The
lack of serious protest in the face of increasing undemocratic,
bureaucratic controls is strange, As Bill Bryson said 'It is interesting
for an American to see the richest countries in Europe enthusiastically
ceding their sovereignty to a body that appears to be out of control and
answerable to no-one.' And so despite votes by the French and Dutch the
amended, but essentially unchanged European constitutional treaty is
pushed through by the political and bureaucratic classes. The last
chance is down to Ireland, as a referendum cannot be avoided under their
constitution. So come on you Irish, show some rebel spirit and save
Europe from the new commissarat. May 8, of course, is also officially
Victory in Europe Day. Every village had its parade with flags and
medals to the War Memorials, with a speech by the mayor followed by
aperitifs in the village hall. In Britain, who with its Empire, did most
of the fighting, it passed almost unnoticed. A poignant comment on the
vibrancy of the two cultures. So France claims the victory for when the
Allies liberated them. Good for them. France has shown clever leadership
with its unwavering strategy to shape Europe to its interest while
Britain has sulked in the corner to its detriment. As Sarkozy made clear
when he and Merkel removed their support from Blair's candidacy to be
Europe's first president, because Britain is not in the Euro, nor
Schengen and invaded Iraq, there are now two classes of European
members. Those committed to common policies and integration and those
not. Britain needs to face this reality and either move to associate
status, like Norway regaining sovereignty but retaining trade access or
embrace fully the EU. And influence its policies. This is a major
opportunity for the UK Conservative Party, but on my recent visit no-one
seemed interested in Europe at all. more... Links Between Daniel 9:27, the 70th Week and the ENP Natural News (June 5, 2008) - I want to thank Ted Montgomery for allowing me to publish this excellent article. Like him I also do agree that the warning must get out at all cost. This article can be downloaded as an easy to print Word document HERE. And for those of you who wonder; my views is 100% the same as Ted’s. Here’s ted:
| Israel | EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | Temple Mount |
France readies for 'heaviest Presidency in EU history'
EurActiv
(June 2,
2008) - With climate and energy negotiations at the top of
France's priorities and a reshuffle of the European institutions in
sight for 2009, the French Presidency promises to be "the heaviest in EU
history," diplomats say. On 1 July 2008, France takes over the EU's
six-month rotating presidency from Slovenia with an exceptionally busy
agenda. According to a French diplomat in Brussels, "this presidency is
the heaviest one of all the history of the European Union in terms of
workload". This, he explained, is because the EU is getting more
cumbersome: there are more countries and commissioners than ever before
and the Parliament has gained more powers. But it is also because
additional factors have accumulated. "For the first time, you have this
coincidence of a heavier Union but there is also the end of the
political mandate of the Commission and Parliament as well as the end of
the [ratification process of] the Lisbon Treaty. You never had all these
things together." A series of sensitive dossiers have also piled up,
all of which have to be closed by the end of the year. The energy
and climate change package, tabled by the European Commission in
January, is the first among them. The package includes a proposed
revision of the EU's CO2 trading scheme and a new renewable energy
directive, two dossiers which involve tough negotiations on how to share
the burden of commitments between each EU member state. "Energy and
climate change is enough to feed a presidency," the diplomat pointed
out. But he added that "there are circumstances which mean the agenda is
heavier for political reasons because some things have been delayed."
This includes for instance a debate on the future of the Common
Agricultural Policy, which the French are keen to help shape under their
Presidency. The outcome of the Irish referendum on 12 June will
undoubtedly have a considerable impact on the Presidency's schedule.
Bernard Kouchner, the French foreign minister, spoke about the issue at
the European Policy Centre in Brussels on 26 May. "If the process
continues without incident as it has so far today - and our sights are
first turning to Ireland - we will have at heart to finish the
preparatory work that started under the Slovenian presidency," he said.
But what will happen if the Irish reject the treaty? "There is no Plan
B", Kouchner answered, echoing the European Commission's official line.
In practice, though, a solution will need to be found if the treaty is
rejected and EU leaders will have plenty of time to discuss this during
a summit on 19-20 June, just days before the start of the French
Presidency. And provided all goes well and Ireland ratifies, there will
still be a lot to do as the pressure then will fall on preparations for
the Treaty's new provisions, which enter into force on 1 January 2009.
According to Kouchner, the French Presidency's work there will centre on
designating the future permanent president of the Council and the new
foreign policy chief, decisions which are all expected to be taken by EU
heads of state at a summit in December. Speculation is already rife
about the names of the candidates, with names already being circulated (see
our LinksDossier on 'Mr. Europe'). But Kouchner recently suggested
that there could still be a few surprises and that more candidates
could emerge (EurActiv
27/05/08). Questions remain, however, as to how all the new roles
will fall into place. According to the agreed schedule, the Treaty
should be ratified by the end of 2008 and start applying as of 1 January
2009. This should also apply for the new permanent EU President and
foreign policy chief. But when EU leaders meet in December to pick their
champion, the outcome of the European elections will still be unknown.
more...
Irish referendum could scupper EU treaty
Telegraph UK
(May 31,
2008) - In 1973, when Ireland joined what is now the European
Union, it was the poorest country on the continent. Today, thanks in no
small part to £32 billion in EU grants, it is the second richest per
capita (after Luxembourg). So the result of a referendum on June 12 on
whether to consolidate EU powers by ratifying the Treaty of Lisbon must
surely be a foregone conclusion. Think again. Despite every major
political party backing the Yes campaign, support for a No vote is
growing daily. The most recent poll put the Yes voters at 41 per cent
and the No voters at 33 per cent. That sounds like a healthy lead until
you discover the Yes campaign was polling well over 50 per cent on the
eve of another Irish EU referendum – on the Nice Treaty in 2001 – before
the electorate delivered a resounding No. In Brussels, European
parliamentarians are twitchy about the future of the EU's 495 million
citizens resting in the hands of the one million Irish voters expected
to turn out on polling day. Having spent two years rebuilding the Treaty
of Lisbon from the scrap parts of the defeated European Constitution,
the Eurocrats can only watch as a learner driver takes the wheel of
their juggernaut and drives it towards the edge of a cliff. This
scenario has arisen because, while all 26 of the other member states
have decided to wave through the treaty via their parliaments (the UK
included), Ireland alone has a legal obligation under its constitution
to put the matter to a public vote. Because the treaty must be passed
unanimously by all 27 member states, an Irish No vote would kill it.
Earlier this week, the European Commission president, José Manuel
Barroso, suggested a No vote would be catastrophic for the EU. "We will
all pay a price for it, Ireland included," he said, adding that there
was "no plan B" if Ireland exercised its veto. Mr Barroso and his
cohorts argue that the treaty represents the next glorious stage in the
EU's future, creating a new post of full-time European Council
president, streamlining the European Commission and redistributing
voting powers. If you don't find these allegedly crucial changes
inspiring, you're not alone. And therein lies the fundamental problem
for Ireland's Yes campaigners. Try as they might, they have been unable
to come up with anything approaching a coherent, inspirational argument
for a Yes. Most tellingly of all, the new Irish premier, Brian Cowen,
has admitted he hasn't read all of the 287-page treaty, and nor has
Ireland's EU Commissioner, Charlie McCreevy, who said no sane person
could read it from cover to cover. more...
Surging inflation will stoke riots and conflict between nations, says
report Guardian UK
(May 23,
2008) - Riots, protests and political unrest could multiply
in the developing world as soaring inflation widens the gap between the
"haves" and the "have nots", an investment bank predicted yesterday.
Economists at Merrill Lynch view inflation as an "accident waiting to
happen". As prices for food and commodities surge, the bank expects
global inflation to rise from 3.5% to 4.9% this year. In emerging
markets, the average rate is to be 7.3%. The cost of food and fuel has
already been cited as a factor leading to violence in Haiti, protests by
Argentinian farmers and riots in sub-Saharan Africa, including attacks
on immigrants in South African townships. Merrill's chief international
economist, Alex Patelis, said this could be the tip of the iceberg,
warning of more trouble "between nations and within nations" as people
struggle to pay for everyday goods. "Inflation has distributional
effects. If everyone's income moved by the same rate, you wouldn't care
- but it doesn't," said Patelis. "You have pensioners on fixed pensions.
Some people produce rice that triples in price, while others consume
it." A report by Merrill urges governments to crack down on inflation,
describing the phenomenon as the primary driver of macroeconomic trends.
The problem has emerged from poor food harvests, sluggish supplies of
energy and soaring demand in rapidly industrialising countries such as
China, where wage inflation has reached 18%. Unless policymakers take
action to dampen prices and wages, Merrill says sudden shortages could
become more frequent. The bank cited power cuts in South Africa and a
run on rice in Californian supermarkets as recent examples. "You're
going to see tension between nations and within nations," said Patelis.
The UN recently set up a taskforce to examine food shortages and price
rises. It has expressed alarm that its world food programme is
struggling to pay for food for those most at need. Last month, the World
Bank's president, Robert Zoellick, suggested that 33 countries could
erupt in social unrest following a rise of as much as 80% in food prices
over three years. Merrill's report said the credit crunch has
contributed to a global re-balancing, drawing to a close an era in which
American consumers have been the primary drivers of the world's economy.
In a gloomy set of forecasts, Merrill said it believes the US is in a
recession - and that American house prices, which are among the root
causes of the downturn, could fall by 15% over the next 18 months. more...
Iran Allows Solana to Visit Tehran to Deliver Nuclear Proposals
Bloomberg
(May 20,
2008) - Iran has agreed to a trip by European Union foreign
policy chief Javier Solana to deliver a package of incentives aimed at
persuading the country to suspend uranium enrichment, Foreign Minister
Manouchehr Mottaki said. Mottaki didn't say when Solana will arrive in
Tehran with the latest proposals for Iran's nuclear program from the
five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus
Germany, according to the state-run Fars news agency. The U.S., the
U.K., France, Russia and China, which have veto power at the UN Security
Council, were joined by Germany on May 2 in revising an incentive plan
developed in 2006. Measures in the initial package included an offer to
provide Iran with enriched uranium for power stations in exchange for
suspension of its own enrichment efforts. The enhancements to the
package haven't been made public. Iran says its nuclear program is
needed to produce fuel for power stations, while the U.S. and its allies
allege the project is being used as cover for the development of an
atomic weapon. Enriched uranium can be used to generate electricity or
to make nuclear warheads. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on May 13
that he won't put Iran's "right'' to carry out uranium enrichment on its
own soil "up for negotiations.'' Iran is a signatory to the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty. Lisbon Treaty Unlikely to End the WEU Anytime Soon Fulfilled Prophecy (May 26, 2008) - In 2002, Fulfilled Prophecy began reporting on a 10-nation military alliance, called the Western European Union, that appears to match a 10-nation alliance foretold in Bible prophecy. Now, with ratification of the European Union’s Lisbon Treaty underway, some may wonder what effect the treaty, if adopted, will have on the alliance. Guest columnist Mishael Meir answers this question. Although repeated efforts have been made to kill it off, the Western European Union (WEU) lives on as a mutual defense treaty among its 10 permanent members. While the Lisbon Treaty appears to put into place elements that indicate a planned WEU demise, the WEU Ten always manages to survive. To understand what is happening, here’s some helpful background. The Magic Number ‘10’ The WEU was created in 1954 by the modified Brussels Treaty as a means for Europe to interface with NATO through its own security and defense organization. Any of the 10 permanent members could withdraw after 50 years from the 1948 date of the original treaty or beginning in 1998. None of them has done so. Additionally, all 10 members could choose to terminate the treaty by “denouncing” it. That hasn’t happened either. Since 1998, there have been many calls to terminate the treaty. None has succeeded. Interestingly, in the WEU Council’s Dec. 6, 2000, Reply to Recommendation 666, the Council made clear that the WEU was sticking around, saying:
Beginning in 2001, the European Union absorbed almost all of the WEU’s functions. However, because the modified Brussels Treaty remains in effect, so does the treaty’s mutual defense clause that gave rise to the 10-state military alliance. The WEU’s Council exists only as a formality. It hasn’t convened as a body since November 2000, but the same people now sit within the structure of the EU as its Political and Security Committee, where it exercises “political control and strategic direction” of EU crisis-management operations. The WEU’s arms procurement body has been absorbed into the European Defence Agency, an agency of the EU headed by Javier Solana. In June 2001, Solana, acting in his role as the WEU’s Secretary General, announced that the WEU Ten had capped the number of permanent members at 10, exactly as the prophet Daniel predicted (Daniel 7:24). After all, why continue expanding the WEU when the EU was beginning efforts to replace it internally? The Netherlands apparently agreed. In 2004, on the eve of the draft constitution’s signing, the Dutch tried and failed to get the WEU Ten to terminate the treaty. Other WEU Ten members said no: The modified Brussels Treaty had to stay in place to maintain the binding commitment of mutual defense, given that such a commitment was not contained in the draft constitution. Source Enter the Lisbon Treaty After the French and Dutch citizens rejected the constitution in their 2005 referendums, the WEU urged the EU to continue building its security and defense framework using the legal authority of the EU’s existing treaties. The EU opted instead to trot out the constitution again, this time repackaged as the Lisbon Treaty. To ensure its ratification, the heads of state blocked their own citizens from being able to go to the polls, that is, except for the Irish who go to the polls on June 12. All of Europe is holding its breath to see the outcome of this crucial vote. Source So, what happens if the Irish say yes and what happens if they say no? What effect will the Lisbon Treaty have on the WEU if it actually goes into effect? If the Irish vote yes, the Lisbon Treaty, on its face, appears to endorse the continued existence of the WEU. Under Protocol No. 11, the EU and WEU are to make arrangements for enhanced cooperation between them. This is curious considering that the WEU is little more than an empty shell with only its democratic Assembly left. Also, the Lisbon Treaty has something the draft constitution never had: a binding mutual defense provision that embraces all 27 member states. Although that would make the modified Brussels Treaty Article V redundant, the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty would not by itself terminate the modified Brussels Treaty. Only the WEU Ten can do that. Additionally, the Lisbon Treaty contains provisions for “permanent structured cooperation” (PSCoop). It would allow members who meet certain criteria to build their own permanent military framework that the other states could later join, assuming they met the funding and troop level criteria set out in Protocol No. 11. Apparently some EU states have suggested that the WEU Ten would logically form the PSCoop membership. Source If the Lisbon Treaty goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2009, and PSCoop gets underway, look for another call to terminate the modified Brussels Treaty. However, these are very big “ifs.” Even if it plays out as the EU hopes, it may take a long time before the PSCoop club got anything going. In the meantime, the WEU Ten will still exist as a military alliance and they aren’t going anywhere anytime soon. If the Irish veto the Lisbon Treaty, the EU has no Plan B. The treaty will fail just like the draft constitution failed. Be assured the heads of state will arm twist the Irish into another referendum so they can vote until they get it “right.” This is exactly what happened with their no-vote on the Nice Treaty, which the Irish finally ratified at a second referendum. ‘Man of Lawlessness’ What occurs to me in the analysis of EU and
WEU treaties is that the antichrist will be a
“man of lawlessness” (2
Thessalonians 2:3). Treaties are law and must be followed. The
antichrist won’t care what a treaty says. As a pertinent example,
consider the transformation of the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire.
The Roman Republic built the legal foundation for Western civilization,
including the checks and balances system for democratic governance. Once
Caesar Augustus transformed the Republic into the Roman Empire in 31
B.C., law turned into whatever the caesars said it was, regardless of
what had already been established through the democratic Senate and
treaties with foreign states. Why a 10-state military alliance in the
revived Roman Empire would suddenly hand the antichrist power can be
explained under an endless number of scenarios. One is this. What if
disaster happens while the EU is wrangling treaties and the only
existing alliance is the WEU Ten? We all know
who loves chaos and confusion, and it sure isn’t our God! (See
1 Corinthians 14:33). As Herb would say, “stay tuned.”
Spain to run America's 1st superhighway?
WorldNet Daily
(May 19, 2008)
- Stretching through
the rural countryside with limited access and no speed limit in
1940, the Pennsylvania Turnpike was built to resemble Germany's
autobahn. Now thanks to a $12.8 billion dollar offer, it may soon
become Spain's. According to a report in the Philadelphia Daily
News, Gov. Ed Rendell has announced that Abertis Infraestructuras of
Barcelona has offered the top dollar bid to the state of
Pennsylvania for the rights to manage the toll road under a 75-year
lease. The highway could become just the latest in a string of U.S.
infrastructure landmarks to be operated by foreign companies. In
2004, management of the Chicago Skyway, a stretch of elevated road
connecting I-90 and I-94, was granted to Cintra, another Spanish
operation that outbid Abertis at $1.83 billion. Abertis lost out to
Cintra again when the Indiana Toll Road was taken over in 2006 for
$3.8 billion. This time, Abertis beat out Cintra and other firms,
hoping to add the Pennsylvania Turnpike to its list of operations
including toll roads in Spain, France, Italy, the United Kingdom,
Chile, Colombia and Argentina. Abertis also operates airports,
including the airports in Orlando, Fla.; Burbank, Calif.; and one
concourse of the Atlanta airport. Even though
the controversial Dubai ports deal was squashed by public outcry in
2006, foreign firms have nonetheless purchased long-term leases on
other American transportation networks. The Chicago Skyway is tied
up for 99 years. The Indiana Toll Road is leased for 75. As
WND reported earlier this year, Chicago is seeking a more than
50-year lease on Midway Airport. Among the potential suitors for
Midway are 6 international firms, including Abertis. The leases are
being made possible through an increasingly common practice of
establishing "public-private partnerships" (PPP's), contracts
between public agencies and private entities that enable private
sector participation in public transportation. Many of the PPP's
implemented in the U.S. bring large up-front cash infusions. In both
the proposed Midway and Pennsylvania Turnpike offers, the billions
in cash are touted as a quick solution to shoring up under-funded
government employee pension funds. Many, however, see an imminent
threat in turning over U.S. infrastructure to foreign companies.
"The USA is up for sale,"
an attendee of a conference in Colorado to discuss PPPs told WND.
"Whatever the public now owns – roads, ports, waste management water
systems, rail lines, public parking facilities, airports, even
lotteries and sports stadiums – are up for grabs and the only
requirement is that the foreigners have the cash." Even William
Capone, the director of communications for the Pennsylvania Turnpike
Commission,
told WND in a telephone interview earlier this year, "We don't
favor turning the Pennsylvania Turnpike into a private entity
through a PPP lease. If we keep the Pennsylvania Turnpike in the
hands of a public entity, we believe we can actually invest more
dollars into roads than a private corporation could do." The
proposal still has to go through the Pennsylvania legislature, a
decision that is likely to be hotly contested. Many in the capital
are hoping Act 44, a law passed by the state legislature in 2007 to
make I-80 a toll road as well, will stem the financial crisis and
deflate the impetus for accepting the Turnpike proposal. According
to the newspaper report, the toll road plan with Abertis allows the
newcomer to raise tolls 25 percent year and 2.5 percent or the rate
of inflation every year after that. more...
World economy on thin ice - U.N.
CNN Money
(May 16, 2008)
- The world economy is
"teetering on the brink" of a severe downturn and is expected to grow
only 1.8% in 2008, the United Nations said in its mid-year economic
projections Thursday. That's down from a global growth rate of 3.8% in
2007, and the downturn is expected to continue with only a slightly
higher growth of 2.1% in 2009, the U.N. report said. The mid-year update
of the U.N. World Economic Situation and Prospects 2008 blamed the
downturn on further deterioration in the U.S. housing and financial
sectors in the first quarter, which is expected to "continue to be a
major drag for the world economy extending into 2009." But the U.N. said
developing countries will suffer as badly: They should grow by 5% this
year and 4.8% next year, compared to a robust 7.3% in 2007, the report
said. The U.N. economists said the deepening credit crisis in major
market economies triggered by the U.S.-led slump in housing prices, the
declining value of the U.S. dollar, persistent global imbalances and
soaring oil and commodity prices pose considerable risks to economic
growth in both developed and developing countries. "The baseline
forecast projects a pace for world economic growth of 1.8% in 2008," the
U.N. report said. However, it said the final figure will largely depend
on developments in the United States. Global growth this year could fall
to 0.8% if the U.S. subprime mortgage market turmoil has a more serious
impact on developing countries and countries in transition, the U.N.
report said. But if the monetary and fiscal measures the U.S. government
has taken to stimulate the economy - including tax refunds and lower
interest rates - boost consumer spending and restore confidence in the
business and banking sector, the world economy could only slow to 2.8%
growth this year and 2.9% in 2009, it said. The report, prepared by the
U.N. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, forecast that U.S.
economic growth will decline from 2.2% in 2007 to -0.2% this year, with
only slight recovery in 2009 to 0.2% growth. "At issue is how deep and
long this contraction will be," the report said. "As the housing slump
continues and the credit crisis deepens, a broad array of ... indicators
are already hinting at a recession." more... The gathering storm, and beyond The Jerusalem Post (May 15, 2008) - The incendiary hate language emanating from Ahmadinejad's Iran - in which Israel is referred to as "filthy bacteria" and a "cancerous tumor" and Jews are characterized as "a bunch of bloodthirsty barbarians" - is only the head wind of the gathering storm confronting Israel on its 60th anniversary. Indeed, we are witnessing, and have been for some time, a series of mega-events, political earthquakes that have been impacting not only upon Israel and world Jewry but upon the human condition as a whole. These include:
WITH ISRAEL'S 60th anniversary, these mega-events have
not only intensified but congealed into what might be called a
"gathering storm," finding expression in the two theses that underpin
this article. First, that this gathering storm appears to be without
parallel or precedent since 1938, suggesting thereby that 2008 is
reflective and reminiscent of 1938. The second thesis, which reflects my
own position and is not inconsistent with the previous notion, is that
whatever 2008 may be, it is not 1938. Simply put, there is a Jewish
state today that is an antidote to the vulnerabilities of 1938. There is
a Jewish people with untold moral, intellectual, economic and political
resources. There are non-Jews prepared to join the Jewish people in
common cause, seeing the cause of Israel not simply as a Jewish cause,
but - with all its imperfections - as a just cause. Nor is Israel is
isolated or alone. It has important friends and allies: for example, the
United States, Canada, Germany and France, to name a few; and it has
diplomatic relations with the two emerging superpowers, China and India.
There are peace treaties, however imperfect, with Egypt and Jordan. In a
word, if one looks at Israel at 60 in this global configuration, 2008
is, even with an admittedly gathering storm not unlike 1938, nonetheless
very different from the Thirties. more...
Egyptian culture minister: I would burn Israeli books myself
YNet News
(May 14, 2008) -
Diplomatic tensions have arised between Israel and Egypt due to a harsh
statement made recently by Egyptian Culture Minister Farouk Hosni. In a
conference that took place in the Egyptian Parliament last week, the
minister said that he “would burn Israeli books himself if found in
Egyptian libraries.” Israeli Ambassador to Cairo Shalom Cohen defined
this statement in a classified report that he submitted to the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs in Jerusalem as “harsh and especially blunt, in a way
which makes it impossible for Israel and for the international community
to continue a regular agenda with Egypt.” The anger in Israel over
Hosni’s statement is especially emphasized due to the fact that the Hosni is Egypt’s candidate for the UNESCO position, as the United
Nations’ education, science and cultural organization secretary-general,
and he has good chances of being chosen. Israel is weighing the
option of bringing the case to the attention of the international
community and thus harming his chances of receiving the position. Hosni
is considered one of the strongest opposition leaders in the Egyptian
government to stand against normalization with Israel. In the past, he
accused Israel of trying to steal Egyptian culture, and he adamantly
opposes any cooperation with Israel. Moreover, he opposed an initiative
presented by the American-Jewish Committee to establish a museum of
Jewish antiquity and culture in Cairo. more...
Solana welcomes appointment of EU civilian operations commander
WorldNet Daily
(May 14, 2008) - THE
EUROPEAN UNION S167/08 Javier SOLANA, EU High Representative for the
CFSP, welcomes the appointment of Kees Klompenhouwer as EU Civilian
Operations Commander. Javier SOLANA, EU High Representative for the
Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), congratulated Mr. Kees
Klompenhouwer today on his appointment as EU Civilian Operations
Commander and Director of the Civilian Planning and Conduct Capability
(CPCC) at the Council of the European Union: "I would like to
congratulate Kees Klompenhouwer on his appointment as the Civilian
Operations Commander and Director of CPCC. In this capacity, he will
exercise command and control at strategic level for the planning and
conduct of all civilian crisis management operations. Mr.
Klompenhouwer brings considerable expertise to his role as Civilian
Operations Commander. In the accomplishment of his tasks, he will
have my full support and that of the European Union as a whole." Mr.
Klompenhouwer addressed today the Ambassadors of the Political and
Security Committee for the first time and presented the main priorities
of his new function. Mr. Kees Klompenhouwer, whose appointment took
effect on 1 May 2008, will exercise command and control at strategic
level for the planning and conduct of all civilian crisis management
operations, under the political control and strategic direction of the
Political and Security Committee (PSC) and the overall authority of the
Secretary- General/High Representative for the CFSP (SG/HR). He will
also direct the Civilian Planning and Conduct Capability (CPCC) which
was established in August 2007 in the General Secretariat of the
Council. CPCC currently totals 60 staff including Council officials,
senior police, rule of law and support services national experts. The
Director of CPCC also has functional authority over planning
capabilities and expertise contributed by the European Union Military
Staff (EUMS) through its Civil/Military Cell and over the Watchkeeping
Capability as far as their support to civilian operations is concerned.
CPCC has a mandate to plan and conduct civilian European Security and
Defence Policy (ESDP) operations under the political control and
strategic direction of the Political and Security Committee; to provide
assistance and advice to the SG/HR, the Presidency and the relevant EU
Council bodies and to direct, coordinate, advise, support, supervise and
review civilian ESDP operations. CPCC works in close cooperation with
the European Commission. The following civilian ESDP missions have been
launched or are planned: EUPM (Bosnia and Herzegovina), EULEX Kosovo,
EUPOL RD Congo, EU SSR Guinea Bissau, EUBAM Rafah (Palestine), EUPOL
COPPS (Palestine), EUJUST LEX (Iraq) and EUPOL Afghanistan. Happy Europe Day! (May 9, 2008) - On the 9th of May 1950, Robert Schuman presented his proposal on the creation of an organised Europe, indispensable to the maintenance of peaceful relations. This proposal, known as the "Schuman declaration", is considered to be the beginning of the creation of what is now the European Union. Today, the 9th of May has become a European symbol (Europe Day) which, along with the flag, the anthem, the motto and the single currency (the euro), identifies the political entity of the European Union. Europe Day is the occasion for activities and festivities that bring Europe closer to its citizens and peoples of the Union closer to one another.
Population Control and a World Food Authority Reshaping the International Order Part 5 Knowledge Driven Revolution (May 5, 2008) -
The establishment of a World Food Authority to control the food supply of the world is a major goal of The Club of Rome's RIO report. This issue is intertwined with exaggerated fears of environmental collapse and the elite's obsession with population control. The Environmental Scare From RIO: Reshaping the International Order: [Italicised text is original emphasis and bolded text is added by author.]
The threat of environmental catastrophe to further the population control agenda is nothing new and continues to this day with the manmade global warming scare. Back in the 1970's the Club of Rome was not shy at using the environmental catastrophe card to push for population control. Below are some examples from RIO: Reshaping the International Order:
The endnote used to back up this claim is given below:
Do these types of arguments sound familiar?
Population Control and The World Food Authority
Food as a Weapon
The further centralization of food stocks under a single international power would only increase the abuse of food supplies not decrease it. This, quite naturally, is the point. The result of this control is well described by Bertrand Russell (who strongly supported this idea) in his 1952 book The Impact of Science of Society [2]:
Conclusion
Germany 'business as usual' with Iran
The Jerusalem Post
(May 5, 2008) - Critics of Germany's
pro-business policy toward Iran flocked to a conference in Berlin that
for the first time brought together Germans, Iranians-in-exile and
Israelis for two days of panel discussions that concluded late Saturday.
The strong trade relations between Iran and Germany are a source of
great concern for the speakers, who argued that Germany's overly cordial
political and economic relations with Teheran are endangering the
security of Israel and stability in the Middle East. The nonprofit
Mideast Freedom Forum Berlin organized the conference. Dr. Matthias
Küntzel, a German political scientist who specializes in German-Iranian
relations, revealed that a controversial meeting between Iranian Deputy
Foreign Minister Mehdi Safari and his German counterpart, Reinhard
Silberberg, took place in April. Küntzel cited a report in the Tehran
Times from April 19 in which "Silberberg noted that the two countries
enjoy good relations and called for continuation of dialogue between
Iranian and German officials." According to an April 20 report in the
Persian Journal, Silberberg invited Safari for a three-day visit that
entailed meetings with leading German politicians and business
officials. A German Foreign Ministry spokeswoman told The Jerusalem
Post, "A meeting took place with Silberberg" and Safari in Berlin on
April 16, but the discussion did not address "economic questions."
Instead, "difficult questions involving Iran" were raised. Silberberg
reiterated Germany's two-track Iranian position emphasizing sanctions
and dialogue, she added. A lighting-rod issue at the conference was the
yawning gap between Chancellor Angela Merkel's speech to the Knesset on
March 18 declaring Israel's national security to be part of Germany's
"national interest," and her government's refusal to clamp down on
German firms supplying valuable technology for Iran's infrastructure.
According to the Iran Press TV Web site, representatives from the German
Economics Ministry and German industry met with Safari during his visit
and "the two sides discussed ways to expand economic cooperation and
agreed that a German delegation would visit Iran to follow up agreements
already signed between Teheran and Berlin." more... UN-American WorldNet Daily (May 5, 2008) - On the last day of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, as Benjamin Franklin was leaving Independence Hall, a lady asked him, "Well, doctor, what have we got?" Franklin pointedly responded, "A republic, if you can keep it." James Madison, chief architect of the Constitution, defined a "republic" to be "a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices ... for a limited period, or during good behavior." In other words, in our constitutional republic, the people possess the power to govern themselves by laws they enact through elected representatives. Today, the most serious threat to our nation's sovereignty and the republican form of government we cherish is the United Nations and other international organizations that work through ill-advised treaties and irresponsible bureaucrats to usurp the power of the American people to govern themselves. Unfortunately, more than a few politicians in our country are willing to cede power to foreign control. One of those powers is the right to control the oceans and seas. The president's proposed budget for 2009 includes a request for nearly $5 million to support the International Seabed Authority, an international tribunal established by the Law of the Sea Treaty. For years this treaty has been rejected by the U.S. Senate because it would take power away from the U.S. government and give an unfair advantage to countries like China, which uses the treaty's vague language to make claims about the waterways it controls far beyond its proper jurisdiction. This treaty would also impose a global tax on U.S. companies if ratified by the Senate. The presumptive Republican nominee for president, Sen. John McCain, wrote a letter in 1998 to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in favor of the Law of the Sea Treaty. As late as 2003, McCain submitted written testimony to the committee in favor of the treaty. But since seeking the Republican presidential nomination, McCain has been telling conservatives that he will "probably" vote against the treaty because its terms negatively affect U.S. sovereignty. Other politicians want the U.S. to fund welfare programs for the rest of the world. The leading Democratic candidate for president, Sen. Barack Obama, is presently sponsoring S.B. 2433: the Global Poverty Act of 2007. This bill would sanction spending as much as $845 billion in taxpayer money to reduce global poverty to meet the "U.N. Millennium Summit Goals." In addition to calling for a reduction in global poverty through unconstitutional foreign aid, the Millennium Summit Goals urge nations to sign many other dangerous treaties like the Kyoto Protocol and the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child – both of which the Senate has rejected for many years. The Kyoto Protocol sets limits on the amount of "greenhouse gases" that nations can emit while specifically excluding countries like China that it categorizes as "developing nations." It also subjects participating nations to penalties for exceeding those limits. Japan, Italy and Spain face penalties totaling over $33 billion for failing to meet their obligations under Kyoto. Each of those countries admits that the cost will be covered by taxpayers and businesses. Thus, joining Kyoto would subject the American people and U.S. businesses to a global tax. As for Obama's rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Hillary Clinton, her husband formally signed the Kyoto Protocol on Nov. 12, 1998, at a global conference in Buenos Aires. In February 2005, Sen. Clinton gave a speech on the "Future Role of the United Nations" in which she openly supported then-Secretary General Kofi Annan and the U.N.'s Millennium Summit Goals. Clinton has also long supported the adoption of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child even though the treaty would wreak havoc on parental rights. One thing all the leading presidential candidates for both major parties support is continued financial aid to the U.N. despite its dismal record of fraud and mismanagement. An audit last month discovered that the U.N. has wasted tens of millions of dollars in its "peacekeeping operations" in Sudan. Last year, a task force uncovered "multiple instances of fraud, corruption, waste and mismanagement at U.N. headquarters and peacekeeping missions ... with an aggregate value in excess of $610 million." A series of audits from 1996 to 2003 revealed "gross mismanagement" in the U.N.'s $100 billion oil-for-food program in Iraq. Yet, Clinton in her speech about the future role of the U.N. stated that she "deplored" Americans "who have sought to weaken, undermine and underfund the U.N." Actually, given the corruption and mismanagement of the U.N., monetary support for the U.N. is un-American. The obstinate support of the U.N. and continual reliance on treaties with foreign powers to solve our problems is reminiscent of the time when ancient Israel depended upon Egypt instead of the Lord for its protection. Isaiah prophesied:
The leading presidential candidates have repeated Israel's mistake:
They are looking to other nations for guidance and have failed to seek
guidance from God – the one upon Whom our nation was founded and our
ultimate security depends. In the process, "We the People" are losing
our right to self-determination and representative government through
the encroaching influence of the international community. George
Washington declared in his First Inaugural Address that "the
preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the
republican model of government are justly considered, perhaps, as
deeply, and finally staked on the experiment entrusted to the hands of
the American people." If the American experiment fails, republican
government falls with it. We must call on our leaders to fight for
America and to rely upon God.
Reshaping Public Opinion and the White Coated Propagandists Reshaping the International Order Part 4 Knowledge Driven Revolution (April 28, 2008) -
Public opinion is not generated by the public it is driven into them by marketing and propaganda. One of the main aspects of generating public opinion is the use of experts or specialists to tell the public what to think and give them a false sense of security derived from the belief that there are armies of experts making all of the difficult decisions for them. What if the legions of experts are just white coated propagandists? Importance of Public Opinion Any attempt at creating a new international order requires the reshaping of public opinion from their current modes of thought into newer more appropriate forms. This important detail was not overlooked by The Club of Rome. From RIO: Reshaping the International Order: [Italicised text is original emphasis and bolded text is added by author.]
Reshaping Public Opinion
No Technocracy, Just White Coated Propagandists
The above quote clearly states that
the "new experts" should form a league of white coated propagandists
willing to subordinate their knowledge (the only thing they have to
offer) to a desired political agenda. It should also be noted the use of
the term "functional representation". This is significant because the
Club of Rome redefines sovereignty from what they call "territorial
sovereignty" to "functional sovereignty" completely changing the meaning
of sovereignty. More on the redefinition of sovereignty
here.
The Ministry of Third World Truth
Conclusion
EU warns
Russia against boosting troops in Georgian breakaway regions
EU Observer
(April 30, 2008) - In a sharp
escalation of tensions in the South Caucasus, Russia has claimed
that Georgia is set to invade its breakaway region of Abkhazia and
is increasing the number of Russian troops there and in South
Ossetia in response. The EU's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana,
has warned Russia against such a move. "Even if the increase in
peacekeepers is within limits, if we want to diminish the perception
of tensions, I don't think it is a wise measure to increase now," EU
foreign policy chief Javier Solana said on Tuesday (29 April),
adding that the union continues to defend the territorial integrity
of Georgia. The statement came only hours after Russia had accused
Georgia, a part of the Soviet Union between 1922 and 1991, of
attempting to invade Abkhazia, something that Tbillisi denies. "If
Georgia puts in place the threat it has made on a number of
occasions about the use of force in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, we
would be forced to take retaliatory measures to protect the lives of
our citizens," Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov told press,
after talking to his European counterparts in Luxembourg on Tuesday.
The Russian foreign ministry has accused Georgia of sending 1,500 of
its own troops and police in the upper Kodori Gorge in Abkhazia,
which is still under Tblisi's control. "A bridgehead is being
prepared for the start of military operations against Abkhazia,"
reads a ministry statement. Georgia has denied any plans or troop
build-up, and regarded the Russian move and accusations as
provocative. Prime Minister Lado Gurgenidze said: "From now on, we
consider every [Russian] soldier or any unit of military equipment
coming in [to Abkhazia and South Ossetia] as illegal, potential
aggressors and potential generators of destabilisation." "We
consider this to be an utterly irresponsible step. We think this
step will utterly destabilise this region," he added. Meanwhile,
according to AFP, Georgian interior minster Shota Utiashvili said:
""This is not acceptable to us ... [Russia] cannot increase the
number any further." "It is the Russians who are taking provocative
actions, not Georgia," he added. "Deploying additional troops is
certainly a very provocative move." "There has been no increase in
forces from the Georgian side, nothing at all. The Russian statement
is simply not true," he continued.
U.N. and World Bank say to tackle Food Crisis
Reuters
(April 29, 2008) - U.N. agencies and
the World Bank pledged on Tuesday to set up a task force to tackle
an unprecedented rise in global food prices that is threatening to
spread social unrest. The international bodies called on countries
not to restrict exports of food to secure supplies at home, warning
that could make the problem worse. "We consider that the dramatic
escalation in food prices worldwide has evolved into an
unprecedented challenge of global proportions," the United Nations
said in a statement. This had become a crisis for the world's most
vulnerable people, including the urban poor, it said after a meeting
of 27 international agency heads in the Swiss capital, Berne, to
chart a solution to food price rises that have caused hunger, riots
and hoarding in poor countries. "Though we have seen wheat prices
fall over the last few days, rice and corn prices are likely to
remain high, and wheat relatively so," World Bank President Robert
Zoellick told a joint news conference. Higher costs of wheat, rice,
and other staples have put extreme pressure on aid providers such as
the World Food Programme (WFP), a U.N. agency aiming to feed 73
million people this year. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called
on the international community to provide the WFP all of the $755
million in emergency funds it needs for the crisis. "Without full
funding of these emergency requirements, we risk again the spectre
of widespread hunger, malnutrition, and social unrest on an
unprecedented scale," Ban said. Concern about soaring food costs and
limited supplies have toppled Haiti's government and caused riots in
parts of Africa. The task force, bringing together the heads of U.N.
agencies, funds and programmes, the IMF and the World Bank under the
leadership of Ban, will set priorities for a plan of action and make
sure it is carried out. more...
EU Condemns Israel, Hamas
Israel National News
(April 28, 2008) - The European Union
condemned Israel on Sunday for restricting the supply of fuel
delivered to Hamas-controlled Gaza. In a response to rumors of a
critical fuel shortage, the EU’s message called on Israel to
partially re-open Gaza crossings and resume regular deliveries of
fuel. Regular deliveries have been stopped due to frequent terrorist
attacks on the crossings, but emergency fuel supplies have been let
through. The EU also condemned Hamas, saying terrorist groups in
Gaza “have their share in aggravating the humanitarian situation” by
their attacks on Israeli crossings, “which only lead to further
suffering of the population.” Foreign Ministry officials expressed
satisfaction with the message, pointing out that the EU rarely
criticizes Hamas by name. The message shows that the EU took
terrorist attacks into consideration when distributing blame for
Gaza’s problems, they said.
As polls
narrow, Irish PM warns of 'disaster' if EU treaty defeated
EU Observer (April 28, 2008) - Irish Prime Minister
Bertie Ahern has issued a stark warning on the consequences of
rejecting the EU treaty as the latest poll shows a narrowing gap
between the yes and no side. A no vote would have "repercussions
that would do immense damage to Ireland," and would be a "disaster
for the country," he said on Sunday (27 April), according to the
Irish Times. His words were in reaction to a poll published by the
Sunday Business Post that showed that 35 percent were in favour of
the treaty, 31 percent said they were against and 34 percent remain
undecided. The results represent a decrease for the Yes side of
eight percentage points, an increase for the No side of seven
percentage points and an increase of one point for the undecided
category when compared with a similar polls taken two months ago.
The high percentage of those who do not know how they will vote, as
well as stronger showing for the no camp, comes just six weeks ahead
of the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, set for 12 June. The
government is increasingly concerned that farmers may exercise their
anger about current world trade negotiations during the treaty vote.
The leader of the Irish Farmers Association, Padraig Walshe, has
repeatedly connected the two issues. Addressing a rally of around
10,000 farmers in Dublin earlier this month - the biggest in recent
years, Mr Walshe said: "Sell us out and we will have our say on the
12th of June." He was referring to negotiations being conducted by
EU trade commissioner Peter Mandelson on behalf of the European
Union, on a world deal on liberalising trade. Part of securing a
deal with developing countries is set to involve concessions by the
EU on its farm subsidies regime. Mr Ahern addressed farmers
specifically on Sunday, pointing out how much the farming community
had gained from the EU. "The biggest beneficiaries [of the European
Union] are the agricultural communities and they should be the ones
leading this campaign for it," he told RTE, the state radio. He
added that the trade talks will be resolved and that he hoped that
the "agricultural community quickly turn around their attitude to
get behind the Lisbon agenda. It's in their interest more than any
other interest or any other section in this country." All member
states need to approve the treaty for it to come into force. So far
11 of the 27 have done so. Ireland is the only country having a
referendum on the document, with a no vote likely to put the treaty
on hold for good. This means the country is under extreme pressure
to secure a yes vote, with much of high politics in Brussels on hold
until after 12 June. A series of senior politicians have visited
Ireland to try and woo voters, including German Chancellor Angela
Merkel and European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso. The
referendum comes at a time of change in Irish politics, with the
long-serving Mr Ahern due to step down on 6 May to be replaced by
current deputy prime minister Brian Cowen, as well as general
uncertainty amid signs of a slowdown in the Irish economy.
Israel: UNIFIL is hiding information about Hezbollah from Security
Council Haaretz
(April 28, 2008) - The United Nations
Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) is intentionally concealing
information about Hezbollah activities south of the Litani River in
Lebanon to avoid conflict with the group, senior sources in
Jerusalem have said. In the last six months there have been at least
four cases in which UNIFIL soldiers identified armed Hezbollah
operatives, but did nothing and did not submit full reports on the
incidents to the UN Security Council. The Israel Defense Forces and
the Foreign Ministry are reportedly very angry about UNIFIL's
actions in recent months, especially about the fact that its
commander, Major General Claudio Graziano, is said to be leniently
interpreting his mission, as assigned by Security Council Resolution
1701, passed at the end of the Second Lebanon War. Senior IDF
officials said recently behind closed doors that Graziano is
"presenting half-truths so as to avoid embarrassment and conflict
with Hezbollah," and that Resolution 1701 has been increasingly
eroded in recent months. A senior government source in Jerusalem
said that, "There is an attempt by various factors in the UN to
mislead the Security Council and whitewash everything having to do
with the strengthening of Hezbollah in southern Lebanon." The source
also said, "The policy of cover-ups and whitewashing will not last
long and, hopefully, now that the concealing of information has been
revealed, things will change." Israeli anger reached boiling point
over a week ago after the release of a new report by UN
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon with regard to another Lebanon-related
Security Council resolution, 1559. The report briefly mentioned an
incident at the beginning of March in which UNIFIL soldiers
encountered unidentified armed men, and included no additional
details. Officials in Israel, familiar with the incident, reportedly
were aware that the Security Council had not been apprised of
numerous details of the incident. A day after the release of the
report, Haaretz revealed that the incident described in the report
had actually been a clash between UNIFIL and armed Hezbollah
activists. The latter, driving a truck full of explosives,
threatened the Italian UNIFIL battalion with weapons. Instead of
using force as required by their mandate, the UN soldiers abandoned
the site. A diplomatic source at the UN told Haaretz that senior
officials in UNIFIL and in the UN Secretariat brought heavy pressure
to bear to have the incident erased from the report or at least to
blur it. When the incident was made public, UNIFIL was forced to
admit that it had indeed occurred and to request Lebanon's
assistance in investigating it. UNIFIL spokeswoman Yasmina Bouziane
said that during the incident, which took place near the city of
Tyre in southern Lebanon, five armed men had threatened UNIFIL
troops. more...
Euro dives as wheels fly off eurozone economy
Telegraph UK
(April 26, 2008) - The euro has
suffered its sharpest drop in four years as a blizzard of weak data from
Germany, Belgium, France, and Spain spark fears that economic contagion
may be spreading from the Anglo-Saxon world to Europe. Spain's business
federation warned that Spanish unemployment will rise by 500,000 by the
summer unless the government takes "valiant measures" to offset the
housing and construction crash. "For every dwelling not built, two
workers will lose their jobs," said the group's president, Gerardo Diaz
Ferran. The country's credit group ASNEF said the volume of personal
loans had dropped 30pc in the first quarter, the worst performance since
the country's financial crisis in the early 1990s. Troubling data in
Spain has been building for months, but investors have tended to focus
on Germany as a proxy for the whole eurozone. A shock drop in Germany's
IFO business confidence index yesterday caused an abrupt change of mood
in the currency markets. The euro plunged to $1.5646 against the dollar,
down from its all-time peak of $1.6018 on Tuesday. It is still 27pc
above its level two years ago. The German data follows a slide in the
Belgian index, which captures crucial port activity in Antwerp. The
headline confidence figure fell to -7.4 in April from plus 1.2 in March,
with a dramatic slump in the export order books to -14. This is flashing
near-recession warnings. David Owen, an economist at Dresdner Kleinwort,
said Europe would soon be engulfed by the twin effects of a "collapse in
export volumes" and a slow motion credit squeeze. "The wheels are coming
off the eurozone economy," he said. BNP Paribas warned clients yesterday
that the "decoupling story" was no longer credible. "We see Europe in
the early stage of a credit crunch, and if we are right credit supply
will shut down," it said. Key governors of the European Central Bank
began to back away from their hawkish stance of recent weeks, clearly
disturbed by the market perception that they are mulling a rate rise to
choke off price rises. Inflation has reached a post-EMU high of 3.6pc on
surging oil and food costs. Jean-Claude Trichet, ECB president, went out
of his way yesterday to brief journalists that "sharp" currency moves
had "possible implications for financial and economic stability", a
coded threat of co-ordinated intervention by world central banks. more...
On St George's Day, EU wipes England off map
Telegraph UK
(April 24, 2008) -
England
has been wiped off a map of Europe drawn up by Brussels bureaucrats
as part of a scheme that the Tories claim threatens to undermine the
country's national identity. The new European plan splits England
into three zones that are joined with areas in other countries. The
"Manche" region covers part of southern England and northern France
while the Atlantic region includes western parts of England,
Portugal, Spain and Wales. The North Sea region includes eastern
England, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and parts of Germany. A
copy of the map, which makes no reference to England or Britain, has
even renamed the English Channel the "Channel Sea". Each zone will
have a "transnational regional assembly", although they will not
have extensive powers. However, the zones are regarded as
symbolically important by other countries. German ministers claimed
that the plan was about "underlying the goal of a united Europe" to
"permanently overcome old borders" at a time when the "Constitution
for Europe needs to regain momentum". The Tories are drawing
attention to the plan today, St George's Day. Eric Pickles, the
shadow secretary of state for communities and local government,
said: "We already knew that Gordon Brown had hoisted the white flag
of surrender to the European constitution. "Now the Labour
government has been caught red-handed, conspiring with European
bureaucrats to create a European super-state via the back door." The
disclosure of the European map comes as a YouGov poll commissioned
by The Daily Telegraph showed that one third of people want England
to have its own parliament. Twenty per cent want England to be an
independent country and for Britain to be broken up. Europe's role in the Middle East: Model or mediator? The Jerusalem Post (April 23, 2008) - Javier Solana, the EU's foreign policy chief, is the High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the Secretary-General of both the Council of the European Union (EU) and the Western European Union (WEU). He was named Secretary General of the 10 permanent members of the Western European Union in November 1999. Solana is a physicist who later became a politician, serving as a minister in Spain for 13 years under Felipe González before serving as Secretary General of NATO from 1995 to 1999. Since October 1999, Javier Solana has served as the EU's High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy. In 2004, Solana had been designated to become the EU's Minister for Foreign Affairs for when the European Constitution was to come into force in 2009, but it was not ratified and his position has been renamed under the Treaty of Lisbon. Here are Solana's e-mail responses to questions sent to him by this columnist: The EU (in its early version as a common market) came about as an attempt to bring a halt to hostilities among European countries, especially France and Germany. [Note how the free-trade process is now working for a North American Union] How relevant is this experience for the current Middle East situation, and what role could the EU play in facilitating similar developments?
How could the EU help Israeli and Arab companies pursue business joint ventures through the auspices of the European Union?
Do you believe there is interest from Arab business sectors in different countries to strengthen economic ties with Israel?
Do you as EU High Representative see it as part of your agenda to promote a Free Trade Area or other economic cooperation between Israel and its Arab neighbors?
The EU could afford to concentrate on first economic matters and then deeper integration thanks to the defense umbrella provided by the US during the cold war. Could the EU play a similar role today for the Middle East?
| Israel | Islam | EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | Solana | 1st Seal |
MEPs to use
budget power over EU president perks
EU Observer (April 22, 2008) -
Members of the
European Parliament are prepared to use their hold over the bloc's
purse-strings to try and make sure that the proposed new EU
president does not wield too much power. "The treaty is very
clear about the duties [of the president]," the head of the
parliament's budget committee, Reimer Boege, told EUobserver, noting
that it says the person can have an administrative role, "but not
take over an executive function." "Budget power is always used as a
weapon. This is a principle," said the centre-right German MEP. The
parliament, wary of upsetting the fine balance of power between the
EU institutions, will have a chance to use this weapon when it comes
to negotiations later this year on the 2009 budget. Mr Boege said
that MEPs will looking out to see that if any extra perks for the
president – a private plane and a residence are rumoured to be under
consideration – would be "linked to lowering the communitarian level
in the treaty", meaning reducing the power of the European
commission and boosting inter-governmental politics. The MEP urged
member states who are due to deliver a draft budget to the
parliament before the summer to show a "flexible and responsible
approach" and indicated that euro-deputies would be inclined to
accept a staff set-up for the president that does not exceed that of
the immediate staff of the European commission president (around
20). The first reading of the budget is due in October, but MEPs are
already fretting about the institutional implications of the
Lisbon Treaty, which is supposed to come into force by the beginning
of next year. Earlier this month, senior MEPs, including
parliament President Hans-Gert Poettering, met European Commission
President Jose Manuel Barroso to raise certain points about the
treaty, particularly concerning the remit of the proposed president.
The treaty foresees a purely administrative role for the
President of the European Council – the formal title of the post
- organising the meetings of EU leaders. However, there is the
potential for external representation overlap with the foreign
minister and the commission president, while the role is also set
to be defined by the person who gets the job. A powerful EU
president that is neither subject to parliamentary control nor
elected by citizens "would lead us to a pre-democratic situation,"
German centre-right MEP Elmar Brok told the constitutional affairs
committee earlier this month. more...
Al Qaeda No. 2: Attacks on Western nations in works
CNN
(April 22, 2008) - Al Qaeda still has
plans to target Western countries involved in the Iraq war, Osama
bin Laden's chief deputy warns in an audiotape released Tuesday to
answer questions posed by followers. The voice in the lengthy file
posted on an Islamic Web site could not be immediately confirmed as
al Qaeda No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri's. But it sounded like past
audiotapes from the terror leader, and the posting bore the logo of
As-Sahab, al Qaeda's official media arm. The two-hour message is
billed as the second installment of al-Zawahiri's answers to more
than 900 questions submitted on extremist Internet sites by al Qaeda
supporters, critics and journalists in December. Responding to a
question of whether the terror group had plans to attack Western
countries that participated in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and
subsequent war, al-Zawahiri said, "My answer is, yes. We think that
any country that joined aggression on Muslims must be deterred." Al-Zawahiri
also denied a conspiracy theory that Israel carried out the
September 11, 2001, attacks on the U.S., and he blamed Iran and
Shiite Hezbollah for spreading the idea to discredit the Sunni al
Qaeda's achievement. Al-Zawahiri accused Hezbollah's al-Manar
television of starting the rumor. "The purpose of this lie is clear
-- (to suggest) that there are no heroes among the Sunnis who can
hurt America as no else did in history. Iranian media snapped up
this lie and repeated it," he said. "Iran's aim here is also clear
-- to cover up its involvement with America in invading the homes of
Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq," he added. "Iran's aim here is also
clear -- to cover up its involvement with America in invading the
homes of Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq," he added. Iran cooperated
with the United States in the 2001 U.S. assault on Afghanistan that
toppled the Taliban, an al Qaeda ally. The comments reflected al-Zawahiri's
increasing criticism of Iran, which al-Zawahiri has accused in
recent messages of seeking to extend its power in the Middle East,
particularly in Iraq and through its Hezbollah allies in Lebanon.
Until recent months, he had not often mentioned the Islamic
republic. Al Qaeda has previously claimed responsibility for the
9/11 attacks. The anti-Iranian rhetoric could reflect an attempt to
exploit majority Sunnis' fears of Shiite Iran's influence in the
region and depict al Qaeda as the main force opposing it. more...
"Functional" Sovereignty and the Common Heritage of Mankind Reshaping the International Order Part 3 Knowledge Driven Revolution (April 21, 2008) -
This article addresses the
redefinition of sovereignty from "territorial sovereignty" to
"functional sovereignty" by The Club of Rome. Also discussed is the use
of the concept of the "common heritage of mankind" to gain international
control of not just the oceans, atmosphere and outer space but also all
material and non-material resources.
Part 1 of this series gives an overview of the proposed new
international order described by the RIO report as "humanistic
socialism". This includes: collective neighbourhood armies, a fully
planned world economy, global free trade, public international
enterprises, proposed changes in consumption patterns among other
topics. Changes to the financial system including international taxation
and the creation of a World Treasury, World Central Bank and World
Currency are examined in
part 2.
The "increasing centralization of [international] decision-making" being a "precondition for the effective assertion of national sovereignty" may seem contradictory. The reason for this misunderstanding is your definition of sovereignty is based on an apparently outdated "territorial sovereignty" instead of the much more modern and politically correct "functional sovereignty".
That is right, "sovereignty" no longer involves governmental control within a geographic space, rather it refers to governmental control of specific functions within a geographic space. Which functions would depend on the dictates of a world authority.
Common Heritage of Mankind as "Functional Ownership"
This concept includes the manipulation of the Third World "national liberation" movements in the post colonial era. These are only stepping stones toward "functional sovereignty".
Remember when you hear the term
"Common Heritage of Mankind" it does not just refer to the oceans,
atmosphere and outer space, it refers to all material and non-material
resources. Anything that might be considered a source of wealth would be
brought under strict international authority. Keep in mind non-material
resources includes, among other things, the education of "human
resources". more...
Defining a better Mediterranean union
The Daily Star
(April 21, 2008) - Next July 13, in
Paris, Europe will better define the Union for the Mediterranean
(UM), its latest venture in the Middle East. Initially proposed by
French President Nicolas Sarkozy, the idea has undergone radical
transformation, so that the current incarnation bears little
resemblance to the initial proposal. The shape of the UM will only
be clear once the July summit is over, but as things now stand, the
union holds many challenges, but also some promise, for the Middle
East. The original idea, floated during Sarkozy's presidential
campaign, was highly nebulous. Seen as a means of rebuilding
France's role in the Middle East, the plan was also a way for
Sarkozy to appeal to voters of North African origin. Initially, it
involved the 10 Mediterranean states and only the southern states of
the European Union. However, Germany, fearing the creation of a
power block within the EU, vociferously objected. Chancellor Angela
Merkel slammed the plan as "very dangerous," arguing it would
release "explosive forces in the EU that I would not like to see."
As a result of German lobbying, the UM idea has since been watered
down. Whereas initially the union was to be independent of
existing EU instruments, such as the Barcelona Process and the
European Neighborhood Policy (ENP), it has now been reconfigured, as
Hans-Gert Pottering, the president of the European Parliament, has
described it, to "strengthen and further the Barcelona Process."
The UM is now attached to the EU and involves all 27 member states.
Additional EU funds will not be forthcoming, although it is rumored
that Qatar and private donors will be contributing money. The UM,
however, does still maintain its project-specific nature, with an
opt-out clause for those states who do not wish to take part in the
projects being offered, which currently center on energy, pollution,
and civil security cooperation issues. But even the new, expanded
project is drawing a fair amount of flak. As one commentator noted,
the involvement of the 27 EU states may lead to a danger of "too
many meetings, with too many participants that achieve too little."
Such concerns compound fears of duplication and an expansion of an
already overly bureaucratic European system, unless extreme care is
taken in overseeing the linkage with the ENP. Pessimists point to
other potential stumbling blocks - primarily the acrimonious
relations between the Middle Eastern partners in the UM. Chief among
these worries is the simmering Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but
hostile Syrian-Lebanese relations and Moroccan-Algerian tensions are
also predicted to place limits on what the UM can realistically
achieve. Supporters, however, liken this to the EU model, whereby
shared interests might generate conflict resolution, with French
Minister for European Affairs Henri Guaino arguing that "it's
through concrete cooperation ... that we can create solidarity
between nations." As observers have noted, most of the areas
marked for projects have been those where collaboration has taken
place under the Barcelona Process. Closer regional relations,
therefore, will have to result not from a novel approach, but from
revived association - a question of degree, not content. Yet if
Guaino's argument is correct, then the UM might do more than enable
Israeli-Palestinian cooperation. Collaboration on various projects
may also provide a helpful platform in aiding rapprochement in North
Africa, vital in light of rising violence by Al-Qaeda in the Islamic
Maghreb. Another point of criticism is the lack of clarity regarding
the relationship of the UM with the EU's political basket - namely
the need to enhance democracy and rule of law in the Middle East. So
far, the UM appears focused on business-oriented initiatives,
leading human rights activists to fear the sidelining of democracy
and rule of law requirements within the framework of the EU's
relationship with the Mediterranean states. Yet the silence over
governance issues can cut both ways. For the Arab counterparts, it's
a welcome relief. Combined with the shared presidency of the UM (one
European country will hold the post together with a Mediterranean
country), this could go some way toward addressing regional
resentment of the Barcelona Process and the ENP - viewed by many as
unfairly weighed in favor of the EU. Redressing this
imbalance will enable a sense of appropriation by the Mediterranean
counterparts, providing for more enthusiastic European-Middle East
relations. more...
Brown deal bars Blair from top EU job
The Independent
(April 20, 2008) - Tony Blair's chances
of becoming the first president of the EU have been dashed under a
secret veto deal Gordon Brown has struck with France and Germany, it
emerged last night. The former prime minister is said to be
"interested" in the £200,000-a-year job if the terms are right. But
the British, French and German governments have all privately agreed
not to back a candidate if any one of them has objections to him or
her, diplomats have revealed. France's President Nicolas Sarkozy has
lobbied on behalf of Mr Blair, but the German Chancellor, Angela
Merkel, is against the move. Mr Brown has said Mr Blair would make
an "excellent" EU president, but has not explicitly backed him as a
candidate. The deal means the decision is now out of the Prime
Minister's hands. "We have agreed with France and Germany not to
back a candidate one of the others doesn't want," a British diplomat
said. Yet there is new speculation from senior EU sources that Mr
Blair is lining himself up for the role of high representative for
foreign affairs – the second permanent position created under the
Lisbon Treaty. The job, effectively the EU's foreign minister, has
more real power than the presidency. Mr Blair has recently let it be
known in the highest circles of the EU that he would want a
"full-time" job similar to his current post as Middle East envoy.
British prime minister calls for global 'interdependence'
Associated Press
(April 18, 2008) - British Prime
Minister Gordon Brown, in his first foreign policy address in the
United States, called on the U.S. and Europe on Friday to lead a new
era of global "interdependence" aimed at solving international
problems such as terrorism, poverty and climate change. "We urgently
need to step out of the mindset of competing interests and instead
find our common interests, and we must summon up the best instincts
and efforts of humanity in a cooperative effort to build new
international rules and institutions for the new global era," Brown
said in a speech to about 350 invited guests at the John F. Kennedy
Presidential Library and Museum. Brown cited Kennedy's Independence
Day speech in 1962, when the president proposed a "new and global
declaration of interdependence." Brown said Kennedy's call for
public service "still reverberates around the world and always
will." Noting Kennedy's creation of the Peace Corps, Brown called
for the creation of "a new kind of global peace and reconstruction
corps," which he described as an organization of trained civilian
experts available any time to rebuild states. Brown also talked
about U.S. leadership following World War II, include the Marshall
Plan that funneled millions in economic aid and technical assistance
to help rebuild Europe. "We must summon inspiration from the vision,
humanity and leadership shown by those reformers to guide our
actions today," he said. Brown reiterated his call for reform of the
World Bank, International Monetary Fund and United Nations to give
emerging countries such as China, India and Brazil more say in the
international institutions. He called on the World Bank to intensify
programs to reduce poverty and said the institution should become a
bank for both development and the environment by transferring
billions in loans and grants to encourage the poorest countries to
adopt alternative sources of energy. The British leader, who has set
a mandatory target in the U.K. to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 60
percent by 2050, insisted that a new global pact on reducing carbon
emission must be agreed on by the end of 2009. He said the deal,
which would replace the Kyoto Protocol that was rejected by the U.S.
and expires in 2012, should be led by the United Nations and needs
to set binding targets for all developed countries. Brown, who has
overseen some U.K. troop withdrawals in Iraq and sought to soothe
public anger in Britain over the unpopular war, did not mention Iraq
directly. But he insisted he would support future military action to
intervene in failing states. He praised President Bush for leading
the world in an attempt to root out terrorism and "our common
commitment that there be no safe haven for terrorists." Brown said
the United States and Europe should act as "hardheaded
internationalists," and use "diplomatic, economic, and yes, when
necessary military action -- to prevent crimes against humanity when
states can no longer do so."
Small state, small job and a safe pair of hands
European Voice
(April 18, 2008) - Having Luxembourg's
Jean-Claude Juncker as president of the European Council would best
suit the interests of the EU's powerbrokers, says John Wyles. I have
long thought that Jean-Claude Juncker could be a good prospect to
win the new role of president of the European Council. While I would
not bet my house on him, he must be the front runner following the
recent publication of a Harris Interactive online poll conducted in
five EU countries plus the US. Tony Blair may still be the candidate
of French President Nicolas Sarkozy (though I doubt it) and others
may think Angela Merkel prefers a European to a national role, but
the smart money must be on Juncker. In the Harris poll he attracted
1% support in France as a candidate for the presidential role, 2% in
Germany, 1% in Italy and even less in Spain and the UK. The
Luxembourg prime minister is favourite not because he is uniquely
qualified for the job. Nor is he a likely winner because his voice
would command attention in Moscow, Washington or Beijing, where he
may be accorded no more than a polite hearing. The prize will
probably be his because, with the kind of public support and
recognition unearthed by Harris, he is a perfect combination: no
threat to the powers-that-be in national capitals while also a safe
pair of hands. These advantages have earned several
Luxembourgers top jobs over the last 50 years and have already made
Juncker chairman of the Eurogroup of finance ministers. It has
always seemed to me infinitely improbable that the leaders of the
big member states would choose a political heavyweight such as Tony
Blair as their first president of the Council. It seems equally
unlikely that a political heavyweight would want the job, although
good authority says that Blair aches for it. As one of the political
godfathers of the Treaty of Lisbon and, therefore, presumably
familiar with its contents, his ambition is difficult to credit. No
matter how hard you try to stretch language, the tasks allotted
to the president of the Council are perfectly suited to a retired
Rotary Club chairman who knows how to drink his soup quietly.
Formally, he/she has to prepare and preside over meetings of the
Council and represent the Union on those formal occasions (signings
of trade agreements, political protocols etc) at home and abroad
that, in some people, sap the will to live. When they embraced
the draft Lisbon treaty, there is no evidence that it was in the
minds of the heads of state and government to appoint someone “who
might actually walk tall on the international stage” as Philip
Stephens, the Financial Times commentator, so hotly desired in a
recent article. There are other reasons for opting for Prime
Minister Juncker or his equivalent from another small member state.
Damaging turf battles between the presidents of the Council and
the European Commission and the High Representative (who is bound
to be known to the media as “Europe's foreign minister”) will be
an ever-present danger, but rather less likely if the Council is led
by someone who is not aspiring to be a master of the universe.
It will be difficult enough to establish clear institutional
coherence and responsibility with a High Representative anchored in
both the Commission and the Council of Ministers, without the
complication of a Council President competing for power in that
narrow space occupied by a common foreign and security policy. more...
France seeks more ambitious EU globalisation strategy
EurActiv.com
(April 17, 2008) - The EU's growth and
jobs strategy needs to be supplemented by a global arm if Europe
wants to remain competitive in the future, argues a new report for
the French government , which could become official policy when the
country assumes the EU Presidency on 1 July. Although the Lisbon
Strategy is delivering initial results, the EU needs to "quicken the
pace" and "adopt a global viewpoint" or it will be "out of the race
by 2020", argued Laurent Cohen-Tanugi, the author of the report, in
an interview with EurActiv France before the official presentation
of the report to the government on 15 April. Admitting that the
Lisbon Strategy has been "visionary" in giving Europe a "head start
over the rest of the world," the author criticises its failure to
achieve the intrinsic goal of reducing the competitiveness gap with
the US. Now Europe even risks being overtaken in certain sectors by
major emerging countries such as China, India or Brazil if it
chooses to maintain the current status quo, argues Cohen-Tanugi.
"Europe is once again behind in a world that is developing at
unprecedented speed," he says, resulting from its failure to
implement the promised reforms. A new 'Lisbon Plus'? The
report calls for the Lisbon Strategy to be renamed "Lisbon Plus" and
integrated into a broader "EuroWorld 2015 Strategy" which would
produce a "more comprehensive strategy" than the Lisbon Agenda.
While "Lisbon Plus" would become the EU's internal component of this
"strategic vision", the second pillar would rely on common external
policies, such as trade, agriculture or the internal market, to help
shape globalisation, according to the report. "The importance given
to external policies is intended to signal the start of a new phase
in the history of European unification in which Europe is no longer
centred on itself but on its relationship with the rest of the
world," the author claims, highlighting a "genuine paradigm shift".
"Competitiveness through innovation" The focus of Lisbon Plus
should be on "competitiveness through innovation," the report
suggests, linking the different economic, social and environmental
dimensions. Moreover, the author expresses his hope that the French
Presidency (to begin on 1 July) will stimulate the so-called
"knowledge triangle" (higher education, research and innovation),
enhancing the value of Europe's human capital and promoting a new
"green economy". "The real global challenge with which Europe is
confronted is to stay in the race, in terms of prosperity and
international influence, in a world that is destined to be dominated
by an America/Asia duopoly," says Cohen-Tanugi. "It is now up to the
French EU Presidency to start carrying through this new strategic
vision," the report concludes.
Berlusconi "wants more EU influence"
Reuters
(April 16, 2008) - Italian prime
minister-elect Silvio Berlusconi said on Wednesday he would help the
EU regain the influence he said it had lost since he was last in
power and called for the European Central Bank's mandate to be
broadened. Speaking on one of his own television channels after
winning Italy's April 13-14 election, Berlusconi said the EU
needed a "top leadership squad" to make it count in the world.
"There is a need to reconstruct a Europe that has a leading role in
the Western world that can tackle with determination the problems
facing the world," said the 71-year-old conservative media mogul,
who is expected to take office next month. In later comments that
could anger some of Italy's European Union partners, for whom ECB
independence is sacrosanct, Berlusconi said its mandate should be
widened beyond keeping inflation in check. He did not specify what
he meant, but in the past he has urged the central bank to support
economic growth. Rules set out in the 1992 Maastricht Treaty give
the ECB the power to pursue its primary goal of maintaining price
stability free of political influence. "I believe the ECB's
functions need to be widened beyond the power to control inflation,"
Berlusconi told a news conference. Italy's third-richest man and
owner of AC Milan soccer club, Berlusconi said during the election
campaign he wanted to "intervene" with the ECB and would discuss it
with EU leaders such as France's Nicolas Sarkozy and Germany's
Angela Merkel. Sarkozy has repeatedly called for action to curb the
sharp rise in the value of the euro, while Germany has vigorously
defended the ECB's independence from politicians. Berlusconi often
blames the euro for the underperformance of Italy's economy, echoing
the opinion of many Italians who say their spending power has waned
since they gave up the lira. Exporters complain the strong euro
makes them less competitive. Berlusconi's victory had been expected
to deal a final blow to the sale of loss-making Alitalia to Air
France-KLM, which has been blocked by unions. Berlusconi wants a
home-grown rescue, but has left the door open to the foreign bid if
Alitalia is given equal footing in any future international airline
group. more...
Irish government embarrassed by leaked EU treaty email
EU Observer
(April 15, 2008) - German chancellor
Angela Merkel has called on Irish voters to back the EU treaty on
the same day that the Irish government was embarrassed by a leaked
email outlining what a UK diplomat says is Dublin's strategy for
holding and winning a referendum. In a state visit to Ireland, the
only country to hold a public poll on the treaty, Ms Merkel on
Monday (14 April), said "To my mind, the Lisbon treaty offers the
best preparation for Europe's future." "To the sceptics, I can only
say that if everything remains as it is now, your concerns will
definitely not be better addressed," she told the National Forum on
Europe. Ms Merkel also reassured Ireland, as a small country, that
it will have an equal seat at the EU table noting that the new
majority voting system in the treaty "is actually more of a problem
for the bigger states." During her visit the Irish government was
forced to contend with a story in the Irish Daily Mail which gives
details of an email sent by a British official based in Dublin after
a briefing by a civil servant in the Irish Department of Foreign
Affairs. According to the article, the email says that the Irish
government had ruled out having a referendum in October although it
would have been better procedurally because they were concerned
about "unhelpful developments during the French presidency –
particularly related to EU defence." The email noted that French
president Sarkozy was considered "completely unpredictable." The
defence issue is extremely sensitive in neutral Ireland. Irish
voters rejected the EU's Nice Treaty in 2000 largely on the back of
a heated debate about neutrality and European defence issues. The
email also alluded to what has been quietly admitted in Brussels
since the beginning of the year – that much of EU politics has been
put on hold until after the Irish referendum, scheduled to take
place on 12 June. It said that EU communications commissioner
Margot Wallstrom had reassured foreign minister Dermot Ahern during
a visit to Dublin earlier this Spring that the "commission was
willing to tone down or delay messages that might be unhelpful."
Reacting to the article, prime minister Bertie Ahern denied there
had been any strategy on Brussels' part. "On the article today, of
course officials from Foreign Affairs, and my department as well,
meet our European colleagues on a very regular basis, but the
suggestion that Europe will somehow deliberately change
announcements ahead of the referendum is without any foundation," he
said, according to the Irish Times. The leaked email – which was not
reproduced in full in the newspaper article – has been seized upon
by 'no' campaigners. Declan Ganley, chair of anti-treaty
organisation Libertas, said that the most damning part of the email
"was the admission that the Government hoped that very few people
would actually read the text of the Treaty, and would simply vote
with the politicians they trust." The revelation also came on
the same day that a new poll showed that the treaty remains an
enigma to most Irish voters. Some 65 percent of the 1001 people
surveyed by the Irish Sun said they had very little or no
understanding of the treaty, 28 percent claimed to have some
understanding while 6 percent said they fully understood it.
Meanwhile, 60 percent do not know how they will vote on the treaty
while 28 percent said they were planning to vote in favour and 12
percent against. But the same poll also confirmed what has regularly
been shown by EU-wide surveys – that Irish voters are the most
positive about effects of the European Union. Some 89 percent
surveyed said membership of the bloc had been good for the country. Europe or Eurabia? Daniel Pipes (April 15, 2008) - The future of Europe is in play. Will it turn into "Eurabia," a part of the Muslim world? Will it remain the distinct cultural unit it has been over the last millennium? Or might there be some creative synthesis of the two civilizations? The answer has vast importance. Europe may constitute a mere 7 percent of the world's landmass but for five hundred years, 1450-1950, for good and ill, it was the global engine of change. How it develops in the future will affect all humanity, and especially daughter countries such as Australia which still retain close and important ties to the old continent. I foresee potentially one of three paths for Europe: Muslims dominating, Muslims rejected, or harmonious integration. (1) Muslim domination strikes some analysts as inevitable. Oriana Fallaci found that "Europe becomes more and more a province of Islam, a colony of Islam." Mark Steyn argues that much of the Western world "will not survive the twenty-first century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most European countries." Such authors point to three factors leading to Europe's Islamization: faith, demography, and a sense of heritage. The secularism that predominates in Europe, especially among its elites, leads to alienation about the Judeo-Christian tradition, empty church pews, and a fascination with Islam. In complete contrast, Muslims display a religious fervor that translates into jihadi sensibility, a supremacism toward non-Muslims, and an expectation that Europe is waiting for conversion to Islam. The contrast in faith also has demographic implications, with Christians having on average 1.4 children per woman, or about one third less than the number needed to maintain their population, and Muslims enjoying a dramatically higher, if falling, fertility rate. Amsterdam and Rotterdam are expected to be in about 2015 the first large majority-Muslim cities. Russia could become a Muslim-majority country in 2050. To employ enough workers to fund existing pension plans, Europe needs millions of immigrants and these tend to be disproportionately Muslim due to reasons of proximity, colonial ties, and the turmoil in majority-Muslim countries. In addition, many Europeans no longer cherish their history, mores, and customs. Guilt about fascism, racism, and imperialism leave many with a sense that their own culture has less value than that of immigrants. Such self-disdain has direct implications for Muslim immigrants, for if Europeans shun their own ways, why should immigrants adopt them? When added to the already-existing Muslim hesitations over much that is Western, and especially what concerns sexuality, the result are Muslim populations that strongly resist assimilation. The logic of this first path leads to Europe ultimately becoming an extension of North Africa. (2) But the first path is not inevitable. Indigenous Europeans could resist it and as they make up 95 percent of the continent's population, they can at any time reassert control, should they see Muslims posing a threat to a valued way of life. This impulse can already be seen at work in the French anti-hijab legislation or in Geert Wilders' film, Fitna. Anti-immigrant parties gain in strength; a potential nativist movement is taking shape across Europe, as political parties opposed to immigration focus increasingly on Islam and Muslims. These parties include the British National Party, Belgium's Vlaamse Belang, France's Front National, the Austrian Freedom Party, the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, the Danish People's Party, and the Swedish Democrats. They will likely continue to grow as immigration surges ever higher, with mainstream parties paying and expropriating their anti-Islamic message. Should nationalist parties gain power, they will likely seek to reject multiculturalism, cut back on immigration, encourage repatriation of immigrants, support Christian institutions, increase indigenous European birthrates, and broadly attempt to re-establish traditional ways. Muslim alarm will likely follow. American author Ralph Peters sketches a scenario in which "U.S. Navy ships are at anchor and U.S. Marines have gone ashore at Brest, Bremerhaven or Bari to guarantee the safe evacuation of Europe's Muslims." Peters concludes that because of European's "ineradicable viciousness," its Muslims "are living on borrowed time" As Europeans have "perfected genocide and ethnic cleansing," Muslims, he predicts, "will be lucky just to be deported," rather than killed. Indeed, Muslims worry about just such a fate; since the 1980s, they have spoken overtly about Muslims being sent to gas chambers. Violence by indigenous Europeans cannot be precluded but nationalist efforts will more likely take place less violently; if any one is likely to initiate violence, it is the Muslims. They have already engaged in many acts of violence and seem to be spoiling for more. Surveys indicate, for instance, that about 5 percent of British Muslims endorse the 7/7 transport bombings. In brief, a European reassertion will likely lead to on-going civil strife, perhaps a more lethal version of the fall 2005 riots in France. (3) The ideal outcome has indigenous Europeans
and immigrant Muslims finding a way to live together harmoniously and
create a new synthesis. A 1991 study, La France, une chance pour
l'Islam (France, an Opportunity for Islam) by
Jeanne-Hélène Kaltenbach and Pierre Patrick Kaltenbach promoted this
idealistic approach. Despite all, this optimism remains the conventional
wisdom, as suggested by an
Economist leader of 2006 that concluded that dismissed for the
moment at least, the prospect of Eurabia as "scaremongering." This is
the view of most politicians, journalists, and academics but it has
little basis in reality. Yes indigenous Europeans could yet rediscover
their Christian faith, make more babies, and again cherish their
heritage. Yes, they could encourage non-Muslim immigration and
acculturate Muslims already living in Europe. Yes, Muslim could accept
historic Europe. But not only are such developments not now underway,
their prospects are dim. In particular, young Muslims are cultivating
grievances and nursing ambitions at odds with their neighbors. One can
virtually dismiss from consideration the prospect of Muslims accepting
historic Europe and integrating within it. U.S. columnist
Dennis Prager agrees: "It is difficult to imagine any other future
scenario for Western Europe than its becoming Islamicized or having a
civil war." But which of those two remaining paths will the continent
take? Forecasting is difficult because crisis has not yet struck. But it
may not be far off. Within a decade perhaps, the continent's evolution
will become clear as the Europe-Muslim relationship takes shape. The
unprecedented nature of Europe's situation also renders a forecast
exceedingly difficult. Never in history has a major civilization
peaceably dissolved, nor has a people ever risen to reclaim its
patrimony. Europe's unique circumstances make them difficult to
comprehend, tempting to overlook, and virtually impossible to predict.
With Europe, we all enter into terra incognita.
Reshaping the International Financial Order Reshaping the International Order Part 2 Knowledge Driven Revolution (April 14, 2008) -
The Club of Rome is a premiere think tank composed of approximately 100 members including leading scientists, philosophers, political advisors, former politicians and many other influential bureaucrats and technocrats. This series of articles describes the major conclusions of the 1976 book Rio: Reshaping the International Order: A Report to the Club of Rome [1] coordinated by Nobel Laureate Jan Tinbergen. The RIO report "addresses the following question: what new international order should be recommended to the world's statesmen and social groups so as to meet, to the extent practically and realistically possible, the urgent needs of today's population and the probable needs of future generations?" Part 1 of this series gives an overview of the proposed new international order described by the RIO report as "humanistic socialism". This includes: collective neighbourhood armies, a fully planned world economy, global free trade, public international enterprises, proposed changes in consumption patterns among other topics. Below is a summary of some of the changes to the financial system proposed by The Club of Rome. Creation of a World Reserve Currency From RIO: Reshaping the International Order: [Italicised text is original emphasis and bolded text is added by author.]
Some tricks never seem to get old.
Prevention of "alternate cycles of inflation, stagflation and
depression" is exactly the same hogwash used to sell the Federal Reserve
Act to the Americans in 1913. How well did that work?
Some Techniques of Implementation
Another technique of implementation requires the use of organizations like OPEC to collect international taxes on behalf of the world community.
One World Currency
The Club of Rome is currently working
on a project entitled
Monetary
Simplification Euro/Dollar: Towards a Global Currency headed by
Ramon Tamames. more...
EU: Europe Needs More Say in World Economy Talks As Strong Euro
Gains Ground Associated Press
(April 11, 2008) - The European Union's
top economy official has said that Europe deserved a greater say in
the global economy as the strong euro gains ground as the world's
second major currency. EU Economic and Monetary Affairs Commissioner
Joaquin Almunia said Friday that the rest of the world now sees
the euro currency zone as "a pole of stability" and the currency had
the potential to become even more important. The euro is now
second to the weak U.S. dollar as a reserve currency held by foreign
investors and has risen sharply against the dollar in recent months,
hitting a new all-time high of $1.5912 on Thursday. Almunia said the euro area is now "playing an increasingly important role in
supporting the stability of the world economy and the global
financial system." "Non-EU countries increasingly perceive the
euro area and the EU as a whole as a pole of stability, a source of
new capital, and also a source of advice and expertise on regulatory
approaches," he said in a speech to the Petersen Institute in
Washington D.C. His prepared remarks were distributed ahead of time
by his Brussels office. The EU official called for the 15 euro
nations to share a single seat when world leaders meet to discuss
the economy at the International Monetary Fund or the G-7 group of
top seven industrialized nations. In the G-7, this would come at the
expense of euro users Germany, France and Italy which now represent
themselves at these talks. The euro's greater role carried some
risks, he warned, because it increased the region's exposure to
shocks from other parts of the world and "disruptive portfolio
shifts" between major currencies. "It is precisely such shocks that
are likely to occur more frequently in a world characterized by
financial and economic globalization," he said. He again signaled
worry about the U.S.' huge current account deficit, saying a sudden
"unwinding" could hit Europe hard, since its currency is still
appreciating against the dollar. The euro now makes up 26 percent of
foreign exchange reserves and is the second most actively traded
currency after the U.S. dollar on global foreign exchange markets.
Euro-dollar trades are the most popular foreign exchange deals,
accounting for more than a quarter of global turnover.
Israel, Palestinian talks raise hope for 2008 accord: Solana
EU Business
(April 8, 2008) - EU foreign policy
chief Javier Solana expressed hope Tuesday that Israel and the
Palestinians could reach a peace settlement this year, after their
leaders met for the first time in almost two months. "Politically,
an important meeting took place yesterday," he told members of the
European Parliament, a day after Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert
and Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas held direct talks in
Jerusalem. "I do think that we have still a chance to move the
process to a settlement before the end of year 2008," Solana said,
underlining: "I don't want to sound too optimistic, I want to sound
realistic." He said that "the situation in Gaza is more relaxed than
it used to be" and that he hoped a "period of quietness" would
descend on Gaza, with the help notably of Egypt. Israel has sealed
off Gaza from all but vital goods since Hamas seized power last
June, in a bid to halt rocket attacks from the territory and to put
pressure on the Islamist-run government. But Solana said the future
would become clearer in the summer. If "we are not able to move the
process in a dynamic manner by this period of time, maybe we'll have
to begin to think that the possibility of an agreement in the year
2008 will be further away," he said. Olmert and Abbas agreed Monday
"to continue with the goal of reaching an historic agreement by the
end of the year," an Israeli spokesman said, despite accusing each
other of failing to meet commitments under a peace roadmap.
Shell chief favours cross-border cooperation over competition to cut CO2
CNN Money
(April 7, 2008) - Royal Dutch Shell
Plc.'s (NYSE:RDS A) chief executive Jeroen van der Veer said the group
favours a scenario to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions which
promotes cross-border cooperation rather than countries rushing to
secure energy resources for themselves. Speaking at an event here, the
chief executive said coalitions should take on the challenges of
economic development, energy security and environmental pollution
through cross-border cooperation. Under the group's favoured
'Blueprints' scenario, innovation should occur at the local level, as
major cities develop links with industry to reduce local emissions, he
said. Added to that, national governments should introduce efficiency
standards, taxes and other policy instruments to improve the
environmental performance of buildings, vehicles and transport fuels.
'The Blueprints scenario will be realised only if policymakers agree on
a global approach to emissions trading and actively promote energy
efficiency and new technology in four sectors: heat and power
generation; industry; transport and buildings,' he said. 'This will
require hard work and time is short'. Under the scenario, the group
assumes carbon dioxide (CO2) is captured at 90 per cent of all coal and
gas fired power plants in developed countries by 2050, plus at least 50
per cent in non-OECD countries. The chief executive said government
support is needed for carbon capture and storage (CCS) because the
system adds costs and yields no revenues. 'At least, companies should
earn carbon credits for the CO2 they capture and store,' he said. In
response, European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana said he
supports the 'Blueprint' scenario in general terms. He said the
scenario is 'dramatic' in that it requires the cooperation of every
country in the world. 'The EU needs to act together rapidly in
the Blueprint type of model. A single policy is absolutely fundamental,'
Solana said. more...
EU foreign policy expected to enter 'new era' EU Observer (April 6, 2008) - The European Parliament is seeking to bolster its role in the bloc's common foreign and security policy (CFSP), with senior MEPs saying it is time for Europe to become a "player and not just a payer" on the world stage. Polish centre-right MEP and head of the foreign affairs committee, Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, says that EU foreign is moving "from one era to another" with the new Lisbon Treaty, due to kick in next year. The proposed new EU foreign minister and diplomatic service as well as the possibility for a group of member states to move ahead in defence cooperation mean foreign policy is "one of the most innovative parts of the treaty." The fact that Javier Solana, the EU's foreign policy chief, will for the first time be present at the MEPs' annual debate on CFSP on Wednesday (4 June) is in itself a "turning point," said the Pole at a briefing on Tuesday. Euro-deputies will today debate a report that sets out principles for the EU's foreign policy - such as respect for human rights - calls for certain issues to be prioritised and says that the CFSP budget from now until 2013 is "insufficient." "Either we have to beef up foreign policy financially, or we have to rethink whether we really want to be a global player," said Mr Saryusz-Wolski, who next week will travel to Paris to discuss the issue with the incoming French EU presidency. "We ask why is nothing ready, prepared for the events that will happen if the treaty [comes into force], and we haven't had an answer," he said. "We are asking this question also: do you have any hidden reserves? What's your view? How to finance the new set up? No answer." Democratic oversight The report also calls for parliament to be given greater democratic oversight over the area, which to date has remained firmly the domain of member states. It suggests that the foreign minister "regularly" appear before MEPs and that the parliament be "fully consulted" on who the foreign minister should be, as well as what the diplomatic service should look like. Deputies are also urging the future EU foreign minister to inform the parliament before any "common actions" are taken. "If we start sending soldiers into danger, it is up to the parliament to give its blessing," says Mr Saryusz-Wolski. The report also takes a more long-term view of the future of common foreign and security policy, with the head of the foreign affairs committee urging the bloc to stop acting like a "fire brigade" rushing to put out emergencies here and there and to think more of the "long-term strategic interests of the Union…20–30 years ahead." EU army Mr Saryusz-Wolski, who believes the union will
gradually develop its own army, says it is no longer enough that the
bloc exercises its traditional role as a soft power. "Too often we
spend money without any conditions being attached. I am against
Europe being a payer and not a player," he said. But he admits
there is a "fear" in the parliament that the foreign minister and
the new permanent president of the European Council may add to the
trill of voices of on the EU stage all claiming to speak for Europe
and may not turn Europe into a player. The potential for overlap
between the two posts – starting in January - and for rivalry with
the European Commission president is high. Debates on the posts are
expected to start in earnest in autumn and be wrapped up by
December. In time-honoured EU fashion, balancing who wins the posts
will have to involve the consideration of a series of factors,
including nationality, whether a candidate comes from an old or new
member state or a small or big member state, and the person's
political hue.
Time for a more
coherent voice EU Observer
(April 4, 2008) - What a difference a
year makes. Twelve months ago the talk was of the European Union ‘fading
away,' as China and India began to assume more importance on the world
stage. Even Joschka Fischer, Foreign Minister in Gerhard Schroeder's
former coalition government, was asking ominously ‘where is Europe?' If
such expressions coincided with the EU's 50th anniversary, the 51st, a
week or two back, found us in better shape. Thanks to a strong currency
and vibrant economy, Europe is on its feet again, weathering the global
financial storms. Unemployment across the Union is down by almost
three-quarters of a per cent, compared to a year ago. The great task of
institutional reform is practically complete; ratification of the Lisbon
treaty being all but assured. We look forward, later this year, to the
arrival of the first European President and Foreign Minister. No one is
asking now ‘where is Europe?' We are no longer the ghost at the
table, a vacant place setting. No one doubts today that we are here, in
economic substance, even if we are still not fully pulling our weight in
terms of influence. Our partners know that there are still many
areas in which we still have to struggle to live up to our own ideals as
well as equipping us to compete against the upcoming super-giants of
Asia. One is democracy. We may be about to announce the arrival of a
European President and Foreign Minister but the idea that there should
be some democratic input, whether directly or through the European
Parliament, to determine who holds these positions is still anathema to
member states. Moreover, the European Parliament still cannot manage
to control where it sits. Nor can Europeans debate European issues with
one another. Despite the attention of the European Commission, attempts
to create a genuine European wide political debate are still in their
infancy. Events of European dimension are still viewed and reported in a
national context... As I write NATO is meeting in Bucharest to
determine, among other things, whether the Ukraine and Georgia should be
allowed to take their first steps towards NATO membership. As the USA is
in favour my guess is that sooner or later they will be admitted,
despite objections from a number (as might be expected there is no
single view) of European states. If the Ukraine and Georgia are part of
the NATO family, and the EU continues to replace NATO forces in local
peacekeeping operations, it seems NATO membership will come to represent
a foot in the door to EU accession. Here of course we see in miniature
the third area on which the EU has shown little sign of moving forward
during the past year. Were the Europe Union to be united on whether the
Ukraine and Georgia should or shouldn't become members of NATO, that
would constitute a powerful voice. But the EU is not united. In fact it
is far from united on a great range of foreign policy issues as a result
of which its voice on the world stage is weak and inhibited. Because
the EU's common foreign policy has to be settled unanimously, it is
common only to the extent that it is the policy to which no one has
found a reason to object. In consequence the policy is feeble.
Instead of speaking with a single strong voice, the EU speaks with many
weak ones. The result is that nobody's interest is served. Most
recently we have seen this split over whether we should recognise
Kosovo, but on practically every dimension of foreign policy the Union
is divided. Sometimes, as over Tibet, the need for unanimity produces
pusillanimity; at other times it produces no policy at all, so we leave
situations - such as divided Cyprus - to fester. Had Europe been
prepared to speak with a single voice over Iraq - the fifth anniversary
of whose invasion we have just commemorated - who doubts that events on
the ground might have been very different, regardless of whether that
voice had been for or against an invasion. Will the advent of an EU
Foreign Minister - or even an EU President - correct this situation,
produce more agreement? It may produce a small change, but nothing
significant is likely to happen without the realisation by member states
that their interests are better served by a single strong foreign and
security policy operating in the common interest, than by each operating
as though they alone had legitimate foreign policy concerns. more...
Brown to host world leaders at 'progressive' summit
AFP
(April 4, 2008) - Prime Minister Gordon
Brown is to host a summit of some 20 world leaders and key figures to
discuss "progressive" governance, after a conference on the issue in
London Friday, officials said. South African President Thabo Mbeki,
Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and former US president Bill
Clinton are among participants at the summit of broadly centre-left
leaders outside London on Saturday, said Downing Street. EU foreign
policy chief Javier Solana, World Trade Organization chief Pascal Lamy
and national leaders from Australia, Chile, Cyprus, Ghana, Italy,
Liberia, Lithuania, New Zealand, Norway and Slovakia are also scheduled,
according to a participants' list released by Downing Street. In a
speech pre-released on video ahead of the conference Friday, and the
"progressive governance summit" on Saturday, Brown called for the
development of a form of "globalisation that is fair and sustainable for
all." The conference brings together some 300 leaders, officials and
experts in a location outside London which has so far not been
disclosed. When the summit was last held in Britain it was in Bagshot,
south of the capital. The conference is organised by the Policy Network,
which describes itself as "an international thinktank dedicated to
promoting progressive policies and the renewal of social democracy." The
idea for the summit was launched by Clinton in 1999, when he was still
in office. The first one was held in Berlin in 2000, before Stockholm in
2002, London in 2003, Budapest in 2004 and Johannesburg in 2005. Brown
will host it after returning from Bucharest, where he has been attending
the NATO summit. The 2008 meeting will focus on globalisation, climate
change and poverty. "Achieving an inclusive globalisation, one that can
combine economic dynamism with social justice in a sustainable way for
all, is the key political challenge facing this generation of leaders
and politicians," Brown said in a video posted on the website of the
Guardian daily.
Turkey's EU bid runs into trouble
BBC News
(April 4, 2008) - Turkey's attempt to
enter the EU is now being called Europe's "biggest project". But new
doubts have emerged that it will ever happen. Uniting Turkey, a large
mainly Muslim nation, with the European Union is Europe's biggest peace
project since World War II, Turkey's Foreign Minister Ali Babacan says.
But he complains that some EU countries are holding Turkey back out of
political ill-will. Turkey has had enough of being Europe's whipping
boy. After nine years of frustrating efforts as an official candidate to
join the European Union but still without a guarantee of membership in
the end, its leaders now have a tougher message for Europe - play fair,
because you need us as much as we need you. Veiled warning Mr
Babacan told BBC News "Europe should never think that Turkey has no
choice". This did not mean there was any "other alliance or group of
countries we might join forces with", the minister explained. But the
relationship must be a two-way street, of benefit to both sides. The
foreign minister's veiled warning came this week during a conference in
Istanbul of the British Wilton Park organisation for politicians and
policy-makers to assess Turkey's path towards EU accession. Last week
Turkey's most ardent supporters of its European hopes were shocked when
the Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, told students in Sarajevo that
his country would have "nothing to lose" if Europe kept it out. The EU
would be the loser, Mr Erdogan claimed. Turkey's 45-year-old commitment
to integration in Europe has hit serious turbulence. And "enlargement
fatigue" among the EU's 27 member states is not the main reason. The
issue is Turkey itself. Turkish hopes are threatened by flagging popular
support on both sides. more...
‘Implementation of the European Neighbourhood Policy in 2007’
Progress Report Israel
Fulfilled Prophecy: Commission of the European Communities
(April 3, 2008) - Israel and the
European Community first established contractual relations in 1975
by signing a Cooperation Agreement. The
Euro-Mediterranean Partnership inaugurated at the 1995 Barcelona
Conference established a policy with ambitious long-term objectives.
The Association Agreement with Israel which entered into force in
2000 sets out in more detail the specific areas in which the
objectives of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership can be developed
bilaterally. On this basis, the EU-Israel Action Plan was adopted in
April 2005, for a period of three years. A first ENP progress report
was adopted in December 2006. Intense institutional cooperation
through the EU–Israel Association Council, the EU–Israel Association
committee and 10 sub-committees has enabled both sides to progress
with the implementation of the Association Agreement and more
recently the Action Plan. In the framework of the EU-Israel
Reflection Group, work is ongoing to identify areas to upgrade the
future of EU-Israel relations. This document reports on overall
progress made on the implementation of the EU – Israel Action Plan
between 1 November 2006 and 31 December 2007, although developments
outside this period are also considered when deemed relevant. It is
not a general review of the political and economic situation in
Israel. Israel has been an active partner in the framework of the
ENP, as demonstrated by the progress made in implementing a large
number of priorities of the Action Plan. Sound macroeconomic
policies associated to a buoyant external demand have allowed the
Israeli economy to expand for a fourth consecutive year. The ENP has
clearly enhanced the pace of cooperation between the EU and Israel
in a large number of fields: from enhanced EU-Israel political
dialogue to Israel's involvement in a number of European
initiatives. Having agreed a framework protocol with the EC, Israel
is the front-runner in making use of the new possibilities for ENP
partner countries’ participation in Community programmes. It has
also sought closer cooperation with EC and EU agencies. In October
2007 Israel agreed to start bilateral negotiations on a Free Trade
Agreement on the liberalisation of services and establishment, at
the beginning of 2008. more...
We have created human-animal embryos already, say British team
Times Online UK
(April 2, 2008) - Embryos containing
human and animal material have been created in Britain for the first
time, a month before the House of Commons votes on new laws to
regulate the research. A team at Newcastle University announced
yesterday that it had successfully generated “admixed embryos” by
adding human DNA to empty cow eggs in the first experiment of its
kind in Britain. The Commons is to debate the Human Fertilisation
and Embryology Bill next month. MPs have been promised a free vote
on clauses in the legislation that would permit admixed embryos. But
their creation is already allowed, subject to the granting of a
licence from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA).
The Newcastle group, led by Lyle Armstrong, was awarded one of the
first two licences in January. The other went to a team at King’s
College London, led by Professor Stephen Minger. The new Bill will
formalise their legal status if it is passed by Parliament. Admixed
embryos are widely supported by scientists and patient groups as
they provide an opportunity to produce powerful stem-cell models for
investigating diseases such as Parkinson’s and diabetes, and for
developing new drugs. Their creation, however, has been opposed by
some religious groups, particularly the Roman Catholic Church.
Cardinal Keith O’Brien, the head of the Catholic Church in Scotland,
described the work last month as “experiments of Frankenstein
proportion”. The admixed embryos created by the Newcastle group are
of a kind known as cytoplasmic hybrids, or cybrids, which are made
by placing the nucleus from a human cell into an animal egg that has
had its nucleus removed. The genetic material in the resulting
embryos is 99.9 per cent human. The BBC reported that the Newcastle
cybrids lived for three days, and that the largest grew to contain
32 cells. The ultimate aim is to grow these for six days, and then
to extract embryonic stem cells for use in research. It is already
illegal to culture human-animal embryos for more than 14 days, or to
implant them in the womb of a woman or animal, and these
prohibitions will remain in the new legislation. more...
Will Uncle Sam let the dollar collapse?
Telegraph.uk
(April 1, 2008) - The dollar is taking
a pounding. With the US sinking deeper into recession, the greenback
recently hit an all-time low against the euro and a 12-year low
against the yen. Last week, America's currency fell again - dropping
more than 2 per cent in euro terms, to $1.5779. On a trade-weighted
basis, the dollar is now south of its late-70s low point and close
to its historic nadir of the mid-1990s. The markets sense the US
Federal Reserve, having already slashed interest rates by 300 basis
points to 2.25 per cent since the credit crunch erupted last summer,
will soon cut rates even more. The European Central Bank, in stark
contrast, looks determined to keep rates at 4 per cent - where
they've been since sub-prime broke. Eurozone inflation, at 3.3 per
cent, is still way above target. And with ECB Chairman Jean-Claude
Trichet stressing upside price pressures last week, eurozone rate
cuts seem unlikely. In other words, the gap between euro and dollar
rates looks set to get wider - making the US currency even less
attractive. And, last week, just as fresh data showed America's
housing and manufacturing sector weakening further, business
confidence in Germany - the eurozone's largest economy - jumped up.
That suggested an even bigger euro-dollar interest differential,
piling still more pressure on the greenback. But a falling dollar is
not necessarily bad news for the American economy. The underlying
reason for the currency's weakness, beyond the current woes on Wall
Street, is that years of over-consumption have resulted in a massive
US trade deficit - which, in 2006, reached 6 per cent of GDP. The
dollar's decline has lately helped address that - by making US goods
more competitive. Over the last two years, American exports have
risen 17 per cent in value terms, cutting the trade shortfall to 4.7
per cent of national income. In other words, as has often happened
in recent decades, a falling dollar has shoved the burden of
America's adjustment onto the rest of the world. And now - as the
White House knows well - a further dollar slide will play a large
part in rescuing the domestic economy. The US takes a dim view of
other countries - such as China - allowing their currencies to
remain weak against the dollar. But when it comes to old-fashioned
beggar-thy-neighbour exchange rate policy, the Americans are past
masters. There are limits to this process. The euro has risen some
17 per cent against the dollar over the last year, with much of that
rise happening since January. This makes life tough for the
eurozone's exporting economies - which, apart from Germany, are now
suffering badly. That's why Trichet now expresses "concern" at the
drooping dollar. French president Nicolas Sarkozy has gone further -
describing America's ailing currency as "a precursor to economic
war". Elsewhere, too, the complaints are getting louder. Japan's
Finance Minister, Fukushiro Nukaga, says the dollar's decline is now
"excessive". Such statements are preparing the ground for a meeting
in two weeks' time - when finance ministers and central bankers from
the G7 gather in Washington. The headlines will be about post
sub-prime regulation. But the meat of the summit concerns the
dollar. The big question is whether to intervene in foreign exchange
markets to prop up the currency. When co-ordinated among several
large central banks, such initiatives have worked quite well. The
1987 Louvre Accord helped halt a sliding dollar, as did joint
intervention by the US and Japan in 1995. But, if the G7's upcoming
dollar dialogue is conducted in whispered tones, another much bigger
question won't be discussed at all - the dollar's status as the
world's reserve currency. The cracks are now starting to show in the
dollar's reserve currency status. For the first time, Saudi Arabia
now refuses to cut interest rates in line with the Fed - the first
step towards a break in the kingdom's dollar peg. If that break
happened, it would spark a massive flight of Middle Eastern assets
away from the US currency. Chinese exporters are also now shunning
the dollar in non-US transactions. Again, that's a worrying sign for
the States. With its $1,400bn of reserves, China is the biggest
investor in dollar-denominated assets by far. With the Fed expected
to cut rates by at least another 25 basis points at its next meeting
on April 30, the dollar can only get weaker in the coming month. So
the US may be forced into a G7 initiative to strengthen its
currency. The trouble is, since the last joint-intervention, the
balance of world power has changed. Today, around 75 per cent of the
world's foreign exchange reserves are held not by the West, but by
the likes of China, Russia and Brazil. So any initiative will have
to involve them - even though they're not in the G7. And that will
expose the grouping for what it is - an anachronistic hark-back to a
world that no longer exists. more...
EU borderless
zone to be extended to airports
EU Observer
(March 28, 2008) - At midnight on Sunday (30 March) the
enlargement of the EU's borderless zone to eight Eastern European
countries and Malta will be completed through the lifting of air border
controls between them and the 15 countries already part of the area. The
enlargement of the so-called Schengen area started on 21 December when
land and sea border checks between Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania,
Malta, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, and the other
Schengen countries were abolished. "The enlargement of the Schengen zone
to 24 member states is now complete," EU transport commissioner Jacques
Barrot stated on Friday (28 March) referring to the inclusion of
airports. "I would like to underline the symbolic and concrete
importance of this change," he said. "The free movement of persons
represents one of the fundamental [EU] principles. [It is] concrete, as
the life of the citizens moving within the Schengen zone will be very
simplified," he added. While air companies will continue to perform
identity checks at check-in and boarding, people will from Sunday
onwards be allowed to fly from one airport to another within the
Schengen area without being subjected to other formalities. In addition,
"it will be the end of a certain number of long queues and procedures
for EU citizens, as well as for third country nationals travelling
within Schengen by air", said Mr Barrot. In order to celebrate the
lifting of air borders, several member states have planned media events
at their main airports. more... Ghost of Nazi Past, Ghost of Nazi Present A Time, Times, and Half A Time (March 16, 2008) - Quite often as I’ve spent time preparing material for this blog space, I’ve thought to myself, “this is a resurgence of Nazism”. I had been raised in a household by a father who purchased every book he could find related to the first and second world wars. I knew that it was important to direct attention to this area and parallel the changes the Nazi’s made to law with those being prepared by the global government. I understood this would be an extremely time consuming task and one which I was not too excited to start. Fortunately for me, around Christmas time, as I passed through the history section in Barnes & Noble, a book title caught my eye. The book The Third Reich In Power by Richard J. Evans had done exactly what I was preparing to do. It seemed as though it was God’s Christmas present to me for which I am thankful. Richard Evans has provided an excellent high level overview of Nazi changes to law and culture—a book which I highly recommend. I will be quoting from Evans’ work extensively in this and the next blog post. The format will be that I present a passage from The Third Reich In Power followed by citations of global governance proposals. I have already dedicated ink to much of the material I’m about to cover, but it is worth re-reading as one considers we have seen this before in various dictatorships, and in particular, the Nazi regime. Throughout my lifetime, I’ve heard people argue that what happened in Nazi Germany could never happen again. My father advised me that when people truly start to believe that, that’s when it will happen. Perhaps Richard Evans best explains this mindset as “the further in time we get from Nazi Germany, the more difficult it becomes for historians living in democratic political systems and in cultures which respect the rights of the individual to make the leap of imagination necessary to understand people’s behaviour in a state such as Nazi Germany, where imprisonment, torture or even death might await anyone who dared to voice the slightest criticism of the regime and its leaders.” Pg 116 Indeed, and today the masses may be prepared to accept the doctrines like those of the Nazis-- the newly-proposed model of Shared Security, a.k.a, “Civilian-Military Cooperation (CIMIC), “Responsibility to Protect”, “Human Security”—because their architects present the doctrines as belonging to the human rights framework. Nonetheless, the definition of human rights has become a slippery slope. For example, any religious or political viewpoint that does not fall within “common shared value” guidelines is considered extremist and said to be a gross violation of another’s human rights. Therein the hostilities begin. Following, I have divided sections into topic. The lead section which is bolded has been quoted from The Third Reich in Power. The italicized sections following it are citations which demonstrate there are calls to implement similar legislation. Cultural/Social “…he [Justice
Minister Gurtner] quickly appointed a committee to revise the Reich
Criminal Code of 1871 in accordance with the new ethos of the Third
Reich. As one committee member, the criminologist, Edmund Mezger, put
it, the aim was to create a new synthesis of ‘the principle of the
individual’s responsibility to his people, and the principle of the
racial improvement of the people as a whole.” Pg 72
Congress, watchdog probe passport security
The Washington Times
(March
27, 2008) - Three House leaders and the Government Printing
Office's watchdog said yesterday that they are investigating security
concerns about the production of electronic passports highlighted during
an investigation by The Washington Times. Rep. Bennie Thompson,
Mississippi Democrat and chairman of the House Homeland Security
Committee, criticized the GPO for using foreign components in new
electronic passports. "It is just plain irresponsible to jeopardize the
gold standard in document security by outsourcing production when U.S.
companies ought to be able to do the same work here," said Mr. Thompson,
who announced that his panel is investigating the outsourcing. Rep. John
D. Dingell and Rep. Bart Stupak said they also are investigating the
overseas production of electronic passports. The two Michigan Democrats
said they are looking into whether profits made by the GPO through
selling blank passports to the State Department may have violated the
law limiting the GPO's business practices. The Times reported yesterday
that the GPO chose two European computer chip makers over U.S.
manufacturers to make tens of millions of electronic passports. The
passports are being assembled in Thailand by one company that was a
victim of Chinese economic espionage. "If true, these allegations raised
in today's press reports are extremely serious not only to the integrity
of our e-Passport program, but also to our national security," said Mr.
Dingell, chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Mr. Stupak,
chairman of the subcommittee on oversight and investigations, said,
"Given all of the personal information contained in an e-passport, it is
essential that the entire production chain be secure and free from
potential tampering." Mr. Dingell and Mr. Stupak said in a letter
yesterday to GPO Inspector General J. Anthony Ogden and Public Printer
Robert Tapella that they are investigating the management, production
and distribution of electronic passports. Mr. Thompson, commenting on a
report in yesterday's editions of The Washington Times, said in a
statement that the credibility of U.S. passports is "of the utmost
importance to our homeland security." "Questions alone about the
production and chain of custody of blank U.S. passports can send shock
waves through our homeland security infrastructure," he said. "The
Committee on Homeland Security will use all of the tools available to
determine if American technologies are being overlooked and what
implications there might be for other border security documents and
technologies." Mr. Ogden earlier said his office is conducting an
"end-to-end" review of the agency's production of electronic passports
and will look into the outsourcing of some passport components, such as
computer chips embedded in travel documents. "We do pay close attention
to the issue of passport manufacturing. It is a high priority of this
office," Mr. Ogden said in an interview. Mr. Ogden said his office's
current work plan includes the review "to help improve the process of
manufacturing passports. That's no secret." One of the companies
involved in passport production in Thailand, Smartrac, charged in a
court filing in the Netherlands last year that its technology was stolen
by China. The company issued a statement yesterday saying its passport
assembly plant was secure, CNN reported. The outsourcing has raised
concerns among investigators over the security of passports. GPO and
State Department officials have sought to play down security concerns
and have said they conduct regular checks of overseas manufacturers. Mr.
Ogden said deficiencies in passport manufacturing detailed in an Oct. 12
report cited by the paper were related to older, non-electronic
passports. He declined to specify the deficiencies but said the agency
has been responsive in addressing many of the problems.
Outsourced passports netting govt. profits, risking national security
The Washington Times
(March 26, 2008) -
The United States has outsourced the manufacturing of its electronic
passports to overseas companies — including one in Thailand that was
victimized by Chinese espionage — raising concerns that cost savings are
being put ahead of national security, an investigation by The Washington
Times has found. The Government Printing Office's decision to export the
work has proved lucrative, allowing the agency to book more than $100
million in recent profits by charging the State Department more money
for blank passports than it actually costs to make them, according to
interviews with federal officials and documents obtained by The Times.
The profits have raised questions both inside the agency and in Congress
because the law that created GPO as the federal government's official
printer explicitly requires the agency to break even by charging only
enough to recover its costs. Lawmakers said they were alarmed by The
Times' findings and plan to investigate why U.S. companies weren't used
to produce the state-of-the-art passports, one of the crown jewels of
American border security. "I am not only troubled that there may be
serious security concerns with the new passport production system, but
also that GPO officials may have been profiting from producing them,"
said Rep. John D. Dingell, the Michigan Democrat who chairs the House
Energy and Commerce Committee. Officials at GPO, the Homeland Security
Department and the State Department played down such concerns, saying
they are confident that regular audits and other protections already in
place will keep terrorists and foreign spies from stealing or copying
the sensitive components to make fake passports. "Aside from the fact
that we have fully vetted and qualified vendors, we also note that the
materials are moved via a secure transportation means, including armored
vehicles," GPO spokesman Gary Somerset said. But GPO Inspector General
J. Anthony Ogden, the agency's internal watchdog, doesn't share that
confidence. He warned in an internal Oct. 12 report that there are
"significant deficiencies with the manufacturing of blank passports,
security of components, and the internal controls for the process."
more...
Only Two European Mayors Decline to Participate in Campaign for Gay
Pride Parades Life Site News
(March
25, 2008) - Only two cities in Europe have refused to
participate in a campaign by Europe's leading homosexual lobby group to
force the leaders of Europe's cities to allow the homosexual "Gay Pride"
demonstrations. But neither of the cities' leaders made any objections
to the goals or activities of the homosexual activist movement. On the
contrary, one said that his city wished "every success" to the campaign.
The mayors of Riga and Tallinn, the capitals of Latvia and Estonia
respectively, have politely declined to participate in a campaign
launched by the International Lesbian and Gay Association-Europe (ILGA)
to attempt to force the leaders of various European cities to hold "Gay
Pride" demonstrations. The Gay Pride events have been one of the key
tools around the world for normalizing homosexuality in public opinion
and are widely supported by city authorities, businesses and
non-governmental organisations in the countries where they are allowed.
The campaign is a response to the refusal by the former Mayor of Warsaw,
Lech Kaczynski, to allow the demonstration that has in other countries
been characterized by public nudity and lewd displays of simulated sex
acts. Strongly Catholic Poland has been under heavy pressure from the
European Union for its refusal to comply with the dictates of the
homosexual political movement. ILGA-Europe's letter to the mayors read,
"ILGA-Europe is seriously concerned that despite a wide international
and European condemnation of bans on pride events and other public
demonstrations by LGBT [lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, transgendered] people
and their supporters, some Mayors and local authorities in Europe
continue to discriminate and ban or restrict the rights of freedom of
assembly and expression for LGBT people. That is why we are appealing to
all Mayors of European cities. We sincerely hope that you will support
our campaign and sign it." more...
Toward A Grand
Strategy for an Uncertain World
From What Björn Thinks
(March
24, 2008) - This is a 152-page document prepared to lay out
the case for transatlantic cooperation that I believe is leading to the
fulfillment of the declared New World Order and will expand in the
coming times to battle religious fundamentalism and act as the
foundation and framework for the
war on the saints. The linked page has the source document,
but primarily picks out certain aspects of the document pointing
out the reasons why. Thank you
Björn!
It's the end of Britain as we know it
Christian Science Monitor
(March
24, 2008) - The Lisbon Treaty spells the end of a
sovereign Britain. You might want to take that vacation in England
just as soon as you can – before its 1,000-year run as a sovereign
nation comes to an end. This winter, 27 nations of the European Union
(EU) signed the Treaty of Lisbon. You may think, "Innocuous enough," as
Portuguese-inspired visions of the Tagus River and chicken piri-piri
swirl before your eyes. But for England (Britain, actually) the Treaty
of Lisbon isn't that appetizing. That's because, if ratified, it will
become the decisive act in this creation of a federal European
superstate with its capital in Brussels. Britain would become a
province and its "Mother of Parliaments," a regional assembly. And
that's no small humiliation for a country that gave the world English
and saved Western civilization in the Battle of Britain in 1940. The
Eurocrat elite in Brussels might not admit it, but the Treaty of Lisbon
is essentially a constitution for a "country" called Europe.
More
bluntly, it's a cynical repackaging of the EU Constitution rejected by
French and Dutch voters in 2005. Former Prime Minister Tony Blair
promised to put the EU Constitution to the British people in a
referendum. But his successor, Gordon Brown, has reneged on that
promise. He insists that the Treaty of Lisbon is shorn of all
constitutional content and that it preserves key aspects of British
sovereignty. On March 11, the bill to ratify the treaty cleared the
House of Commons. And now the Brown government is poised to win passage
in the House of Lords, too. But British resistance is stirring. In a
recent series of mini referendums, almost 90 percent of voters gave the
Lisbon Treaty an emphatic thumbs down and demanded a nationwide
referendum. If all 27 nations ratify the treaty this year, it will
begin to come into effect on Jan. 1, 2009. The British will then be
expected to transfer loyalty and affection to the EU and devote
themselves increasingly to its wellbeing. With its flag, anthem,
currency, institutions, regulations, and directives, the EU has long
been indistinguishable from a nation-state-in-waiting. Now the
Lisbon Treaty gives it those requisites of nationhood it's always
lacked: a president, a foreign minister (and diplomatic corps), a
powerful new interior department, a public prosecutor and full
treaty-making powers. Add to those its common system of criminal
justice, an embryonic federal police force, and the faintly
sinister-sounding European Gendarmerie Force, and what this union
becomes is a monolithic state with great power pretensions. Most
alarmingly, though, is that the Lisbon Treaty can be extended
indefinitely without recourse to further treaties or referendums.
That 27 European nations are on the verge of being reconstituted as a
federal European superstate is substantially the achievement of the
fanatical French integrationist Jean Monnet, for whom the nation state
was anathema. When British Prime Minister Edward Heath took Britain
into the Common Market in 1973, the country thought it was entering a
free-trade agreement. It hoped membership would sprinkle some
European stardust on Britain's shipwrecked economy. Mr. Heath, a
passionate Europhile, assured the country that membership would not
entail any sacrifice of "independence and sovereignty." Like Europe's
fervent integrationists, whose plans for political union had always been
disguised as increasingly beneficial economic integration, Heath
maintained the fiction that he had simply joined a trading bloc.
Britain had been a highly successful nation state and global power. Now,
it seemed, she needed Europe to reverse a relentless decline. Thus
when the British were asked to decide on continued membership in the
Common Market in a 1975 referendum, almost 70 percent voted to stay in.
The "Yes" campaign swept to victory on a platform of jobs, prosperity,
and peace. But the implications for the weakening of national
sovereignty went unheeded. Few recalled that in 1961 the
Anti-Common Market League had warned that signing the Treaty of Rome
(which created the Common Market) "would mean a permanent, irrevocable
loss of sovereignty and independence" and that Britain's affairs "would
increasingly be administered by supranational bodies … instead of by our
own elected representatives." Surrendering to supranational rule is
hard for Britain given its celebrated past. Its European neighbors, by
contrast, their histories indelibly stained by tyranny, military defeat,
and imperial barbarity, seem eager to subsume themselves in a
suffocating superstate. The Treaty of Lisbon crystallizes the EU's core
belief that nation states are every bit as defunct as Stone Age tribes.
In the case of Britain, though, it would curtail the freedom of action
and global vision of a nation whose people are far from convinced that
sovereign independence is a badge of shame. Britain could walk out of
the EU today simply by repealing the 1972 European Communities Act. But
political courage of that order is in short supply. Perhaps only Queen
Elizabeth II can rescue her realm from the baleful Treaty of Lisbon. She
could veto it when it comes to her for royal assent and – sensationally
– declare that she's not prepared to see her proud, independent,
liberty-loving country swallowed up by an arrogant, authoritarian, and
unloved European superstate. She would be in excellent company. Queen
Anne refused assent to the Scottish Militia Bill in 1708. And that was
only about a bunch of musket-toting rubes of doubtful loyalty. This is
about national survival.
Embassies pay for devalued dollar
The Washington Times
(March
22, 2008) - The State Department is losing millions as a
result of the free-falling dollar, forcing its overseas missions to lay
off local staff, reduce energy consumption, put facility repairs on hold
and cancel travel, officials said. Although the dollar's weakness is
affecting embassies and consulates around the world, the most drastic
measures are being taken in Europe, where the euro has been trading
around $1.54. "It's beginning to hurt — there is no question about it.
It's tough on us," said Christopher R. Hill, assistant secretary of
state for East Asian and Pacific affairs. Another official said that 24
percent of the State Department's main operating account, which is $3.8
billion for 2008, is disbursed in foreign currencies. "We already have a
tight budget, and the buying power of those limited resources is further
affected by the decline of the dollar," the official said. He noted that
the department has a "buying power maintenance account" where it puts
money when the dollar's value goes up, but "there is no money in it
now." "The biggest impact I have seen is our ability to program events,"
a Foreign Service officer in Europe said. "We have had to become very
creative in finding cost-saving measures." Public diplomacy programs are
among the most affected, officials said. The officers spoke on the
condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to
reporters. "The weak dollar has made it much more expensive to do our
work, limiting our ability to travel around the country to monitor
events and engage contacts, limiting the number of representational
events we can organize for visiting U.S. and host-country officials,"
said another officer in Europe. Several officials said the higher cost
of maintaining existing facilities abroad reduces the funds available
for renovations and new construction. "We'd like to put in new embassies
in some places, but the price tag is going up every day," Mr. Hill said.
A third Foreign Service officer in Europe said that at his embassy
"electricity usage is being cut by reducing lighting and turning off hot
water heaters." "We have turned off every other fluorescent light in our
offices and hallways," he said. "We can still work, but it feels like
permanent sunset." Another major expense in foreign currency are the
salaries of thousands of local employees at U.S. embassies and
consulates. The first officer in Europe said that her salary is now
lower than that of her assistant, who is a national of the host country.
Still, the officer said that what the assistant makes is "below the
salary level [it] should be to be competitive on the local market."
While some posts in Europe are limiting or banning overtime for local
employees, others are resorting to freezing pay or even layoffs,
officials there said. Layoffs add to the workload of Foreign Service
officers, they said. American diplomats are protected against a sinking
dollar by an allowance that goes up when the U.S. currency goes down.
That allowance has just been increased in most European countries. In
Paris, it jumped from 80 percent to 90 percent of "spendable income," or
the amount after taxes, contributions and other payments. "Given the
time it takes to make the adjustment in the salary, you do lose out a
bit, but nothing major," an officer in central Europe said. Several
officers said the allowance is less meaningful to junior officers, whose
salaries are relatively low. It is also more difficult for those with
children, because they buy locally more than others. Most officers make
purchases from catalogs that are shipped to them from the United States
for no additional charge. Even though many diplomats said they still
live comfortably, they are cutting back on eating out, personal travel
and other entertainment. The biggest challenge, they said, are events
like weddings, births or other celebrations. One officer said that his
upcoming wedding, with about 100 guests, will easily cost more than
$50,000, while a couple of years ago the price tag would have been about
$30,000. "I don't have that kind of money, and I don't make that kind of
money," he said. "For this once-in-a-lifetime situation, I'm really
struggling." He added that he could have saved thousands of dollars by
having the wedding back home, but he is gay, and gay marriage is illegal
in the United States. It is legal in the western European country where
he is serving, which is also where his partner is from. While the
cost-of-living allowance of American diplomats in Europe is going up,
their European counterparts in Washington said theirs is being reduced.
"At the last adjustment, our 'expatriation bonus' went down about 7.5
percent," one European diplomat said. "We'll lose more money in the
coming months." Summit approves 'Union for the Mediterranean' Euractiv.com (March 14, 2008) - EU leaders have given the green light to a compromise, struck by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, to create a 'Union for the Mediterranean', an initiative aimed at upgrading the EU's relations with its neighbours from North Africa and the Middle East. The main focus of the new union will be on the following areas:
Sarkozy had originally
envisioned the new Union as an exclusive club, involving only the EU's
Mediterranean countries and its neighbours but not the EU as a whole.
But this proposal attracted strong criticism, particularly from Germany,
which feared the plan could split the EU down the middle, with the new
union becoming a rival to the EU itself. In the end, Sarkozy was forced
to back down and agree to allow all 27 EU member states to participate
in this initiative (EurActiv 05/03/08). He also agreed to change the
original title of "Mediterranean Union" to "Union of the Mediterranean"
to counter fears that the new body would become a rival to the bloc.
Germany also prevailed by holding to its position that no new EU money
beyond the funds allocated for the Barcelona Process should be given to
the new union, countering Franco-Italian demands that the financing for
the new body be multiplied. Sarkozy announced his intention to seek
additional funding from the private sector, hoping for up to 14 billion
euro. Another element of the compromise relates to the Union's
management structure, which will consist of two directors coordinating
cooperation between the EU and the partner countries. One director is to
come from the EU member states and the other from a non-European
Mediterranean country. Both will be appointed for two years, supported
by a 20-strong secretariat, to be located in a yet-to-be-determined
southern EU city. Barcelona and Marseille have been mentioned as
potential candidates, claimed Sarkozy, who denied having endorsed the
French city. The agreement also foresees bi-annual summit meetings
between the EU and its partner countries. Seen as a partial victory for
Paris, the southern EU nations will hold the first presidencies.
more...
Inside the hush-hush North American Union confab World Net Daily (March 13, 2008) - A largely unreported meeting held at the State Department discussed integration of the U.S., Mexico and Canada in concert with a move toward a transatlantic union, linking a North American community with the European Union. The meeting was held Monday under the auspices of the Advisory Committee on International Economic Policy, or ACIEP. WND obtained press credentials and attended as an observer. The meeting was held under "Chatham House" rules that prohibit reporters from attributing specific comments to individual participants. The State Department website noted the meeting was opened by Assistant Secretary of State for Economic, Energy and Business Affairs Daniel S. Sullivan and ACIEP Chairman Michael Gadbaw, vice president and senior counsel for General Electric's International Law & Policy group since December 1990. WND observed about 25 ACIEP members, including U.S. corporations involved in international trade, prominent U.S. business trade groups, law firms involved with international business law, international investment firms and other international trade consultants. No members of Congress attended the meeting. The agenda for the ACIEP meeting was not published, and State Department officials in attendance could not give WND permission under Chatham House rules to publish the agenda. The meeting agenda included topics reviewing the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP, and the U.S.-EU Transatlantic Economic Council, or TEC. The SPP, declared by the U.S., Canada and Mexico at a summit meeting in 2005, has 20 trilateral bureaucratic working groups that seek to "integrate and harmonize" administrative rules and regulations on a continental basis. Several participants said the premise of the SPP is to create a North American business platform to benefit North America-based multi-national companies the way the European Union benefits its own. Others noted the premise of the TEC is to create a convergence of administrative rules and regulations between Europe and North America, anticipating the creation of a "Transatlantic Economic Union" between the European Union and North America. Participants pointed out that transatlantic trade is currently 40 percent of all world trade. They argue that trade and non-trade barriers need to be further reduced to maintain that market share as a framework is put in place to advance transatlantic economic integration. Still, some participants argued that many corporations in North America already have moved beyond a North American focus to adopt a global perspective that transcends even the Transatlantic market. "Supply chains and markets are everywhere," one participant asserted. "What's to stop global corporations from going after the cheapest labor available globally, wherever they can find it, provided the cost of transporting goods globally can be managed economically?" Other participants argued regional alliances were still important, if only to put in place the institutional bases that ultimately would lead to global governance on uniform global administrative regulations favorable to multi-national corporations. "North America should be a premiere platform to establish continental institutions," a participant said. "That's why we need to move the security perimeters to include the whole continent, especially as we open the borders between North American countries for expanding free trade." One presentation on the agenda identified four reasons why administrative rules and regulations need to be integrated by SPP in North America and by the Transatlantic Economic Council, bridging together European Union and North American markets:
The discussion pointed out the SPP trilateral working
groups and the Transatlantic Economic Council were being supported by
top-level Cabinet officers and the heads of state in both the EU and in
North America. Progress in EU-U.S. regulatory integration was noted in
financial market coordination, investment rule cohesion, trade security
measures and efforts undertaken recently to preserve intellectual
property rights. more...
Euro News (March 12, 2008) - Video at link: As the EU continues to expand, openness and greater security are the key subjects for European ministers meeting in Slovenia. They are focusing on possible new measures including fingerprinting, and collecting information on anyone crossing Europe's borders, regardless of whether they are entering or leaving. A vast and profitable single market fulfilling every investor's dreams: that is the optimist's view of an enlarged Europe. But its critics say with no internal borders, any terrorist can move around at will, from country to country, and never be caught. EU Commissioner Franco Frattini says this is about tighter internal security, offset against the problems of the visa waiver agreements with the United States. This meeting builds on the existing European Security Strategy which is a mirror image of a similar arrangement in America. Both Europe and the US believe the world is full of new dangers, and multilateral co-operation is the only way to keep both continents as safe as possible. | EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | NewWorldOrder | 1st Seal | America |
EU must boost military capabilities in face of climate change EU Observer (March 10, 2008) - The European Union should boost its civil and military capacities to respond to "serious security risks" resulting from catastrophic climate change expected this century, according to a joint report from the EU's two top foreign policy officials. The EU and member states should further build up their capabilities with regards to civil protection, and civil and military crisis management and disaster response instruments to react to the security risks posed by climate change, reads a paper by EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana and external relations commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner. The seven-page paper, to be submitted to EU leaders at a summit in Brussels later this week, warns of a range of stark scenarios, in particular the threat of an intensified "scramble for resources" – both energy and mineral – in the Arctic "as previously inaccessible regions open up." The rapid melting of the polar ice caps is seen as a great opportunity for far-northern economies, as the "increased accessibility of the enormous hydrocarbon resources in the Arctic region" mean new waterways and international trade routes open for business where once there was only ice. But this does not come without certain hazards. The report highlights the threat to Europe from Russia. "The resulting new strategic interests are illustrated by the recent planting of the Russian flag under the North Pole." Eco-migration: Additionally, the report suggests that Europe will come under increasing pressure from so-called eco-migration. "Europe must expect substantially increased migratory pressure," says the report. "Populations that already suffer from poor health conditions, unemployment or social exclusion are rendered more vulnerable to the effects of climate change, which could amplify or trigger migration within and between countries." The document notes that the UN has predicted that there will be millions of environmental migrants by 2020, and warns that the pressure will not only come from beyond Europe's borders, but that climate change "is also likely to exacerbate internal migration with significant security consequences." Other worries include water shortages and the consequent food price increases that result from lower crop yields, all of which could lead to civil unrest, particularly in the Middle East. This in turn puts pressure on energy security. more...| EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | Solana | NewWorldOrder | International Herald Tribune (March 10, 2008) - For months, for years, we have been deeply distressed, yet powerless, with respect to the tragedy in Darfur. Two weeks ago, despite the troubles in Chad, Europe gave itself the means to protect the victims and to rebuild their villages in eastern Chad. At the behest of France, and thanks to the efforts of our European partners, the European Union - implementing a unanimous UN Security Council resolution - launched its Eufor operation. There will finally be help and comfort for women - who up to now were raped or killed as soon as they left their camps - and for hungry children. This is no small achievement. I've just returned from Goz Beida in eastern Chad, and I will never forget the enthusiastic welcome the European soldiers received from displaced persons and refugees. The launch of an autonomous EU operation in Africa, led by an Irish general with a Polish deputy and bringing together troops from some 15 countries, illustrates how far we have come in building a European defense. It is now desired and supported by nations that until very recently remained skeptical. We have been working to build a European defense since the 1990s. The Europeans needed military means commensurate with their political ambitions. How could we hope to influence a crisis or negotiations without the means to back up our words? "The Union must have the capacity for autonomous action, backed up by credible military forces, the means to decide to use them, and a readiness to do so, in order to respond to international crises," concluded the Franco-British Saint-Malo Summit in 1998. The European Security and Defense Policy inscribed in the Lisbon Treaty is finally allowing us to meet this need. In the future, if we wish to do so, the EU will be able to fully assume its role on the international scene. No one can deny that this is a major asset for peace in the world. The approximately 15 civilian and military operations that Europe has already conducted since 2003 in the Balkans, in Africa, in the Middle East, in Afghanistan and as far away as Indonesia, largely attest to this. In each of them, the EU was guided by a single ideal: to save lives, to avert war, and to work for reconstruction and reconciliation when the international community had been unable to prevent conflict. Each time we did so with a concern for effectiveness and pragmatism, with or without direct support from the Americans. Our vision of relations between the EU and NATO is that they should be founded on this same pragmatism. In some cases, the EU has used its own military means, as it did in Congo in the past and is doing in Chad and the Central African Republic today. In other situations - Bosnia, for example - the EU benefited from NATO support. Now, in a growing number of crises, the EU and NATO are deployed together on the ground. That is sufficient to show that there is not competition but rather complementarity between the two organizations. How could it be otherwise when 21 of the 26 NATO allies are members of the EU, and 21 of the 27 EU partners are members of NATO? Moreover, it is these individual nations that decide on a case-by-case basis what is the most appropriate framework for their actions. And it is they who supply troops and equipment - there is no EU army, just as there is no NATO army. And all the parties remain free. This very simple truth means that European defense relies on the commitment of each state and that all may do their share. It presumes that all European countries make the effort to ensure that the security of all is no longer guaranteed or financed by only a few. As France is one of the largest contributors to both EU and NATO operations, it is in our interest, even more than in that of others, for the two organizations to work more effectively together. The positions expressed by President Nicolas Sarkozy last fall are clear: A tireless promoter of European defense, France is at the same time a key member of NATO, whose forces it has commanded on several occasions, particularly in Kosovo and Afghanistan. Our new approach to NATO is not an alignment but rather a strengthened European dynamic. Some claim that the United States remains opposed to a European defense, as it would weaken NATO. This claim no longer appears to be true. Recent statements by high-ranking U.S. officials in Paris and London indicate that Washington - aware of the challenges we must face together - acknowledges the necessary complementarity of the two organizations. Trust is built over time and through reciprocity: Our openness to the United States and American support for the EU autonomously assuming its responsibilities shall advance hand in hand. European defense and Europe's anchorage in the Atlantic alliance are two facets of the same defense and security policy, pursued in the name of the values we share. The EU presidency, which France will assume on July 1, must allow us to open new perspectives in the field of security and defense, to fight against terrorism and proliferation more effectively, to reinforce our energy security, and to prepare the implementation of permanent structured cooperation open to all 27 member states, as made possible by the new treaty. We will resolutely strive toward that aim. We are already preparing ourselves under the presidency of our Slovenian friends. This progress will give full meaning to the renewal of our relationship with NATO. | EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | Solana | NewWorldOrder | 1st Seal | America |
President or
foreign minister - who should talk to Medvedev?
EU Observer (March
7, 2008) -
Listening to an analysis of the Russian presidential election, I
heard the interviewer ask who would now be handling Russian foreign
policy? Would it be the President - the newly elected ex-Chairman of
the Russian state energy giant, Gazprom, whose name was lost to
Hillary Clinton the other day - Mr Dmitry Medvedev? Or would it be
that prime ministerial power behind, under, over, around, and beside
the President's throne - Mr Vladimir Putin? The government spokesman
muttered something safe, as spokesmen are wont to do. Under our
constitution, he said, the President deals with foreign policy while
the Prime Minister (that is Mr Putin) deals with domestic matters.
We shall have to wait to see what happens in practice but only the
bright and naively optimistic can surely imagine that the Putin
finger will, not only be in every domestic pie, but on every foreign
policy trigger as well. ...But before we Europeans shake our heads
and tut-tut (and after all the congratulations to Mr Mevedev and the
hoping that his election will usher in a new, warm period in
EU-Russian relations, there is a very great deal to tut-tut at in
Russian politics and not only Mr Putin's flagrant warping of the
Constitution and suppression of all viable opposition) we could well
turn the question back on ourselves and ponder who, in practice,
will actually be responsible for foreign policy, on our side of the
fence so to speak, in the post-Lisbon Treaty World of 2009? Who
will have the job of dealing face to face with Mr Putin and Mr
Mevedev over energy security, border control, trade, missile sites,
nuclear installations, climate change, extradition matters,
exploitation of the Arctic, the Caucasus, Serbia, the United
Nations, and so on? Who will handle the relations between democratic
Europe and despotic Russia; between two nuclear armed continents
that share a long border? Will it be Europe's Foreign Minister
designate under the Lisbon Treaty, Or will it be the President of
the European Council? ...In the absence of a coherent European
foreign policy (look how split Europe is over Kosovo, over US
missile defence bases, over gas pipelines) Russia naturally finds it
easy to play one country off against another. Nothing unites us
quite so well as our disunity. But a strong European foreign
policy will require leadership and diplomatic skills of the highest
order, both to secure the policy at home and then to put it across
abroad. As the Constitutional Convention of 2003 foresaw,
Europe does need someone to speak with both personal and
constitutional authority on Foreign Affairs. Should this person
be the (so-not-called) Foreign Minister - or should it be Europe's
President, the man or woman whose task it will be to coral the
member states, pushing the agenda along in the manner of someone
first among equals? At present, of course, there is no EU
President as such. The Lisbon Treaty creates a new and, as yet,
undefined post. Foreign Policy is split between the High
Representative (Mr Solana) who works for the member states, and the
External Relations Commissioner, Mrs Ferrero-Waldner. These two
posts will be combined into something which, in practice, will be a
quasi-Secretary of State role. Mr Solana (for he is the favourite)
will then have a foot in both camps. But a Secretary
of State is a Secretary of State. He or she acts on behalf of the
head of state. Now the European Union is not a state; it is a
partnership of states that wish, ostensibly, to align their foreign
policies to achieve goals and influence which they could not expect
to achieve, in this global world, by acting alone. But if the
partnership is to find a voice and then speak with authority, it
needs a strong President. ...Vladimir Putin may have been prepared
to bend the constitution and engage in practices so anti-democratic
that election observers feel they cannot operate in Russia, so great
are the restrictions placed upon them. But Europeans beware! Our own
democratic credentials at the Continental level are wafer thin; some
would say non-existent. Europe's President will be appointed; not
even indirectly elected. As will be the Foreign Minister. Are
their democratic credentials, therefore, any better than those of Mr
Medvedev and Mr Putin? If our enlarged Europe is to pursue a united
and successful foreign policy, she must not fall into the Russian
trap of becoming another ‘sovereign democracy.' Criticising Russia
here may be another case of pots and kettles. more...
EU's
Solana condemns Jerusalem attack
European
Jewish Press (March
6, 2008) - European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana
condemned Thursday night a deadly attack on a yeshiva or Jewish
religious school in Jerusalem. "Javier Solana spoke tonight with the
Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni to condemn the terrorist that
killed at least eight students and injured many more, " a statement from
the EU Council said. Solana, who had talks in Israel earlier this week,
sent to Livni his condolences to the families of the victims and to the
Israeli authorities. A Palestinian terrorist entered the building of the
Merkaz Harav Yeshiva religious school in Jerusalem late Thursday and
started shooting, killing eight students and wounding 35. Security
services in Israel have been on alert for the past three weeks since
Israel was blamed by Hezbollah for the assassination in Baghdad of one
of its top commanders, Imad Mughniye. France also condemned the attack.
"France condemns in the strongest terms the horrible attack this evening
in a Talmudic school in west Jerusalem which has caused the death of
numerous civilians," Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said in a
statement. Kouchner called for "talks aimed at the creation of a
Palestinian state living in peace and security alongside Israel".
I call on the FARC not to commit the irreparable Le Figaro (March 6, 2008) - Nicolas Sarkozy believes that an agreement between France and Germany is "necessary" to advance the EU, but that it "is not enough". There has been much commented on your disagreement with the German chancellor, Angela Merkel. Have you turned this page?
What agreement did you find out about this case?
The agreement between France and Germany is still the engine of the European Union?
more...
UK referendum
bid defeated EU Observer
(March
6, 2008) - The UK's parliament has rejected a call for referendum
on the new EU's Lisbon treaty, a move representing a victory for Labour
Prime Minister Gordon Brown which has argued in the face of bitter
opposition that there should not be a public poll. The House of Commons
on late Wednesday (5 March) voted against the proposal for a popular
vote by 311 votes to 248, with a margin of 63, the BBC reported. The
Lisbon treaty was signed by EU leaders in December 2007 and it must be
ratified by all the bloc's member states before taking into force. Most
countries have opted for a parliamentary ratification, with only Ireland
due to hold a referendum on the issue, probably in June. The push for a
popular vote in Britain was due to a manifesto pledge before the 2005
general elections by all three main political parties to ask citizens
for their approval of the EU constitution. The constitution was
subsequently rejected by French and Dutch voters in mid-2005, but the
current treaty contains most of its innovations. While the UK's ruling
Labour party as well as the Liberal Democrats claim the Lisbon treaty no
longer has constitutional implications for Britain and so does require a
referendum, the Conservatives insist the document is the constitution
but with a different name. "We have the courage of our convictions and
are sticking to that promise - you have lost your courage," Conservative
leader David Cameron told the prime minister in a passionate debate in
parliament. Mr Brown hit back by saying: "If this was a constitutional
treaty, we would hold a referendum. But the constitutional concept was
abandoned." The Labour MPs also referred to several "opt-outs" from the
Lisbon treaty that the government had negotiated, mainly on citizens
rights, and justice and home affairs. But Wednesday's vote showed some
differences of opinion within the political parties over their own
official lines on the treaty. Some 29 Labour MPs and 13 Liberal
Democrats voted with the Conservatives in favour of a referendum, while
three Conservatives voted against their party line. Britain is now
expected to ratify the treaty by the summer. So far, five countries have
given the green light to the document: Hungary, Slovenia, Malta, France,
and Romania.
EU plans international embassies
Telegraph.UK
(March 5, 2008) - The European Union will
open its own embassies under a plan critics fear represents a "power
grab" by Brussels officials pushing for a federal superstate. The secret
plan represents the first time that full EU embassies have been
discussed seriously. The "Embassies of the Union" would be controlled by
a new EU diplomatic service created by the
Lisbon Treaty. The Daily Telegraph has seen a high-level Brussels
document discussing plans for a "European External Action Service"
(EEAS) which was proposed under the new EU Treaty, currently being
ratified in Westminster. Talks have so far remained behind closed doors.
Officials fear political fallout over plans to implement the new
Treaty before it has been fully ratified. Working papers
circulating in Brussels suggest that more than 160 EU offices around the
world, including in member states, would become embassies. The new
service would rival established diplomatic services. Britain, with
one of the world's largest, maintains 139 embassies and high commissions
in capital cities. Equally controversial is a proposal for EU
ambassadors who would be accountable to the European Parliament.
"Parliament should aim for proper hearings of special representatives
and ambassadorial nominees in the tradition of the US Congress for
nominations of a clearly political nature," says the document. Plans
for the new foreign service have raised highly sensitive political
issues by giving trappings of statehood to the EU and by fusing, for the
first time, national diplomats with existing "eurocrats". A vicious
battle over who should control the diplomatic corps has broken out
between national governments and the European Commission. Countries such
as Britain are alarmed that the EEAS, which is expected to take on some
consular activities, would be a stepping stone to a single
"supranational" euro-diplomatic service. Meanwhile, Brussels officials
fear that, if controlled by national governments, the new EEAS would
draw power from "Community" bodies, such as the Commission, to
inter-governmental institutions such as the Council of the EU, which
represents member states. "Any inter-governmentalism of policy areas
under Community competence has to be avoided," states the confidential
document. "The EEAS will have to be in a specific way administratively
connected to the European Commission." The EEAS will number between
2,500 to 3,000 officials at its inception in January next year. It is
then expected to grow to 7,000, or even up to 20,000, according to
different estimates. Britain, which loses its veto over the EEAS after
it is created by a European summit decision expected in October, is
expected to contribute around 20 to 30 senior diplomats to the EU
service. William Hague, the shadow foreign secretary, said yesterday:
"As predicted the renamed EU Constitution is forming the basis of a
power grab by the EU. It exposes Labour's stupidity in giving up the
veto on an area key to Britain's interests." A Foreign Office spokesman
said: "The UK opposes and will argue against naming EEAS offices
embassies.
Climate change poses 'security risk'
London Financial Times
(March 3, 2008) - Climate change poses
"serious security risks" and fighting it should be part of "preventive
security policy", according to the European Union's top diplomats,
writes Andrew Bounds in Brussels. The warning is contained in a paper
prepared for an EU summit this month by Javier Solana, the bloc's
foreign policy chief, and Benita Ferrero-Waldner, external relations
commissioner. The paper, seen by Financial Times Deutschland and the FT,
says increased natural disasters and shortages of water, food and other
resources in the developing world could affect European security. The
threat of water wars is particularly grave in the Middle East.
Two-thirds of the Arab world relies on external supplies. "Existing
tensions over access to water are almost certain to intensify in the
region, leading to further political instability with detrimental
implications for Europe's energy security and other interests. Water
supply in Israel might fall by 60 per cent over this century," the paper
says. It anticipates falling harvests in Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Saudi
Arabia, creating instability there. "Climate change will fuel conflicts
over depleting resources, especially where access to those resources is
politicised," it says, citing the fighting in Darfur. It points to seven
threats, including disappearing islands and coastlines, increased
migration, a new scramble for resources in the Arctic and greater
competition for access to energy.
Gaza: EU Slovenian presidency condemns ‘disproportionate use of force’
by Israel European
Jewish Press (March 2, 2008) - The European Union has
condemned on Sunday what it called the “disproportionate use of force"
by Israel in the Gaza Strip as the EU’s foreign policy chief, Javier
Solana is arriving in the region. In a statement, the EU’s Slovenian
presidency said: "The presidency condemns the recent disproportionate
use of force by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) against Palestinian
population in Gaza and urges Israel to exercise maximum restraint and
refrain from all activities that endanger civilians." It added: "Such
activities are contrary to international law. The Presidency at the same
time reiterates condemnation of continued firing of rockets into Israeli
territory and calls for its immediate end." The statement was issued
after intense fighting in the Gaza Strip over the weekend in which
fifty-four Palestinians and two Israeli soldiers were killed. Senior
Israeli political and military leaders have been mulling a major ground
operation in the Gaza Strip for months, as Hamas militants launched
daily rocket and mortar attacks on southern Israel. The EU presidency
said "it rejects collective punishment of the people of Gaza." "We are
deeply worried about the suffering of the civilian population on Israeli
and Palestinian side. We have stated too many times that both
Israelis and Palestinians deserve to live in peace and security,”
the statement said...
Javier Solana,
the European Union foreign policy chief, has started on Sunday a 3-day
visit to Israel, the Palestinian territories and Lebanon. In Israel,
Solana will meet on Monday with Israeli President Shimon Peres, Prime
Minister Ehud Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Defence Minister
Ehud Barak. On Tuesday, the EU official will travel to the Palestinian
territories for meetings with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Prime
Minister Salam Fayyad, Ahmed Ali Mohammed Qurei, chairman of the
Palestinian negotiating team, and Saeb Erekat, head of the negotiations
affairs department. According to his cabinet, Solana will stress the
importance of keeping the Annapolis peace process on track and underline
the EU's commitment to this process and its support for the parties. He will also stress the EU's readiness to help bring about and implement
a solution to the situation in Gaza. more... Europe In The World: The Next Steps Cyril Foster Lecture: Javier Solana (February 28, 2008) - It is a special honor to give this year's Cyril Foster lecture. Cyril Foster, I understand, was a special character. A retired owner of a shop selling sweets, who lived and died in a caravan. He left the remains of his estate to this University [Oxford], stating that his money be used to promote peace with an annual lecture. This speech had to focus on "the elimination of war and better understanding of the nations of the world." The commitment of ordinary people like Cyril Foster to international peace offers an important message to those involved in daily diplomacy. Our responsibility is not just to defend the national interest but to put this in context of wider international interests. Gorbachev used the phrase "all-human values." This may sound foreign to use. But I know what he was talking about. Since we are gathered in the Examination Schools, I am conscious I had better try to answer the exam questions that have been set. Why should the European Union play a global role? What have we learned in recent years? And what are the next steps? In science, as in politics, one has to make the case. It cannot be assumed. So what is the case for a credible European Union foreign policy? Broadly speaking, I see two logics: First, and perhaps most familiar, is the logic of effectiveness. It has become a cliché to say that the world around us is changing fast. Trite, perhaps, but no less true. Complexity and uncertainty are core features of the international landscape. The boundaries of national and international politics are blurring. Old templates do not enable us to make sense of today's new threats, new issues and new powers. Meanwhile, many of the old problems from the rubble of past empires endure. In addition, power is shifting away. Both within political systems where markets, NGOs, media and individuals are increasingly powerful. But also between political systems: from the West to East, from North to South. It is clear, or it should be, that in the face of these broad trends, national cards have only limited reach. These days, if you want to solve problems, you must bring together broad constellations of international actors. This applies to all governments around the world. But especially to Europe: a group of medium-sized countries that have had out-sized influence on the world. And whose power base, in relative demographic and economic terms, is eroding. These days politics, like business, is increasingly taking place on a continental or even global scale. It is interesting that sometimes our publics and companies seem ahead of governments in realising this. So the first reason has to do with the changes in the world around us. Effectiveness requires us to group together. On top of the external rationale, there is also an internal, specific European one. For a credible European foreign policy should also be seen as the logical extension of the origins of the European project. With six words, the French poet Paul Valéry captured the European condition in 1945: 'We hope vaguely, we dread precisely.' It was only after Europe had experienced the horrors of the 20th century that people were ready to try a radical new idea: peace through openness; integration based on strong institutions and laws; a paradigm change whereby the strength of one's neighbour was no longer seen as a threat but as an asset. European integration, together with NATO, has been essential for this fantastic success. No one under 60 has experienced a general European war. Historically speaking, this is not the "normal" condition for our continent. Then there is enlargement, through which we have expanded the zone of peace, stability and law. In the European Union we practice system change: it is voluntary, peaceful and extraordinarily successful. From the original six t 27 member-states today. More than 500 million people living under a Community of law. Yes, all this has required a sharing of powers. Some people believe that sharing power means there is less of it when you share it. On the contrary, there is more. Michael Heseltine once expressed this point with a good phrase: "A man alone in the desert is sovereign. He is also powerless." By being members of the European Union, countries regain the capacity to address problems that, on their own, they would have no hope of solving. In other words, the rationale for European integration extends far beyond "no more war." Although that remains a success we should not belittle. So the twin logics are: First effectiveness driven by external forces. And second, extending the internal success of the European project. From peace on our continent to promoting peace in the world. In addition, the internal and external logics are linked. For the nature of the integration project has influenced the kind of foreign policy we are trying to shape. Internally, it has been all about taming the passion of states and spreading the rule of law. To make power lawful and the law powerful. That is the way we started and succeeded inside Europe. And that is how we try to operate outside. Domestically, people are more free if they live under the rule of law than if they live in anarchy. So rules make people free and secure. In the same way, states have more control over their destiny if they can establish a framework of rules and operate together. All this explains our support for strong institutions and rules. From the UN to the WTO to the African Union or the OSCE. But also on specific issues: from human rights, to non-proliferation, to climate change. Mind you, all this is not some naïve do-goodism. We know that all of us, including the strongest, benefit from having a system of rules. And we know that rules need to be enforced. Above all, we know that promoting peace, law and institutions, requires taking risks. Politically and with people on the ground. That is precisely what we have done. Since 2003 we have deployed 18 operations on three continents. From classic peace-keeping, to border monitoring, to security sector, police or judicial reform. In recent years, around 10,000 people have been deployed in EU operations. These operations are mostly small in size. But conceptually they are quite sophisticated. Mixing military with civilian instruments; in support of a political strategy... What about the third part of the exam question, the
"next steps?" If we are serious about a more effective European foreign
policy, there are many things we have to do. Let me mention just three.
Firstly, we need more capabilities for crisis management. Plus we
need a greater willingness to use the ones we have. It is striking that,
after we have agreed together to deploy missions in Afghanistan or Chad
or elsewhere, the force generation takes longer than it should. By being
smarter in how we spend on defence, we can get more usable equipment and
capabilities. In similar vein, we should expand the number of rapidly
deployable and adequately trained civilians. Sometimes mobilising
civilians is even harder than military, since they do not wait in
barracks to be called to duty. Secondly, when we agree by
consensus on what to do, we need greater efficiency in translating that
into effective action on the ground. The
Lisbon Treaty will help very much. It is right that
consensus remains required for decision-making in foreign policy. But
once we have taken decisions, we should be able to implement them faster
and more effectively. Thirdly, and most difficult: we need to
think differently about foreign policy as such. Foreign policy these
days should not be just about diplomats, soldiers and development
workers. And about how we can bring these "tribes" better together -
although doing so is necessary. Modern foreign policy should be broader
and involve wider sets of people. From those working on energy and
climate change to migration and asylum to international economics.
Perhaps I could make the same point somewhat differently. If the
European Union gets its act together on energy, climate change and
migration, we will have created big building blocks for a foreign policy
fit for the 21st century. more...
Europe's Power to Lead
The Moscow Times
(February
28, 2008) - At last month's World Economic Forum in Davos, the
buzz was about Asia's growing power. One Asian analyst argued that by
2050, there will be three world powers: the United States, China and
India. He did not mention Europe, but underestimating Europe's power is
a mistake. Yes, Europe currently punches below its weight. It is
fragmented, peaceful and normative in a world of hard power, but part of
the world is not about military power. The use of force among advanced
industrial democracies is virtually unthinkable. In their relations with
each other, such countries are all from Venus, to paraphrase U.S.
political commentator Robert Kagan, and here Europe's focus on law and
institutions is an asset. A recent Pew poll found that many Europeans
would like Europe to play a larger role in other parts of the world. To
balance U.S. military power, however, would require a doubling or
tripling of defense spending, and few Europeans are interested in such
an increase. Nevertheless, a smart strategy for Europe will require
greater investments in hard power. The picture for Europe, however, is
not as bleak as pessimists assume. Power is the ability to get the
outcomes one wants, and the resources that produce such behavior depend
upon the context. In functional terms, power is distributed like a
three-dimensional chess game. On the top board are military relations
among states, with the United States the world's only superpower with
global reach. Here the world is unipolar. On the middle board are
economic relations, where the world is already multipolar. Here, Europe
acts as a union, and other countries like Japan and China play big roles.
The United States cannot reach a trade agreement or settle antitrust
cases without the approval of the European Union. Or, to take
another example, Europe was able to lead the drive to remove Paul
Wolfowitz from the World Bank. The bottom chessboard includes
transnational relations outside the control of governments -- everything
from drugs to infectious diseases to climate change to terrorism. On
this board, power is chaotically distributed among nonstate actors, and
it makes no sense to call this world either unipolar or multipolar.
Here, close civilian cooperation is important, for which Europe is
well endowed. European countries' success in overcoming centuries of
animosity, and the development of a large internal market, has given
them a great deal of soft power. At the Cold War's end, East
European countries did not try to form local alliances, as they did in
the 1920s, but looked toward Brussels to secure their future. Similarly,
countries like Turkey and Ukraine have adjusted their policies in
response to their attraction to Europe. Recently, the U.S. National
Intelligence Council published four widely different scenarios for the
world in 2020: Davos World, in which economic globalization continues
but with a more Asian face; Pax Americana, where the United States
continues to dominate the global order; New Caliphate, where Islamic
religious identity challenges the dominance of Western norms; and Cycle
of Fear, in which nonstate forces create shocks to security that produce
Orwellian societies. Like any exercise in futurology, such scenarios
have their limits, but they help us ask which three or four major
political factors will help shape the outcome. The third major
determinant of which scenario will prevail will be U.S. power and how it
is used. The United States will remain the most powerful country in
2020, but, paradoxically, the strongest state since the days of Rome
will be unable to protect its citizens acting alone. U.S.
military might is not adequate to deal with threats such as global
pandemics, climate change, terrorism and international crime. These issues require cooperation in the provision of global public good
and in the soft-power technique of attracting support. No part of
the world shares more values or has a greater capacity to influence U.S.
attitudes and power than Europe. This suggests that the fourth
political determinant of the future will be the evolution of European
policies and power. more...
Dollar plunges to fresh record euro low
Breitbart.com
(February
27, 2008) - The dollar plunged to another record low against the
European single currency on Wednesday as a stream of negative US data
undermined the greenback, analysts said. In morning deals, the euro
surged as high as 1.5088 dollars, after smashing through the 1.50
barrier for the first ever time in US trade on Tuesday. "The euro is
trading above 1.50 against the dollar for the first time since the
eurozone came into existence in January 1999," said Global Insight
analyst Howard Archer. "This is primarily a consequence of the dollar
being undermined by further weak US data heightening concerns over the
US economy and reinforcing expectations of additional interest rate cuts
by the Federal Reserve."
Sarkozy wants six-nation elite EU defence force
EUX.tv
(February 17, 2008) - French President
Nicolas Sarkozy is pushing to create an elite European defence force
consisting of forces from the six largest EU member states: France,
Germany, the UK, Spain, Italy and Poland. According to an outline of the
plans presented in French daily Le Figaro, each of the six countries
would contribute 10,000 troops for a special intervention force, they
would all spend a minimum of 2 percent of GDP on defence, and they would
jointly make major defence acquisitions. The group of six would
constitute a European "hard core" defence group, said French MP Pierre
Lellouche in a recent interview with Le Figaro. Lellouche is Sarkozy's
spokesman on defence. Plans for increased defence cooperation among EU
member states are seen as controversial in NATO circles. In the past
they have drawn fire especially from the United States. EU member states
already have a mechanism for joint procurement in the area of defence.
France is due to take over the rotating presidency of the EU in July.
France: Sarkozy wins vote on EU treaty with help of Socialist Party
World Socialist Website
(February 16,
2008) - President Nicolas Sarkozy has finally succeeded in
imposing the Lisbon Treaty on the French population, with critical
assistance from the Socialist Party. The treaty was approved by the
National Assembly on February 7 by a vote of 336 to 52. A majority of
Socialist Party deputies voted in favour or were absent from the vote.
The treaty is a revised version of the European Constitution, which was
decisively rejected by French and Dutch voters in popular referendums in
2005 because it embodied the free-market economics required by European
capitalism. Although the Socialist Party (SP) and its ally in the
National Assembly, the French Communist Party (PCF), did not have enough
members to vote down the treaty, three days earlier they had the
opportunity to require the government to put the issue before the French
people in another referendum before it could be ratified by parliament.
The acceptance of the treaty necessitated a modification of the French
constitution, which requires a three-fifths majority vote of the
Congress (the joint meeting of the National Assembly and the Senate at
the Palace of Versailles), the only body empowered to change the
constitution. The modification allowed the EU Treaty to be adopted
without a referendum. While the SP, along with the PCF, did have the
two-fifths representation that would have enabled them to prevent the
constitutional change, they chose not to do so. The ruling elites of
France and Europe feared that the French working class, in opposition to
Sarkozy’s dismantling of the welfare state and attacks on living
standards and democratic rights, would again scupper their plans. By
allowing Sarkozy to push through the Lisbon Treaty, the SP has
effectively given the go-ahead to the government to carry forward its
vast programme of “reforms.” Sarkozy appeared on television February 10
to express his relief that “a simplified treaty...was a solution that
allowed partisans and opponents of the [European] constitution to
surmount their differences.” In fact, the constitution and the Lisbon
Treaty are essentially identical. The architect of the constitution,
former French president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, has already described
the Lisbon Treaty as a “near perfect copy of the 2005 treaty.” Sleep well: Javier Solana and Company are Protecting you! Constance Cumbey (February 15, 2008) - Last year, this time, Javier Solana spoke in New York City to the Arthur Burns Foundation, a German-American journalist group. "Dear Javier" was introduced as the "face and voice of Europe" by the German Ambassador to the USA. It appears he celebrated Valentine's Day, once again, not with wife Concepcion, but in New York City, this time to celebrate the opening of a foundation designed to shred, if not obliterate, national sovereignty: "Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect." In his own imicable words:
But, who's going to
protect us from "Dear Javier" and the "Global Centre"?
AIM Says Media Cover-Up Obama’s Socialist-Oriented Global Tax Bill
Accuracy In Media (February
13, 2008) - Accuracy in Media editor Cliff Kincaid disclosed
today that a hugely expensive bill called the "Global Poverty
Act," sponsored by Democratic Senator Barack Obama, was quickly
passed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday and
could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States.
Kincaid said that the major media's cover-up of the bill, which
makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the
dictates of the United Nations, demonstrates the media's desire to
see Senator Obama elected to the presidency. In a column posted
on the AIM web site, Kincaid noted that Senator Joe Biden, chairman
of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was trying to rush
Obama's "Global Poverty Act" (S. 2433) through his committee without
hearings. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7
percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a
phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the
U.S. already spends. It was scheduled for a Thursday vote but
was moved up a day, to Wednesday, and rushed through by voice vote.
Kincaid learned, however, that conservative Senators have now put a
"hold" on the legislation, in order to prevent it from being rushed
to the floor for a full Senate vote. The House version (H.R. 1302)
was suddenly brought up on the House floor last September 25 and was
passed by voice vote. House Republicans were caught off-guard,
unaware that the pro-U.N. measure committed the U.S. to spending
hundreds of billions of dollars. Kincaid's column notes that the
official in charge of making nations comply with the U.N. Millennium
Goals, which are prominently highlighted in the Obama bill, says a global tax will be necessary to force American taxpayers to
provide the money.
For the benefit of you doubting Solana's global influence Constance Cumbey (February 13, 2008) - To my readers: There have been some doubters of Javier Solana's global influence, particularly as he currently appears to be hiding behind upcoming 6 month EU presidency holders such as Nicholas Sarkozy and/or Angela Merkel. I thought you might want to review this release coming from his own office last March 2007. It was about a global governance speech he had just delivered to launch a new "global governance" project with the enthusiastic cooperation of many powerful people in the USA. Nearly one year later, I wonder how that "global governance" project is coming? Stay tuned! Javier SOLANA, EU High Representative for the
CFSP, launched a research initiative on global security at the Brookings
Institution, Washington.
Javier SOLANA, EU High Representative for the Common Foreign and
Security Policy (CFSP), today delivered an introductory lecture to
launch a research initiative on global security at the US think tank the
Brookings Institution in Washington. Mr Solana underlined the good
relations between the EU and the US. In a broader context, as complex
security challenges defy traditional approaches, Mr
Solana suggested that, instead of "ad hoc" international cooperation, a
universal system to address complex security challenges was needed.
"Globalization has unleashed forces that governments can neither stop
nor control", Mr Solana said. Citing terrorism, non-proliferation,
climate change, epidemics and failed states as problems that could not
be solved by single governments alone, Mr Solana called for a
revitalization of international cooperation by finding ways "to share
power and think about new power". (Emphasis added) Enemy of the Civilization A Time, Times, and Half A Time (February 12, 2008) - Shared Security is the doctrine that a person living in one part of the world has responsibility for the security and well being of a person living in other parts of the world. For example, a person living in Mexico shares responsibility for the well being of a person living in Pakistan and so forth. Shared Security incorporates the doctrines of EU and UN-architected human security and Canadian-architected Responsibility to Protect. These doctrines are designed to eradicate and prevent extreme poverty, hunger, abuses against women and children, genocide, terrorism, insecurities caused by economic collapse and/or state failure, etc. The Shared Security doctrine is the security model for the new global government. In a globalized world where national borders shall become obsolete, nations are expected to fundamentally shift their security strategies. Strategies which once were concerned primarily with forces of external aggression are now being called upon to focus on threats from within. The issues Shared Security addresses are legitimate and should concern all of us—so why should we oppose it? As one becomes familiar with the global governance leadership one learns to read further to, as Paul Harvey says, “get the rest of the story”. Having read calls for sustainable development following drastic population reduction has left me skeptical that good will is the guiding principle. Underlying Shared Security is a fully-developed interlocking security model called CIMIC, i.e., Civilian-Military Cooperation. To understand CIMIC, let’s further examine the components which make up Shared Security. Starting with the Canadian-architected “Responsibility to Protect”, this doctrine has become the cornerstone of the United Nations’ reform and security architecture. The Report of the International Conference "The EU, the US and the Reform of the United Nations: Challenges and Perspectives reveals that “the most significant conceptual shift occurred through the linking of the notions of sovereignty with that of responsibility. Responsibility is not only a virtue to be promoted to achieve international security; it is also a condition necessary to exercise full sovereignty. For the High Level Panel States are means, not ends per se. The “responsibility to protect” populations from atrocities and gross human rights violations shared between states and international institutions, becomes the new organizing concept for the new international security system. A number of participants shared the view that when states are unable or unwilling to perform these functions, the international community must intervene, even with the use of force when necessary.” Responsibility to Protect is understandable where nations are called upon to respond to state aggression and genocide, but language exists which is vulnerable to broad interpretation and abuse. In my previous blog post I presented some of the global governance documents which target political dissent and monotheistic religious doctrines as “extremist” ideologies which lend themselves to violent radicalization. Interpretations of religious texts which do not conform to the Alliance of Civilizations’ guidelines are said to cause social exclusion and violate others’ human rights. (It escapes their attention that syncretism of the world’s faiths and the requirement that everyone discard their religion for a new revelation—one which their messianic figure Maitreya is expected to introduce—is itself exclusivist and violently radicalizing.) While the Responsibility to Protect establishes the framework for vacating a nation’s sovereignty, it is the Human Security doctrine that, in the interest of human rights, implements the global interlocking civilian-military cooperation (CIMIC) model. The idea behind CIMIC is that it places the civilian population under military policing authority. Canada’s experience with CIMIC provides some insight to what we might expect. The Human Security doctrine, originated by European Union High Representative Javier Solana, is the “preventive engagement” framework which is to be implemented globally. The 10-nation military wing of the European Union—the Western European Union—provides Solana with emergency powers to convene the European Council and preside over the military and civilian crisis management (CIMIC) machinery. Solana’s Human Security doctrine outlines the makings of a police state. Some of its characteristics are:
Notice that Solana understands that CIMIC must be legitimized throughout the populations if he is to be successful. As I read through the global counter-terrorism materials I noticed that religion is being used as the legitimizing vehicle. This reminds me of the Peter Lemesurier’s blueprint for bringing forth Maitreya. In the Armageddon Script one of Lemesurier’s themes is the use of religion against itself:
It is not surprising to
see that two United Nation’s organizations—the Alliance of Civilizations
and Religions for Peace—have combined efforts to promote the concept of
Shared Security. more...
EU willing to sustain initiative
Times of Malta
(February 12,
2008) - The EU High Representative for the Common Foreign And
Security Policy, Javier Solana yesterday expressed his conviction that
the Maltese initiative to hold the first ever European Union-Arab League
conference will be kept up. Speaking to The Times on his arrival at the
conference venue at the Westin Dragonara in St Julians, Mr Solana said
he was pleased to be here for this important meeting. "After having met
with the Arab League on many occasions in different formats, now is the
first time we meet at a specific meeting between the Arab League and the
27 EU member states. "We like the idea very much and now we have to see
how we can cooperate in this format." Asked what he expected to come out
of the meeting, Mr Solana said there were no specific issues that had to
be dealt with. What was more important was to strengthen cooperation
between the EU and the Arab League. He said he was glad the idea to hold
this meeting had come from the smallest EU member state, which had quite
a history of relationships in the Mediterranean. Representatives of 27
EU member states and those of the 22 states which form part of the Arab
League will discuss common issues tomorrow as the foreign ministers'
meeting gets formally under way. The League of Arab States, or Arab
League, is a voluntary association of countries which aims to strengthen
ties among member states, coordinate their policies and direct them
towards the common good. The idea of holding the meeting was first
drafted by Maltese Foreign Minister Michael Frendo. Yesterday he said a
number of issues will be discussed during the one-day meeting. However,
he expected nothing ground-breaking to come out of it. "The event in
itself is ground-breaking since it is the first time this European
Union-League of Arab States (EU-LAS) meeting will be held," he said.
Malta was working on drawing up a final communiqué at the end of the
session. "The event was Malta's idea and this shows the standing the
island has in convincing the EU and the Arab League to hold this
conference here. "This meeting will give impetus to the EU and the Arab
League, both of them existing structures, to seek closer cooperation in
the future," Minister Frendo said. The event is a showcase for Malta, he
added. "We are exposing our country to other countries, many of which
have not been to Malta in a while. Many have already commented that they
were amazed at the improvements it has made. "This conference is an
indirect proposal for investment. We cannot underestimate the ripple
effects such a conference will have on the country's economy." more...
EU foreign policy plan may not deliver strong voice
Reuters (February 11,
2008) - A minister from a major Asian state visiting Brussels
last month said he planned to meet the "Prime Minister of Europe". Of
course he could not recall the person's name -- the post does not exist.
The remark shows how the European Union still struggles to find its
voice in the world, decades after U.S. Secretary of State Henry
Kissinger's famous question in the 1970s: "Who do I call if I want to
call Europe?" The bloc now numbers 27 states and its stature has grown
but it plays second fiddle to the United States in many parts of the
world -- notably in Middle East diplomacy -- and its power to act
remains hobbled by complex internal red tape. It was to revamp a system
described as "verging on dysfunctional" by British diplomat and former
EU External Relations director-general Brian Crowe that foreign policy
was included in an EU reform treaty due to take effect in January. EU
member states broadly agree that they can exert more influence in a
globalised world collectively. But with those same states anxious to
protect national interests, it remains to be seen how far-reaching the
reforms will prove. Who will fill a new role of foreign policy supremo,
how that person interacts with a planned new EU president, and how the
diplomatic support will function have all still to be resolved. The
reform will create a powerful high representative for foreign affairs --
combining the role of an existing EU foreign policy coordinator with
that of the European Commissioner in charge of the EU's multi-billion
euro aid budget. That person will be supported by an EU diplomatic corps
of some 3,000-4,000, drawn from staff from Brussels, 130 EU delegations
worldwide, and the diplomatic services of EU states. "It's hugely
important, because all our challenges are now external," said Katinka
Barysch deputy director of the London-based Centre for European Reform (CER)
think tank. "You have climate change, terrorism, proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction, energy security and how to deal with China
and Russia." A key question is whether the new EU president evolves as a
largely ceremonial role or one with real influence. Britain's former
prime Minister Tony Blair has made no secret of his desire for the job,
but Missiroli said he would be "very intrusive" in the foreign policy
field. EU diplomats and politicians believe Blair has little chance, as
Britain is too disconnected from the EU mainstream, and he is
discredited in Europe by his support for the Iraq war. The smart money
is on Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker. A master
consensus-builder, he would steal less limelight, but would not accept a
purely ceremonial role. Long a favourite as high representative is
Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, a former prime minister with
extensive diplomatic experience. However, some consider him too
outspoken. "The rumour gaining ground is that the best personality
for the high representative at the beginning is Solana himself -- to
have a an old and safe pair of hands, at least for one year or two, it
would be better to keep him in place," said Missiroli. more...
Brown's secret talks on 'new world order'
New Zealand Herald
(January 22,
2008) - British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has begun secret
talks with other world leaders on far-reaching reform of the United
Nations Security Council as part of a drive to create a "new world
order" and "global society". Brown is drawing up plans to expand the
number of permanent members in a move that will provoke fears in his
country that the veto enjoyed by Britain could be diluted eventually.
The United States, France, Russia and China also have a veto but the
number of members could be doubled to include India, Germany, Japan,
Brazil and one or two African nations. Brown has discussed a shake-up of
a structure created in 1945 to reflect the world's new challenges and
power bases during his four-day trip to China and India. British sources
revealed "intense discussions" on UN reform were under way and Brown
raised it whenever he met another world leader. The Prime Minister
believes the UN is punching below its weight. In 2003, it failed to
agree on a fresh resolution giving explicit approval for military action
in Iraq. US President George W. Bush then acted unilaterally, winning
the support of then British Prime Minister Tony Blair. His aides are
adamant that the British veto will not be negotiated away. One option is
for the nations who join not to have a veto, at least initially. In a
speech in New Delhi, the Prime Minister was to say: "I support India's
bid for a permanent place - with others - on an expanded UN Security
Council." However, he is not backing Pakistan's demand for a seat if
India wins one. Brown will unveil a proposal for the UN to spend £100
million ($257 million) a year on setting up a "rapid reaction force" to
stop "failed states" sliding back into chaos after a peace deal has been
reached. "There is limited value in military action to end fighting
if law and order does not follow," he will say. "So we must do more to
ensure rapid reconstruction on the ground once conflicts are over and
combine traditional humanitarian aid and peace-keeping with
stabilisation, recovery and development." more...
'Arab view of deal close to Israel's'
The Jerusalem Post
(February 10, 2008) - The Arab world truly
wants the Israeli-Palestinian conflict resolved urgently, and many Arab
leaders back terms for a permanent accord "very close to what Israel is
wanting," Quartet peace envoy Tony Blair told The Jerusalem Post over
the weekend. "I spend a lot of time talking to the Arabs," said Blair.
"I have a genuine belief, and this is not shared by everyone in Israel:
The Arabs genuinely want this settled now. There were Arab leaders, I
don't want to say which, talking to me recently about the type of
settlement, the type of agreement which they would accept. I would say
it is very close to what Israel is wanting and on some of the most
sensitive questions." Although Blair preferred not to identify which
leaders he was referring to, he went on to speak about leaders in "Gulf
and Arab states," and especially the younger leadership generation, who
"want to be on the cutting edge of globalization; they want to be 21st
century economies. And they realize their politics and their culture
have got to start coming into synch with their economies." Blair
described the Arab world as being "in transition." The question, he
said, was what it would "transition into": either this modern,
globalized, cutting edge vision or the Islamists' "battle to the death"
against "the West and its allies including Israel." The would-be
modernizers, he said, regard solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
"as an important part in making sure that their vision beats the other
vision." At a time when even Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam
Fayad is saying that he does not believe a permanent accord can be
reached this year, Blair remained insistent that the Annapolis timetable
was "doable," provided there was sufficient "urgency, focus,
determination and strategy." He faulted Israel for not acting with
sufficient urgency to speed up a range of economic projects that could
immediately benefit Palestinians in both the West Bank and Gaza. He also
asserted that freedom of movement for Palestinians in the West Bank
could be improved without compromising Israeli security. He said he was
encouraged that the West Bank economy was now showing gradual growth.
"It is limited and small, but it is there." And on the matter of PA
security control, he noted that limited improvements in the Nablus area
meant he had now been able to visit the city (on Thursday) whereas just
months ago it would have been too dangerous. "The governor of Nablus was
describing to me a situation where this time last year there were armed
gangs going into his predecessor's office, shooting the place up. That's
not happening now." At the same time, the former British prime minister
said he completely understood that Israel could not dramatically ease
its own security precautions in the West Bank for fear of an immediate
upsurge in violence. But "no one is asking for a dramatic easing [of
security controls]. People are asking for a step-by-step easing, as the
Palestinians show step-by-step capability. "Now the Palestinians have to
do a lot more on this," Blair went on. The PA had to properly plan and
fund a security overhaul, retrain its security forces, "pension off"
those who were unfit - "in other words, to start operating like the
Jordanians operate. They are a way off that, which is why I'm not
sitting here saying there should be a dramatic easing. But there can be
some." Obviously, Blair elaborated, Israel insisted on checkpoints for
people leaving Nablus "because of what happened" - a reference to
suicide bombers and other terrorist attackers dispatched from the city.
But he suggested that the checkpoints could be more efficient - "a lot
quicker, a lot better... particularly for people who are trying to do
business." Blair said he had been speaking to businesspeople who were
routinely held up for hours at checkpoints, and that this undermined any
optimism about a viable diplomatic process. "At the moment, if Abu Mazen
[PA President Mahmoud Abbas] stands up in front of them and says,
'Actually guys, we're going to have a state,' they'd say, 'You must be
joking.'"
"Comrad J"
what björn (farmer) thinks
(February 8, 2008) - In the book Comrade J, which is
about the Russian master spy Sergei
Tretyakov, Strobe Talbott
is described as beeing duped by the Russian intelligence service and that the UN is penetrated by Russian
spies. Read about it
HERE. Does it surprise us, who easy it was for
J. Solana to get the former
Eastern-block States into NATO and how easy it was for him to talk Putin
to open the gas-tap again for the EU states back in January 2006,
despite the then very hesitating Austrian Presideny of the EU? (read
about it
here) Further back in 2000, when
Talbott was named head of the Yale
Center for the Study of Globalization, he was named “a key
architect of U.S. foreign policy” during the Clinton years. From
2002-2007 headed the Brookings
Institution. Strobe Talbott
stated in Time magazine that U.S. sovereignty would cease to exist in
the 21st century and that we would all answer to a single global
authority, (“The Birth of the Global Nation,” Time, July 20, 1992).
Shortly after making these statements, Talbott was elevated to the White
House by President Bill Clinton, where he served as Deputy Secretary of
State for the next seven years. Rhodes
scholars Bill Clinton, Strobe Talbott
and Richard Gardner were
largely responsible for Javier Solana's
appointment as head of NATO in 1995. "Talbott has been promoting his own book,
The Great Experiment, about the
need for “global
governance” and expanding the power of the U.N. in foreign affairs.
His book ignores the role of Soviet spy
Alger Hiss in founding the U.N. but thanks
George Soros and
Walter Isaacson, formerly of Time but now with the Aspen
Institute, for their input on his manuscript. Talbott also gives thanks
to convicted document thief Sandy
Berger, Bill Clinton’s national security adviser who now advises
Hillary’s presidential campaign;
Soros associate Morton Halperin,
formerly of the ACLU; (Comrad) Javier
Solana of the European Union; and
Bill Clinton, “for
helping me better to understand several aspects of his view of the world
and America’s role in it.”
link stay tuned!
Is the euro becoming the new greenback?
Axcess News
(February 8, 2008) - Some merchants
in New York have begun accepting the euro as currency, citing the
ever-growing weakness of the dollar. While the stores are taking foreign
currency, they're still required to exchange it at the appropriate rate
when deposited at their banks. But some fear that the euro could become
the new American currency of choice. Not so, says New Yorkers, the
greenback will also be tops. Well, at least to us anyway, to Europeans
its a cheaper currency and that's turned New York merchants into a
global class of business owners now in tune to foreign currency exchange
rates and the advantages of accepting it. Part of New York shop owners
move in accepting Euros is because of the flood of the European
vacationers showing up at their shops, Euros in hand wanting to buy
cheap American goods. The European tourists showing up at their shops
have gone up in numbers since merchants started displaying signs in
their shop windows saying they accept Euros. The convenience of not
having to exchange them when they reach New York is becoming a mixed
blessing for the merchants who have made slightly more by hanging on to
the foreign currency and depositing less often as the dollar has sagged
in value. "It's no windfall, in exchanging Euros," one shop owner
explained. "But we are getting more Europeans coming into our store
because of we accept their currency." Since the dollar began dropping
and the euro rising, coming to America for vacation, or in some cases
just to shop, has turned into a boom for those New York merchants who've
been savvy enough business owners to cash in on the rush. But the euro
isn't the only currency finding its way into the hands of New Yorkers.
Canadian and British tourists are pouring into the Big Apple as well.
During the holiday shopping season, there were hundreds of Britons
arriving in New York just to shop on a daily basis and their level of
visits didn't stop after the holidays either. Here, they could buy goods
for less than fifty pence to the dollar, or in our language, a half buck
bought a dollar's worth of goods. Canadian's too were flooding over the
border to shop in the United States as the Canadian dollar, called the 'Loonie'
surpassed the dollar in valuation. Gasoline was less, food in
restaurants and vacation hot spots like Las Vegas, all saw a rise in
Canadian tourism beginning in the fourth quarter of last year when the
dollar began to weaken.
World Leaders Gather To Roast Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
The Onion
**Warning sexually explicit content on link from event. (text of quotes
by attendees) You will get the jist here without reading the whole
article. You've been forewarned.
(February 6, 2008) -
In
what observers are calling an unprecedented opportunity for the
international community to express its grievances against Iran's
controversial leader, dozens of world leaders and key U.N. delegates
gathered Saturday to roast Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The
event, which took place beneath U.N. headquarters in the historic Geneva
Friars Club, brought together the heads of every G8 member state, as
well as some of today's top foreign policy makers and peace brokers.
Roastmaster and former U.N. secretary general Kofi Annan kicked off the
evening by welcoming President Ahmadinejad to "what [was] sure to be the
first and last time Mahmoud would ever be surrounded by 72 virgins."
"Ladies and gentlemen, and Tony Blair, we stand here in the presence of
one of the most vicious and destructive forces in the world today—but
enough about Bea Arthur," said Annan, gesturing with a tumbler of Makers
Mark across the long white tables of chuckling diplomats to the former
Golden Girls star. "Some people here tonight will tell you that Mahmoud
refuses to engage in diplomatic talks, that he is the most ruthless
stonewaller who has ever lived. Well, those people have obviously never
met my first wife." The black-tie affair brought together
representatives from warring nations and longtime enemies who sat in the
hallowed, oak-walled dining room and patiently awaited their turn to
lambaste Ahmadinejad. Some of the evening's most pressing topics
included the Iranian president's insistence on developing a nuclear
program, his possible involvement in the 1989 assassination of an exiled
Kurdish leader, and his excessive body hair. "You know, a lot of folks
have been criticizing Ahmadinejad for covering up one of the most
horrifying and unspeakable crimes ever perpetrated on humankind,"
Russian president Vladimir Putin told the assembled guests. "But don't
you listen to them, Mahmoud. I happen to like your beard." Ahmadinejad,
seated in a plush red armchair just to the right of the podium, seemed
in high spirits as he calmly endured countless ribs from his allies and
fellow arms-race competitors. Rolling his eyes and shaking his finger in
mock disapproval, he was taken to task for everything from his brutal
treatment of political dissidents to his recent visit to Columbia
University. more... *Be forewarned, the
crudeness in the detail of the rest of the story I left out. If you want
to see what passes as a comedy roast and are not offended, then read the
rest. -It's really not that important anyways, I just think this
gathering may have had hidden importance considering who was all there.
"Euros Accepted" signs pop up in New York City Reuters
(February 6, 2008) - In the latest example
that the U.S. dollar just ain't what it used to be, some shops in New
York City have begun accepting euros and other foreign currency as
payment for merchandise. "We had decided that money is money and we'll
take it and just do the exchange whenever we can with our bank," Robert
Chu, owner of East Village Wines, told Reuters television. The
increasingly weak U.S. dollar, once considered the king among
currencies, has brought waves of European tourists to New York with
money to burn and looking to take advantage of hugely favorable exchange
rates. "We didn't realize we would take so much in and there were that
many people traveling or having euros to bring in. But some days, you'd
be surprised at how many euros you get," Chu said. "Now we have to get
familiar with other currencies and the (British) pound and the Canadian
dollars we take," he said. While shops in many U.S. towns on the
Canadian border have long accepted Canadian currency and some stores on
the Texas-Mexico border take pesos, the acceptance of foreign money in
Manhattan was unheard of until recently. Not far from Chu's downtown
wine emporium, Billy Leroy of Billy's Antiques & Props said the vast
numbers of Europeans shopping in the neighborhood got him thinking, "My
God, I should take euros in at the store." Leroy doesn't even bother to
exchange them. "I'm happy if I take in 200 euros, because what I do is
keep them," he said. "So when I go back to Paris, I don't have to go
through the nightmare of going to an exchange place."
EU treaty to be ratified by France
The Parliament
(February 4, 2008) - Nearly three years after French voters
shocked the political establishment and stunned the rest of Europe by
rejecting the EU constitution, deputies and senators will gather in a
special session at the palace of Versailles to approve the EU’s Lisbon
treaty, reports the FT. Ratification of the treaty will be concluded in
four days and without a public vote, marking a dramatic turnround in the
French debate; a recent opinion poll showed that 58 per cent want a
plebiscite on the new treaty.
EU to act in Gaza if solution is reached, Solana says (Roundup)
Monsters & Critics
(February 3, 2008) - On a two-day-visit in Egypt, European
foreign policy chief Javier Solana said the European Union (EU) is ready
to take up its role in the Gaza Strip, if a political solution is agreed
on, sources said on Sunday. Egyptian presidential spokesman Soliyman
Awad said Solana promised President Hosny Mubarak that EU
representatives would return to monitor Rafah crossing border, security
sources told Deutsche Presse- Agentur dpa. Awad said that during their
short meeting, Mubarak and Solana agreed on the fact that the current
situation in Gaza is a result of the Israeli blockade of the enclave and
asserted that the Palestinian sufferings should reach a swift end. A
member of Solana's delegation, who requested anonymity, told dpa that
Solana's meeting with Egyptian Foreign Minister Abu al-Gheit covered
regional issues, including Lebanon's political crisis, and the upcoming
EU-Arab Summit in Malta. Solana, who next heads to Israel, plans to meet
with Israeli envoys to discuss the latest developments in the Gaza
Strip. Earlier, Hamas had rejected the US-brokered 2005 deal which
allowed the Rafah monitoring post to be activated with Palestinian
Authority personnel serving alongside European Union monitors. But the
crossing point has been closed since June 2007, when Hamas seized
control of the Strip after its gunmen routed forces loyal to President
Mahmoud Abbas in five days of savage fighting. In late January, Hamas
militants blew huge holes in the concrete and metal border fence between
Gaza and Egypt, enabling hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to flood
through the breach and mostly head for al-Arish, 50 kilometres away, to
stock up with supplies made scarce by the Israeli economic blockade. The
Israelis imposed the blockade as a means of pressure to stop Palestinian
rocket attacks.
Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA) Goes Live The 70th Week (February 2, 2008) - If you are familiar with Bible Prophecy then you are aware that towards the middle of the 70th week, the False Prophet will require all to take a mark on their right hand or forehead, and without this mark they will not be able to buy or sell. Who ever does not take this mark and worship the beast will be killed. Many have speculated over the years as to what this will be and what it will look like. Here is a scriptural reference to review.
A couple of days ago the Single Euro Payments Area or SEPA went live. This could be highly significant. You see SEPA is a brand new way to conduct cashless transactions throughout the EU. Not only is this another step in the integration of the EU but it is a huge step towards a single market. If the Anti-Christ and the False Prophet were able to be in charge of this future single market, it would make implementing the mark of the beast that much easier. Is SEPA the beginning or the framework for the Mark of the Beast? Well, time will tell, but one thing is for sure, it is worth watching. Please take the time to read the article below.
| EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | NewWorldOrder | Mark of the beast |
MEPs issue wake
up call on EU diplomatic service
EU Observer (January 28, 2008) - The European Parliament is starting to
question the make-up of the planned EU diplomatic service, believing it
risks changing the nature of the Union to favour larger member states.
The service is meant to give some clout to the post of foreign
minister - created by the EU's new Lisbon treaty - and due in place at
the beginning of next year. But MEPs fear that the service could
become a body that is essentially run by large member states, and where
the European Commission and smaller countries are sidelined. "To what
extent is the commission aware that this is about its own destiny?"
asked German centre-right MEP Elmar Brok during a committee debate on
the matter last week. Andrew Duff, a British liberal MEP, accused the
commission of "not showing its normal cohesion" when it comes to the EU
diplomatic corps. There is a "degree of uncertainty on quite how the
commission should play this one," he noted. The new EU Reform Treaty
states that the corps should work in "cooperation" with national
diplomatic services and that it will consist of EU officials working on
external relations issues from the commission and the council (member
states body) as well as experts from the member states. But it leaves
all the organisational - but highly political - detail about how it
should be funded, where it should sit and the ratio of the different
officials to be decided by member states. Finnish centre-right MEP
Alexander Stubb suggested the tussle over the exact set up of the body
could see a "potential institutional war that could turn out very sour."
While one MEP suggested it could be the "greatest opportunity to
strengthen our foreign policy," Belgian centre-right MEP Jean-Luc
Dehaene warned "there are going to be a lot of conflicts" around its
setting up. The core of the problem is that some member states -
particularly the UK - fear losing foreign policy sovereignty if the
foreign minister and his or her diplomatic corps is not firmly anchored
to national capitals. Both the new EU foreign minister as well as the
diplomatic service are to be in place by January 2009, when the new
treaty is supposed to come into force. more...
Slovenia and Malta ratify EU treaty
EU Observer (January
30, 2008) - Slovenia and Malta have approved the new EU Lisbon
treaty by a large majority, but in Slovakia the treaty vote has become
tangled up in a dispute over a separate law. Early Tuesday evening (29
January), the two-million strong Slovenia, currently chairing the
27-strong union became the second member state to ratify the new EU
treaty in its national parliament, following Hungary which adopted it in
late December. Out of 90 MPs, 74 voted for the treaty and only 6 members
of a small right-wing Slovene National Party voted against after
previously tabling a proposal for a referendum on the issue, rejected by
other parliamentarians. In his speech to the parliament ahead of the
vote, Prime Minister Janez Jansa openly suggested that MPs were voting
on the same content as was in the original European Constitution, which
was rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005. He said that thanks
to the new Lisbon treaty, the constitution's ratification by 17 other
member states was not in vain, Slovenian media reported. Mr Jansa also
said he expected at least 20 of the 27 EU member states to ratify the
treaty by the end of June and others to do so by the end of the year,
stressing that one of Slovenia's jobs as EU presidency country was to
"carefully monitor ratification procedures." A little while later on
Tuesday, Malta became the third country to give the go-ahead to the
document, with its parliament voting unanimously to approve a motion of
ratification put by Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi. Both government and
opposition parties supported the treaty, partly due to it giving the
tiny Mediterranean island of less than half a million inhabitants an
extra seat in the European Parliament. "I find it particularly symbolic
that each of the first three countries to approve the new Treaty are
member states that joined the European Union in 2004," European
Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso said in reaction to votes. He
added, "This shows that enlargement is an inspiration and impetus for
the future development of European integration." more... The Purposes and Principles of the Shadow Government A Time, Times, and Half A Time (January 20, 2008) - Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy Part IV Previous:
In April 2007, the Council of Europe Counter-Terrorism Task Force conducted a comprehensive conference aimed at addressing the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism. The Why Terrorism conference reinforced the efforts of the Council of Europe’s convention on the Prevention of Terrorism, the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, the initiative of the Alliance of Civilizations, and the Club of Madrid’s counter-terrorism agenda. The outcome document called for the international community to:
As I’ve covered in previous blog posts, the EU presents itself as the gravitational point in the system of world government. By enshrining human rights into the framework of its foreign policy, the Union believes it can export its interpretation of human rights values without legal constraint. This far-reaching policy compounded with a unique interpretation of human rights has most dangerous consequences--for we have seen that the Alliance of Civilizations’ initiative is the global implementation of the EU’s social cohesion policy. The EU’s rotational president Danilo Türk addressed this at the recent Alliance of Civilizations Madrid Forum. Alliance of Civilizations High Representative Jorge Sampaio describes this policy as the global governance of culture. As we have seen, the Alliance of Civilizations social cohesion policy is the core component of the United Nations’ global counter-terrorism strategy. The strategy places a great deal of emphasis on regional organizations for they are key in the implementation of AoC objectives. An example of AoC-regional organization cooperation is the Tripartite-Plus agreement in which the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and the Council of Europe have united to combat “extremist” ideology. States that have bound themselves by treaty to these regional organizations are politically bound to abide by the organization’s decisions. For example, the United States as an OSCE signatory state is expected to implement OSCE decisions bypassing the approval of our national legislature. In its document The Role of Religion and Belief in the Fight Against Terrorism, pertaining to restrictions on religion or belief, the OSCE tells us:
Similarly, Russia and its former satellite (eastern block) countries are bound to Council of Europe decisions. Stanford University’s Europeanisation as a Gravity Model of Democratisation notes that:
Stanford University later explained that it is probable that these countries did not realize what they were getting themselves into when they bound themselves to the Council of Europe. Note the significance of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The ECHR is modeled after the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights which is said to be the cornerstone of every counter-terrorism strategy we have examined thus far. Article 29 states:
The limitations as determined by international law and the purposes and principles of the United Nations are of particular interest to me for they are companions to the social cohesion policy. In this context, human rights are based upon the adherence to a set of common beliefs and values having the intent to ensure social inclusion. This theory is seriously flawed for it introduces governance in which thought and belief become strictly controlled thereby negating the very diversity they claim to protect. The quest to build a new common civilization further contradicts the notion of diversity and a free society. Take, for example, the inter-religious dialogue aspect of the social cohesion policy which recognizes that all religions’ gods are equal. If an individual’s belief system requires they reject this premise, their belief system then becomes a violation of another person’s human rights where they further stand accused of exhibiting an ideology of hate or one that contributes to social exclusion. Worse yet, that individual’s belief system categorically becomes one associated with violent radicalization and terrorism. Article 5 of the Council of Europe’s Convention on Terrorism addresses the public provocation to commit a terrorist offence as such:
The Council of Europe has provided legal analysis for article 5:
There are many documents within the European Union that identify religious ideologies considered to be hate speech and conducive to the spread of terrorism. Among them are the ideological foundations of Europe: unity in diversity which warns us that we must embrace redefined humanistic versions of our faiths:
Not only is religious belief attributed to violent radicalization but also political dissent. How could one possibly oppose globalization without adoption of an “extremist” ideology? In communication from the European Commission to the Parliament and the Council, the final paragraph of Terrorist recruitment: addressing the factors contributing to violent radicalization states:
The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), article 10, paragraph 2, modeled after the United Nations’ human rights declaration, establishes a framework which would place restrictions on individuals accused of advocating “extremist” ideologies:
Now let’s back up to article 9 of the ECHR which pertains to religious freedom. Here we read similar language where restrictions may be imposed on religious freedom:
In its conference The Role of Religion and Belief in the Fight Against Terrorism, the Organization for Security and Co-Operation of Europe provides interpretation of plausible restrictions.
Note that the commentary indicates that if the state believes that others’ religious beliefs are not respected, restrictions on religion are permissible. Recall that religious fundamentalists have been described as those who reject another’s belief system as being equally valid. By definition, this constitutes disrespect. Additional clarification may be found in the Council of Europe’s counterterrorism document written by UNESCO’s Rosa Guerreiro, program specialist for Intercultural and Interreligious Dialogue. Guerreiro warns that religious fundamentalism constitutes disrespect and violates article 4 of the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity thereby violating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
To
further combat religious fundamentalism is the United Nations’
Declaration
on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination
Based on Religion or Belief. more...
Joint US-EU-NATO security body mulled The
Jerusalem Post (January 17, 2008)
- While rejecting the idea of Israel or other countries in conflict
joining NATO, five former Western defense chiefs called Wednesday
for the alliance and the European Union to create a joint
security "directorate" to address global terrorism and the
challenges posed by Iran and China. In a report
presented in Brussels, former military commanders of the United
States, Germany, France,
Britain and the Netherlands laid out a new strategy for NATO
designed to create stronger ties between the US and its
European allies. The authors of the report included
Gen. (ret.) Dr. Klaus Naumann, former German chief of staff, and
Gen. (ret.) John Shalikashvili, former chairman of the US Joint
Chiefs of Staff. "There is a great mismatch between the
interconnected list of dangers and the international and national
capabilities to respond to them - capabilities that are weakened by
their disunity," the authors wrote in the report, titled "Towards a
Grand Strategy for an Uncertain World." "No institution and no
nation is capable of responding to these dangers and risks on its
own; and just a cursory glance at our international organizations
leads us to ask whether we have a proper basis for coordinated
action. Unfortunately, it would appear that we do not," the report
concluded. The report's authors recommend the establishment of a
US, EU, NATO "steering directorate" to coordinate operations when
common interests are in danger. "The point of such a directorate
would be to better liaise for the common good, to coordinate who
takes the lead on which issue, and to ensure that the three entities
support each other," the report reads. The proposal comes ahead of a
NATO summit set for April during which leaders of the 32 member
states are expected to discuss the alliance's post-Cold War future.
While Israeli defense officials were not familiar with the report
they were not surprised by its recommendation that the Western
alliance undergo a major restructuring. "For years now, NATO has
been looking for a new purpose," said one Israeli official. "With
the Cold War over, they are looking to preserve their strength, and
a new directorate uniting the US, NATO and the EU could do that."
While the report does not specifically mention the issue of Israeli
membership in NATO - for years debated within the IDF and the
Defense Ministry - it does recommend not accepting as a member any
country that is engaged in conflict or territorial disputes.
Outgoing Strategic Affairs Minister Avigdor Lieberman has over the
past year pushed for Israel to ask for full membership in the
military alliance. "NATO should state that it will not extend
membership invitations to countries in which the standards of NATO
members - such as democracy, respect for human rights, the rule of
law and good governance - are
not fully adhered to. It should also be agreed that the alliance
will not accept any country as a member which has unresolved
territorial claims or which is involved in ongoing armed conflicts,"
the report reads. The report's authors also referred to the Second
Lebanon War, citing it as an example of non-state actors involved in
asymmetric warfare and saying that Hizbullah engaged in "war crimes"
by positioning its fighters and launching rockets from within
civilian population centers. Keep in mind that according to Bible prophecy, Christians and anyone refusing to worship the antichrist are going to become the terrorists and enemies of the globalist state during the great tribulation. Right now the terrorists are mostly limited to radical Islamic fundamentalists, but once the man of sin demands worship, the "Islamic" part will be removed from the definition to include all "radical fundamentalists," including Jews and Christians as well as anyone refusing to accept the antichrist. NATO is also on board with the Alliance of Civilizations and, unknown to most Americans, has split under the Berlin-Plus Agreement. In the event of a crisis situation, NATO assets are transferred to the European Union’s Political and Security Committee presently presided over by EU High Representative Javier Solana. With NATO's continuing integration with European forces, I think we can begin to see how global enforcement of antichrist policies will be implemented. We're also seeing a move to a North American Union through trade agreements and security issues that will make legal control of the Americas much easier once the antichrist takes power. My friends, the writing is on the wall. But don't just listen to me...
EU troops mobilise for Chad role
The Australian (January
28, 2008) - The European Union will today launch the biggest
military operation in its history, a peacekeeping force for Chad and the
Central African Republic, according to officials. The 3700-strong
UN-mandated force, with France providing the lion's share of troops,
will help protect hundreds of thousands of refugees from the strife-torn
Darfur region of neighbouring Sudan. "All the conditions are now
fulfilled," so that the EU foreign ministers, meeting in Brussels today,
can "confirm the rapid launch of the operation", a European diplomat
said, following a final meeting by representatives of the 27 EU member
states on Friday at the end of five months of fractious preparations.
"The departure of the first elements should follow fairly quickly and
the deployment will begin in the first week of February," he added. Some
Chadian rebels have expressed fears that the European force will help
prop up Chadian President Idriss Deby Itno, an ally of Paris. However,
during a trip to the Democratic Republic of Congo on Friday, French
Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said the EU mission was solely to
protect displaced refugees. The foreign ministers "should authorise the
EU operation commander to activate the deployment of the forces and
start the execution of the mission," the EU said in a statement. A draft
agreement on the force, to be endorsed by the EU foreign ministers,
emphasises it will operate in a "neutral, impartial and independent
manner". In accordance with a UN Security Council resolution, the
"military bridging operation" will operate for one year. According to
the EU, the force will "actively work for the improvement of the
security situation in Chad and the Central African Republic. It will
contribute to protecting civilians in danger, particularly displaced
persons and refugees". The force will be commanded by Irish Lieutenant
General Pat Nash and have its official headquarters in France. It had
originally been due to deploy last November but a reluctance to provide
troops and materiel held up progress. The force's leader on the ground
in eastern Chad will be French Brigadier General Jean-Philippe Ganascia.
Soldiers from 14 countries will take part, including 2000 French, 400
Irish and 400 Polish troops, another diplomat said. At least 200,000
people have died from war, famine and disease in Darfur and more than
two million have fled their homes since rebels took up arms against
Khartoum in 2003.
Blair
Wants Mideast Peace in 2008
Associated Press (January
27, 2008) - Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair told the
final session of the World Economic Forum on Sunday that he wants an
Israeli-Palestinian peace deal and a pact on climate change by the end
of 2008. Sharing the same level of ambition, Nobel Peace Prize laureate
Elie Wiesel called for China to open its doors to the Dalai Lama and for
an end to the conflict in Sudan's Darfur region. The final session of
this year's forum seemed to shrug off any pessimism about what can be
achieved in the coming months despite fears that the U.S. economic
downturn could lead to a global recession. "The mood was moderately
optimistic because we have many, many opportunities," said Klaus Schwab,
the forum's founder. "But if we do not address the challenges, one day
even the greatest opportunities will not be enough to guarantee our
continuation as humankind if you look at climate change, terrorism,
poverty." The five-day political and economic brainstorming session that
brought nearly 2,500 of the world's movers and shakers to this Swiss ski
resort was short on "glitz" this year - with the exception of rock star
Bono and Oscar-winning actress Emma Thompson, who are both also
anti-poverty campaigners. Politically, there was much talk about whether
President Bush's goal of a peace treaty between Israel and the
Palestinians by the end of the year will be reached. "I would like to
see an agreement that gives us the prospect of a lasting peace between
Israel and Palestine because I do think that would be the greatest
signal of reconciliation with which the 21st century could start," said
Blair, who is now the chief envoy for the key international Mideast
mediators known as the Quartet. Wiesel said he also wanted to see
Mideast peace this year, and "to alleviate the suffering in Darfur which
has become the capital of human suffering in the world today." "I'd like
China to open its doors to the Dalai Lama so I could accompany him to go
to Tibet. That would be a great, great victory," Wiesel said, as the
audience burst into applause. Blair said he'd also "like to see us get
the climate change deal or framework of it." PepsiCo Inc. (PEP) chief
Indra Nooyi said she'd also like to see "a climate policy" and efforts
to bring down rising food prices. more... "Watch" - Part 3 Watching & Waiting Blog (January 23, 2008) - Quoted information is from Wikipedia, cited and corroborated by many sources, unless otherwise noted. Items inside quotations enclosed in <> are my commentary: "July 14th, 1942 - " Javier Solana Madariaga is born the son of "a chemistry professor" and Obdulia de Madariaga. He is the great nephew of Spanish League of Nations disarmament chief, diplomat, writer and European integrationist Salvador de Madariaga and his wife the British Scholar and economic historian Constance Archibald de Madariaga. Additional quote from a previous Wikipedia entry:
>>Here's where it starts to get interesting. First, it's notable that he chaired the Barcelona Conference, the results of which have been incorporated into the European Neigborhood Policy (more on that later). Also, as the Secretary General of the Council of the European Union, not to mention the High Representative for the CFSP (Common Foreign and Security Policy), he has quite a bit of power. The kicker (or one of many) is that he's also the Secretary General of the WEU. The WEU was established on the basis of the Treaty of Brussels of 1948(read: the year Israel became a nation again). By the time Javier Solana became Secretary General of the WEU, it was composed of the following permanent members: "Member countries: (modified Brussels Treaty - 1954) All of them being members of both NATO and the European Union. These are the only nations that have full voting rights.>>By the time he became the Secretary General, this was a ten-nation military alliance. In Daniel 7:23 and 24, we read:
Of note is that it says "he shall subdue three kings". Shortly after the ENPI budget period (which runs from Jan 1st, 2007, to December 31st, 2013, which is seven years, more on that later) began, the prime ministers of the EU "big three" were changed. In Germany, Schroeder was replaced by Angela Merkel (who has previously worked with Javier Solana, and was instrumental in getting the EU's constitution {after being renamed to a "reform treaty} started in the ratification process), In France, Chirac was replaced by Nikolas Sarkozy, and in Britain, Blair was replaced by Gordon Brown. It was reported that those three nations had been stalling the EU's progress in certain areas, and I've got a blog post on all of that with news articles linked here. Next, check out the EU's Article 666, from the EU website:
>>This was instrumental in creating Solana's position as Secretary General of the Council, and High Representative for the CFSP. Prior to his appointment, this office did not exist. The next document, found under the heading "RECOMMENDATION 666 - on the consequences of including certain functions of WEU in the European Union" at the WEU website, here, contains the following text:
>>The PSC is the "Political and Security Committee or PSC, which monitors the
international situation in the areas covered by the CFSP and contributes
by delivering opinions to the Council of Ministers, either at its
request or its own initiative, and also monitors the implementation of
agreed policies." more...
EU blames US spending for market turbulences EU
Observer (January
23, 2008) - The European Commission has pointed to unhealthy
public spending in the US as the main cause of the current global market
turbulences and urged Washington to cut expenditure and boost savings,
while praising Europe's own "solid and sound" economy and the positive
effect of the common currency. The topic dominated a regular meeting of
EU finance ministers in Brussels on Tuesday (22 January), shortly after
the biggest plunge of global stock markets since the terrorist attacks
of 11 September 2001. While evidently concerned about the possible
consequences for the region - mainly if there is a recession in the US,
where most of Europe's exports are heading - both the finance chiefs and
the commission were keen to avoid pessimistic statements. "This is not
about a global recession, but about the risk of a recession in the US,
as during the last years, big imbalances have been created in the US
economy - a big current account deficit, a big fiscal deficit, a lack of
savings," said EU economy commissioner Joaquin Almunia. Mr Almunia
suggested that US policy-makers should tackle the current crisis with
measures that would secure "reducing the external deficit and the fiscal
deficit, and increasing domestic saving in the US both in the public and
the private sectors." He maintained that Europe's own previous reforms
and pressure for cuts in public finances have paid off, leaving the
fundamentals of the bloc's economy - in contrast to the situation across
the Atlantic - as "solid and sound". "So we are well prepared to weather
this situation even if we cannot ignore the risk of our growth rates
being affected by this turmoil," he added. A similar message was echoed
by several ministers and national capitals. "The last forecast shows
that economic reforms that have been implemented in the EU increase the
resilience of the European economy in trying to face such shocks," said
Slovenia's finance minister Andrej Bajuk on behalf of the bloc's
presidency. German chancellor Angela Merkel also urged for calm,
describing Europe as an "anchor of stability for the global economy."
But Berlin is expected on Wednesday (23 January) to announce a downward
revision of the country's economic forecast in 2008 for the third time
in less than a year, down to 1.7 percent from 2.5 percent last year. A
full and clear picture of the impact of the turbulences and recent
development in the global economy is expected to emerge following the
European Commission's quarterly preview, due to be unveiled in February.
"Everybody is concerned, but more than that, everybody is uncertain. We
must wait to see whether the US government interventions will prove to
be effective or not," Dutch finance minister Wouter Bos commented.
more...
US warns EU on using climate change as pretext
Boston.com (January 22,
2008) - The United States warned the European Union yesterday
against using climate change as a pretext for protectionism, setting the
stage for trans-Atlantic tension over a new package of EU measures to
combat global warming. The pointed comments by the US trade
representative, Susan Schwab, after talks in Brussels, came just two
days before the European Commission introduced its proposals for cutting
EU emissions at least 20 percent from 1990 levels by 2020. "We have
been dismayed at a variety of suggestions where we have seen the climate
and the environment being used as an excuse to close markets,"
Schwab said after discussions with Peter Mandelson, her European
counterpart. President Nicolas Sarkozy of France has called for a carbon
tax on imports to ensure that European companies that need to comply
with tough environmental rules are not undercut by foreign competitors
whose governments are not capping carbon emissions. EU officials were
not expected to propose such a measure tomorrow but were expected to
keep alive the possibility of a so-called border tax to keep European
industries competitive. The EU pledge to protect European industry by
2011 at the latest will be aimed at assuaging powerful lobby groups from
sectors like steel and aluminum manufacturing, which say they are facing
higher costs than their overseas competitors because of the EU's
determination to lead the world in climate protection. Even so, EU
officials hope to be able to avoid the issue, not least because any
European border tax could be challenged at the World Trade Organization.
Instead, EU officials hope that other developed countries like the
United States, which did not sign the Kyoto climate treaty, will join an
international treaty by the end of the decade, making protectionist
measures unnecessary. more...
They lied yesterday; they will lie tomorrow UK
Times Online (January 21,
2008) - The Lisbon treaty is a dangerous betrayal. The process of
ratification of the Lisbon treaty will start this week in the House of
Commons. I'm against the treaty because it involves an important
constitutional transfer of powers from the European nations to the
European institutions, from national democracy to supra-national
bureaucracy. I'm in favour of a referendum, not only
because it was promised by Labour, Tories and Liberal Democrats at the
last general election, but also because it would be the best way to
ratify - or reject - a big constitutional change. The people
should be consulted when their powers of self-government are being given
away. I was struck yesterday by an observation of the Foreign
Secretary, David Miliband. He said: “The reform treaty gives Britain a
bigger voice in Europe.” That seems to me to be the opposite of the
truth. The reform or Lisbon treaty gives Europe a much bigger voice in
Britain. It follows the original constitutional treaty in giving the
European institutions that are not democratically accountable important
additional powers, while failing to repatriate any powers to the
individual European nations. The original constitutional convention
was supposed to reduce the democratic deficit of Europe. The Lisbon
treaty has done the opposite, taking powers away from the nations and
their electorate. The treaty is a defeat for the idea of a liberal
democratic Europe; it is surprising that British Liberal Democrats are
among its keenest supporters. The Government's handling of the
referendum issue has been shameful, because that, too, has been
anti-democratic. The advantage of a referendum process is that
it imposes a regard for public opinion on European politicians. If they
want to win the referendums, they have to negotiate a popular and
democratic constitution. In recent British history devolution has been
successfully negotiated for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. In
each case the promise of a referendum helped to shape the new
constitution. In each case, the new constitution was duly ratified by
the referendum. In the case of the European negotiations the original
constitution, which led to the Lisbon treaty, was hijacked by Brussels
federalists - contrary to the wishes of the people of Britain, France
and the Netherlands. Having hijacked the negotiation, the federalists
then found that their idea of a supra-European constitution was deeply
unpopular. They could not face any more referendums in Europe because
they would lose them. In particular, they could not face a British
referendum. The British voters do not want to hand over more powers to
the European federalist bureaucracy; they want to get some of them back.
The negotiations for the Lisbon treaty were, therefore, designed
from the beginning to get round the need for referendums,
except in Ireland, where the Irish constitution requires one. Naturally,
this underhand process was designed to avoid the British having a
referendum. The Labour Government was a co-conspirator in avoiding the
need to fulfil what had become an awkward election pledge. The plot
certainly involved Tony Blair, whose last public decision was to agree
to the new treaty. He was not acting in order to fulfil his election
commitment but in order to evade it. After some initial show of
reluctance Gordon Brown accepted this deceitful subterfuge. The British
people know they are being manipulated; they resent it. more... Gee, it's almost like they're doing all this on PURPOSE! Nah, they're protecting freedom right? We need peace and security in this chaotic world, right? If enough chaos can be created, I mean happen, then who wouldn't be willing to give up freedoms in the name of peace and safety? It's already happening now in little baby-steps to prepare the world for the coming New World Order. Keep watching!Daniel 8:25
New EU treaty worries US intel services Jane's
Public Safety News (January 17, 2008) -
As EU governments focus on securing ratification of the proposed Lisbon
Reform Treaty in 2008, United States policymakers are concerned its
provisions could present serious challenges to transatlantic
intelligence and homeland security co-operation. The main US reservation
is that, by transferring additional law and justice functions from the
individual EU member states to EU institutions, the treaty could disrupt
existing bilateral relations between US and EU governments without
establishing anything better. Since the September 2001 terrorist
attacks on the US, its intelligence and homeland security officials have
prioritised the strengthening of collaboration with European governments
against the mutual threat of Islamist-inspired terrorism.
Despite periodic expressions of discontent, which naturally attracted
the most media attention, US intelligence community officials, US law
enforcement agencies and the Department of Homeland Security routinely
praise their European counterparts for using various bilateral
mechanisms to pursue joint initiatives encompassing non-proliferation,
immigration and other counterterrorism-related issues. In contrast,
Washington-based policy makers regularly criticise EU-wide bodies for
proving at best ineffectual - and at worst downright disruptive - in
their efforts in the 'global war on terrorism'. Common criticisms
include an inability to determine an appropriate point of contact for US
officials in Brussels - a perception that many Europeans are misguidedly
seeking a negotiated solution to the 'war on terrorism' and excessive
preoccupation on the part of EU lawmakers with protecting the privacy of
EU nationals suspected of engaging in terrorist-related activities. US
intelligence and security officials have been able to circumvent EU
institutions in many cases so far by relying extensively on formal and
informal arrangements with the individual member governments. In
addition, Washington has felt confident that its European allies
would use their powers to veto unwelcome EU-wide proposals in areas
related to security and defence. If adopted, the Lisbon
treaty could threaten many of these arrangements. The Putin-Osama Connection Front Page Magazine (January 16, 2008) - Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Pavel Stroilov, a Russian exile in London and the editor and translator of Alexander Litvinenko’s book, Allegations. He was a friend of Litvinenko’s. FP: Pavel Stroilov, welcome to Frontpage Interview.Stroilov: I am very honoured, though I would have much preferred to see the author of the book, Alexander Litvinenko, here in my place. Alas, he cannot speak for himself anymore, so our sad duty is to act as his posthumous spokesmen. While Alexander was still alive, he made a number of extremely important allegations. If nothing else, his horrible death itself proves that those allegations should be taken very seriously and investigated most thoroughly. FP: Our thoughts and prayers are with Alexander and with his family. Against all odds, let us hope that his killers will one day be brought to justice. Let’s start our discussion with the FSB’s (Federal Security Service) links to Al-Qaeda. Stroilov: Alexander revealed, in his articles and interviews included in the Allegations, that at least two notorious Al Qaeda terrorists are secret agents of the FSB – one of whom, Aiman al Zawahiri, is bin Laden’s second-in-command. As the former leader of the terrorist organisation Egyptian Islamic Jihad, al Zawahiri was on international lists of most wanted terrorists for many years. In 1997, he suddenly re-surfaced in Russia, where he undertook a special training course at a secret FSB base in Dagestan. After that, he was sent to Afghanistan, and joined Al Qaeda as bin Laden’s number two. Meanwhile, the FSB officers who had supervised him in Dagestan were promoted and re-assigned to Moscow. It was from them that Alexander learned about al Zawahiri. These and other facts of FSB involvement in international terrorism, revealed by Alexander, have tremendous implications. Contrary to the view of many in the US, Russia is anything but a reliable ally of yours in the ‘war on terror’. The Kremlin is playing a treacherous double game: while enjoying the West’s support as ally, it secretly supports and manipulates the Al Qaeda through FSB agents of influence. As Alexander writes: “It is possible to destroy the whole international terrorism tomorrow, along with Russian Mafia. All you need to do is disband the Russian special services.” FP: Ok just a second. Alexander states that, “It is possible to destroy the whole international terrorism tomorrow, along with Russian Mafia. All you need to do is disband the Russian special services.” His point is well taken. The FSB does a lot to bolster Islamo-Fascism. And the FSB’s involvement here is significant, dangerous and reprehensible -- and we must be honest about it. But to imply that the threat of radical Islam toward the West would dissipate if the Russian special services were disbanded is a bit of an exaggeration, don’t you think? Alexander is making a strong point with a bit of hyperbole, correct? Stroilov: Yes, in a sense he is. I don’t think that terrorism would disappear immediately if you just close down the Kremlin and Lubyanka. However, that would certainly do the terrorists more damage than anything you have done yet, and that would open you the way to a final victory. Indeed, that would be much more than just cutting the enemy supplies. For the war against terrorism is all about intelligence: the most horrible terrorist is absolutely toothless without secrecy. Overthrowing the KGB regime in Russia would mean investigation of its crimes which, in turn, would give you such intelligence about the international terrorist networks which you could never obtain elsewhere. Litvinenko, an FSB officer who was not even involved in supervision of international terrorists, revealed information of tremendous importance about leaders of Al Qaeda. Can you imagine how much more information you would have if only you could interrogate those directly responsible, and search in their secret archives? If, as Alexander wrote, the ‘Kremlin is the centre of world terrorism’, taking over the Kremlin would mean capturing the enemy headquarters. You would know everything: names, chains of commands, communication channels, supply channels, hiding places, etc, etc. On the other hand, imagine what would happen if the truth about Moscow’s hand in organisations like Al Qaeda is made public. It is hardly a very fresh idea that ‘winning hearts and minds’ of the Muslims is the key to victory in the whole ‘war on terror’. To put it mildly, I strongly doubt that revelations about Al Qaeda leaders’ intimate relations with Moscow would boost their popularity. Rather than being ‘lions of Allah’, as they call each other, they would be exposed as moles of Putin. After that, suicide bombers would probably think twice before obeying their orders. But thinking twice is no good in suicide bombers’ profession. If you are serious about the global war, let us try and think strategically. The most important strategic target in that war is the Kremlin. That is not only the best way to start winning it, but, as far as I can see, the only way. Paraphrasing Alexander, we can say it is impossible to destroy the international terrorism even in a century unless you disband the Russian secret services first. FP: Russian special services are aiding international terrorism. But Islamist terror is also, on some realms, targeting Russia – and has also hit Russia. How do we make sense of all this? Stroilov: It is not the first time when Russian people and Russian special services find themselves on opposite sides. In fact, Russia is exactly the place where the FSB hand in terrorism, Islamist or otherwise, can be seen most clearly. The ‘Nord-Ost’ story is only one example, and not the brightest one. In 1999, the FSB blew up four apartment blocks in Russia, and then were caught red-handed attempting to blow-up the fifth. After that, they announced that the bomb was a fake (the expert technicians simply mistook sugar for an explosive mixture), and the whole operation was a training exercise. Before that, in mid-1990s, one FSB officer was killed trying to blow up a railroad bridge, and another one was convicted by court for blowing up a bus in Moscow. Alexander Litvinenko was well-known precisely for his investigation of the FSB terrorism in Russia, particularly the 1999 apartment blocks explosions. A big part of the Allegations is about it, and even more details are given in Blowing-up Russia. Terror from within by Litvinenko and Yuri Felshtinsky. The FSB is at war with Russian citizens, and that is more than just a figure of speech. They resort to any means in that war. They have created the terrorist threat in Russia, and then ‘defended’ us from it – in exchange for our obedience. FP: Tell us about the Prime Minister of Italy, Romano Prodi (also former President of the European Commission) and his relations with the KGB. Stroilov: Romano Prodi was described to Alexander by a senior KGB/FSB colleague, three star General Trofimov, as ‘our man in Italy’. He told Alexander that Prodi had ‘collaborated with the KGB’ and ‘carried out KGB missions’. Moreover, after 1996 the FSB had restored its relations with the old KGB agents of influence in the West. So, Gen. Trofimov and Alexander himself reckoned that Prodi might still be dangerous. In February 2006, Alexander was interviewed about that by Mario Scaramella, a consultant to the Guzzanti Commission of Italian Parliament, which investigated the KGB’s activities in Italy. The video-record of that interview was kept secret at the time, and intended only for a closed-doors parliamentary investigation. (After Alexander’s death it was made public, and the transcript of it is included in the Allegations.) However, two months later Alexander encouraged Gerard Batten, Member of European Parliament for London, to make his accusation against Prodi public. Gerard did that on 3 April 2006 in his speech to the European Parliament. The Parliament declined to investigate the matter, as Gerard insisted it should do; nor did Prodi himself ever comment on it as long as Alexander was alive. However, just eight days after Litvinenko’s death, Italian left-wing newspapers ‘revealed’ how Sen. Guzzanti and Scaramella were ‘plotting’ to discredit Prodi by alleging he had links to the KGB. Prodi himself, in a clumsy imitation of fury, announced he would instruct his lawyers to take legal action over these allegations. In event, no such legal action was taken. Mario Scaramella was arrested as soon as he returned to Italy on Christmas of the same year. He is still kept in prison without a trial, and may stay there for the rest of his life. For the Italian legal system enables the prosecution to keep him in jail for three months on some particular charges, then drop those charges, put forward some new ones, and jail him for another three months. So it goes on and on for a year now, against the background of a perpetual propaganda campaign against Scaramella. Indeed, he is one of the first political prisoners in the emerging Gulag of the EUSSR. FP: Can you talk a bit about the political prisoners in Russia today? Stroilov: There are dozens. We know this much, although there is no commonly accepted list, as different human rights organisations have different criteria to distinguish political prisoners from other victims of Russia’s perverted ‘justice’. However, at least one Penal Code article, introduced under Putin, is used only to persecute dissenters: ‘instigation to extremism’. Boris Stomakhin, a journalist who edited a small on-line newsletter, is now imprisoned for his critical writings, which were ruled to constitute that ill-defined ‘crime’. Trying to get away from the FSB gangsters who came to arrest him, Stomakhin jumped out of the window, and broke his spine and leg. Being practically handicapped, he is now denied any decent treatment in the harsh conditions of what we call PutLAG. Some others are those who went dangerously close to the Kremlin’s darkest secrets. Thus, Col. Yevgeny Taratorin, a police detective, was imprisoned in a notorious corruption trial. However, Alexander Litvinenko argued that the corruption charges against Taratorin were fabricated, while the real reasons for his imprisonment was his investigation of the 2002 ‘Nord-Ost’ theatre hostage-taking. Apparently Taratorin had gone too close to uncovering the FSB role in that crime. Then there is over a dozen of political prisoners persecuted in the notorious YUKOS case, for their association with the once uncontrollable oil company. There is also a number of academics, such as Igor Sutyagin and Valentin Danilov, imprisoned in the course of Putin’s spy-mania campaign for their collaboration with foreign colleagues. There are ethnic Chechens, such as Zara Murtazaliyeva or Zaurbek Talkhigov, who were deemed ‘terrorists’ and imprisoned only for their Chechen origins. Apart from that, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of Chechen POWs and civilians captured in North Caucasus and kept in the so-called filtration camps there. About them, we simply know very little or nothing. It is also possible that many political prisoners in Russia itself remain unknown. FP: The FSB role in that the 2002 ‘Nord-Ost’ theatre hostage-taking? What role are you exactly alluding to and what would the FSB want to cover up in this instance? Stroilov: The publisher would probably want me to answer by recommending to read Chapter 2 of Allegations, but I shall briefly re-tell the story now. At least two of the ‘Nord-Ost’ terrorists were FSB agents-provocateurs, and both of them miraculously survived the FSB assault on the building. One of them, Khanpasha Terkibayev, suddenly emerged in Strasbourg a few months later, accompanying Russian official delegation to Council of Europe. There he was recognised and interviewed by Anna Politkovskaya, and admitted he had been in the theatre during the siege. Russian prosecutors were not interested, but because a US citizen had been killed in ‘Nord-Ost’, the FBI also investigated it. So, the FBI said they wanted to interrogate Terkibayev, but a few days later he was killed in a car accident in Chechnya. Apparently, it had been Terkibayev who provided the hostage-takers with all the necessary logistics in Moscow. If not for him, they would not be able to capture the theatre at all. Another agent-provocateur, Abubakar, was identified by Mikhail Trepashkin. Many years before that, FSB detective Trepashkin investigated Abubakar as a gangster and arms dealer – and discovered that Abubakar enjoyed FSB protection. More details of that story are given in the book. Better still, Trepashkin himself has been released from the PutLAG a few weeks ago, so you can ask him. As for Col. Taratorin, I understand that he tried to trace the explosives, and the traces also led him too close to the FSB. FP: Your thoughts on the situation in Chechnya ? Stroilov: Like Alexander, I approach the situation in Chechen Republic of Ichkeria from a strictly legal viewpoint. Russia has recognised Chechnya as an independent state in the 1997 Peace Treaty. The subsequent invasion and the present Russian occupation are totally illegal. The only legitimate government of Chechnya is the one supported by its last democratically elected Parliament, i.e. the government-in-exile led by Ahmed Zakayev. Indeed, none of those ‘elections’ and ‘referenda’ which Russia held in Chechnya after the 1999 invasion were recognised by independent observers. Anyway, no fair vote is possible under a military occupation. Another important thing to understand is that the war is by far not over. The Kremlin propaganda about peace and prosperity finally coming to Chechnya under the excellent occupational administration is as false as the 100% turnout at the last ‘elections’ and 99% support for Putin’s regime. In reality, the war and genocide are still going on; people on both sides are being killed every day. Moreover, this war has now spread all over North Caucasus. Alexander’s book is as much about Chechnya as it is about Russia. He reveals lots of details about the dirty tactics which FSB uses in this war: from terrorism and agents-provocateurs to zachistkas and assassination squads. FP: Who killed Alexander Litvinenko? How exactly did they do it and why? Stroilov: On his deathbed, Alexander himself named Vladimir Putin as the murderer. Moreover, as is revealed in the Allegations’ last chapter, Putin had been trying to kill him for all those years. In July 2006, extra-judicial murders of people like Alexander were openly made an official policy of Russian regime. A law was passed, authorising the president to use Russian special forces to assassinate his enemies all over the world – and there was little doubt that Alexander’s name was high on the hit list. As Alexander himself commented prophetically in a Radio Liberty interview: ‘If they listen to me now, let them know: I hire no bodyguards to protect myself, and I never hide anywhere. I live very openly, all the journalists know where to find me. So, gentlemen, if you come to Britain to kill me, you will have to do that openly.’ But the most crucial piece of evidence against Putin is the poison, the Polonium-210, which is a very rare substance, precisely traceable to its source in Russia. And indeed it was traced down to a state-controlled, top security nuclear establishment. The use of Polonium to poison Alexander could only be authorised from the very top. Of course, Putin and his accomplices never expected the poison to be identified. That was why, immediately after Alexander’s death, Putin betrayed himself by publicly claiming there was no evidence of violent death. The actual assassination was perpetrated by a team of at least three people: Andrei Lugovoi, Dmitry Kovtun, and someone who used several false identities and whose real name is unknown. Apparently, Kovtun was responsible for the transportation of the Polonium, Lugovoi – for approaching the target, whom he knew personally, and the third one actually put the poison in Alexander’s cup. Putin probably had several motives to murder Alexander, the most obvious of which is this. Litvinenko knew too much and, worse still, he tried to let the public know too much. If you pretend to be a valiant fighter against terrorism, and there is a man who knows and talks about your covert links with Al Qaeda, what else would you do? And the Al Qaeda business is only one of the secrets which Alexander knew and revealed. FP: What interests does Putin have in helping Al Qaeda and other jihadi terror groups? Stroilov: To stir up trouble, in the world in general and in the Middle East in particular. The most obvious consequence of that are sky-high oil prices, which are both the source of KGB junta’s wealth and the salvation for their regime. Apart from that economic interest, this is a similar scheme to the one used against Russian citizens. We must stay united in front of the grave terrorist threat, right? It is not the time to reproach Putin for murders, tortures, political prisoners or genocide, is it? We must be realists: we cannot afford a new Cold War against Russia in a situation like that, can we? That is the reaction they want from you, and regrettably, they have not been quite unsuccessful. FP: What would your advice be to the U.S. and to the West in general in terms of its policy toward Putin? Stroilov: It is no good arguing if the Second Cold War is good or bad for us, for it has already started. What we should think about is how to win it as quickly and painlessly as possible. In my view, it would be wise to set the following immediate objectives in your policy towards Putin (and his future successor): 1. Total isolation: throw him out of the G7, Council of Europe, WTO and wherever else you’ve made him a member or observer. Oddly enough, they are rather sensitive about such things. Cut the number and level of meetings with Russian officials, starting from summits and ministerial ones. The KGB people don’t see these meetings like you do: for them, every meeting is a stage in your virtual recruitment. They cannot be your partners, they can only be your case officers. 2. Support all those who are already fighting them, from democratic opposition inside Russia to those neighbouring countries, such as Georgia or East European states, which resist Kremlin’s pressure. I even think it is time to establish relations, in an appropriate form, with the Chechen government-in-exile. I don’t think that you follow the Chechen politics very carefully, so perhaps your readers are unaware of the recent crisis, when Islamic fundamentalists unsuccessfully tried to take over the leadership of the Resistance. Instead, it resulted in the formation of Ahmed Zakayev’s government, which is pro-democracy, pro-independence, and has explicitly dissociated itself from the so-called jihadism. The West will hardly ever find a better kind of partners in the Muslim world. If you support Zakayev, that would be a very strong blow on the Kremlin. In a situation when Putin covertly supports Al Qaeda, what could be a better response than demonstration of your solidarity with his own worst enemies, whom he slanders as terrorists, who represent the small nation suffering from FSB genocide, and who abide by the laws of war even in their desperate situation? Besides, if you support a Muslim nation in its war against Kremlin’s tyranny, that may win you plenty of Muslim ‘hearts and minds’ elsewhere. 3. Do everything you can to make oil prices drop. Persuade the Saudis, develop your own oil production, do anything you can think of. Every dollar-per-barrel down means a blow on the KGB regime, and perhaps many human lives saved. FP: Your thoughts on Time making Putin the person of the year? Stroilov: Well done. They’ve found a worthy successor to Hitler, Stalin, and Khomeini. FP: Are you optimistic or pessimistic about the future of Russia in general? Stroilov: Optimistic (though I don’t like the word). The Putin-Medvedev regime is doomed, and whatever will replace it, it cannot be worse. Even if the country collapses into dozens of realms, as it very well may, in many of them things will certainly get better than the present state. But of course, it is very important to do everything possible to help democratic opposition to develop in Russia, so as to have a force able to ensure stability after the KGB downfall. FP: Pavel Stroilov, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview. Stroilov: Thank you.
UN 'civilization' forum endorses measures to end intolerance Brietbart.com (January
16, 2008) - A new UN
"civilization" forum concluded Wednesday with a series of
initiatives to combat intolerance between people of different
cultures in the wake of the September 11 and other terror attacks.
The forum provided "a solid glimpse of a renewed hope that if we
unite efforts we will bring some change to the world," said Jorge
Sampaio, the United Nations' high representative for the Alliance of
Civilizations. It is a "unique example of the way in which the UN
can adapt to the emerging challenges," the former Portuguese
president said in a closing speech to the delegates. The Alliance of
Civilizations Forum was the brainchild of Spanish Prime Minister
Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, who proposed it at the UN General
Assembly in September 2004, six months after the Madrid train
bombings that killed 191 people and four years after the September
11 attacks in the United States that claimed nearly 3,000 lives. It
"responds to the crucial demand for building bridges of
understanding across cultures," Sampaio said. He outlined 12
concrete initiatives from the two-day conference. These included a
100-million-dollar (67-million-euro) fund to finance major film
productions that promote cross-cultural understanding and counter
stereotypes. The fund, first announced by Jordan's Queen Noor on
Tuesday, has an initial investment of 10 million dollars and has
established partnerships with Hollywood production and distribution
companies. Sampaio described it as "the first-of-its-kind nonprofit
large-scale media production company focused on normalizing images
of stereotyped communities and minorities in mass media." Another
initiative is a Rapid Response Media Mechanism, aimed at reducing
tensions in times of cross-cultural crises. It will begin with an
"online resource that will feature global experts in cross-cultural
issues, who are available to talk to journalists," Sampaio said. He
said the Alliance will also set up a network of "goodwill
ambassadors", create a global network of philanthropic foundations
as well as a Youth Solidarity Fund. Another major initiative was a
fund to reduce youth unemployment in the Middle East and North
Africa. Qatar announced Monday it had contributed 100 million
dollars to the fund, called Silatech ("your connection" in Arabic).
Around 350 people from the worlds of politics, religion, the arts
and human rights, representing 63 countries, attended the Alliance
of Civilizations Forum. more...
7-year plan aligns U.S. with Europe's economy
WorldNet Daily (January 16, 2008) -
Six U.S. senators and 49 House members are advisers for a
group working toward a Transatlantic Common Market between the U.S. and
the European Union by 2015. The
Transatlantic Policy Network – a non-governmental organization
headquartered in
Washington and Brussels – is advised by the
bi-partisan congressional TPN policy group, chaired by Sen. Robert
Bennett, R-Utah. The plan – currently being implemented by the Bush
administration with the formation of the Transatlantic Economic Council
in April 2007 – appears to be following a plan written in 1939 by a
world-government advocate who sought to create a Transatlantic Union as
an international governing body. An economist from the World Bank has
argued in print that the formation of the Transatlantic Common Market is
designed to follow the blueprint of Jean Monnet, a key intellectual
architect of the European Union, recognizing that economic
integration must inevitably lead to political integration. As
WND previously reported, a key step in advancing this goal was the
creation of the
Transatlantic Economic Council by the U.S. and the EU through an
agreement signed by President Bush, German Chancellor Angela Merkel
– the current president of the European Council – and European
Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso at a White House summit meeting
last April. Writing in the Fall 2007 issue of the Streit Council journal
"Freedom and Union,"
Rep. Jim Costa, D-Calif., a member of the TPN advisory group,
affirmed the target date of 2015 for the creation of a Transatlantic
Common Market. Costa said the Transatlantic Economic Council is
tasked with creating the Transatlantic Common Market regulatory
infrastructure. The infrastructure would not require congressional
approval, like a new free-trade agreement would.
Writing in the same issue of the Streit Council publication, Bennett
also confirmed that what has become known as the "Merkel initiative"
would allow the Transatlantic Economic Council to integrate and
harmonize administrative rules and regulations between the U.S. and the
EU "in a very quiet way," without introducing a new free trade agreement
to Congress. No document on the TEC website suggests that any of the
regulatory changes resulting from the process of integrating with the EU
will be posted in the Federal Register or submitted to Congress as new
free-trade agreements or as modifications to existing trade agreements.
In addition to Bennett, the advisers to the Transatlantic Policy Network
includes the following senators: Thad Cochran, R-Miss.; Chuck Hagel,
R-Neb.; Barbara Mikulski, D-Md.; Pat Roberts, R-Kan.; and Gordon Smith,
R-Ore. Among the 49 U.S. congressmen on the
TPN's
Congressional Group are John Boehner, R-Ohio; John Dingell, D-Mich.;
Kenny Marchant, R-Texas; and F. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisc. WND
contacted Bennett's office for comment but received no return call by
the publication deadline. A
progress report on the TEC website indicates the following U.S.
government agencies are already at work integrating and harmonizing
administrative rules and regulations with their EU counterparts: The
Office of Management and Budget, the Food and Drug Administration, the
Environmental Protection Agency, the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration and the Securities and Exchange Commission. The
Streit
Council is named after Clarence K. Streit, whose 1939 book "Union
Now" called for the creation of a Transatlantic Union as a step toward
world government. The new federation, with an international
constitution, was to include the 15 democracies of U.S., UK, France,
Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Ireland,
New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and South Africa. Ira Straus,
the founder and U.S. coordinator of the
Committee on Eastern Europe and Russia in NATO, a group dedicated to
including Russia within NATO,
credits Bennett as TPN chairperson with reviving Streit's work "seven
decades later." A globalist with leftist political leanings,
Straus was a Fulbright professor of political science at Moscow State
University and the Moscow State Institute of International Relations
from 2001 to 2002. The congruity of ideas between Bennett and Streit
is clear when Bennett writes passages that echo precisely goals Streit
stated in 1939. more...
Alliance of Civilizations told to act - Summary Earth
Times (January 15, 2008) -
The United Nations' Alliance of Civilizations project was Tuesday
advised to engage in concrete programmes instead of
just discussing inter-cultural dialogue at meetings and in documents.
The countries involved should "tenaciously" seek to apply "concrete
programmes," European Union foreign policy chief Javier
Solana said at the alliance's first annual forum, which
began in Madrid. The Alliance of Civilizations, which was launched
by Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero after
Islamist train bombings killed 191 people in Madrid in 2004, seeks
to break down cultural prejudice and to increase understanding
especially between the West and the Muslim world. The two-day forum
brought nearly 400 people from more than 60 countries to the Spanish
capital, including representatives of governments, international
organizations, civil society as well as religious leaders,
entrepreneurs and artists. The guest list included the presidents of
Senegal, Finland and Slovenia and the prime ministers of Algeria and
Malaysia. "We do not need new documents, but they need to be
applied," Solana said, pointing out that many of the alliance's
ideas were already contained in EU legislation. The countries
involved should not "just hold meetings, but the meetings need to
serve to solve problems," Solana insisted. The Alliance of
Civilizations will only succeed if given a "concrete content," Zapatero
said, calling on all countries to adopt it as a "policy of
state." UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon stressed the
urgent need for inter-cultural dialogue to thwart the threat of
extremist movements. "Never in our lifetime has there been a more
desperate need for constructive and committed dialogue," Ban said,
describing the Alliance of Civilizations as a "unique" platform for
that purpose. It was easy to call for cultural bridges, Ban
admitted, but it was much more difficult to turn the words into
deeds influencing how people thought and acted. Spanish Foreign
Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos urged the participants to engage to
back US peace efforts in the Israeli- Palestinian conflict,
complaining of a "lack of political will" to create a Palestinian
state. Former Portuguese president Jorge Sampaio, the UN high
representative for the Alliance of Civilizations, said it was
filling a "vacuum" existing on the international level. Turkish
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has joined Zapatero in
sponsoring the initiative, said Turkey's entry into the EU would
"prove that the Alliance of Civilizations is possible." The forum
included workshops aimed at sparking initiatives and partnerships to
promote inter-cultural understanding. Jordan's Queen Noor announced
the creation of a 100-million-dollar fund to subsidize audiovisual
productions promoting cultural integration, while the Spanish
government said it would support movies and television series of
that kind. Recommendations issued by 20 eminent personalities in
2006 set education, the media, youth and migration as the main areas
to be targeted. Zapatero's and Erdogan's initiative for an alliance
of civilizations was adopted by the UN in 2005. The United States
has backed the initiative, though it has shown a limited interest,
and only sent its ambassador to Spain to the Madrid forum, according
to Spanish sources. The general action plan issued in 2006 is now to
be followed by national plans. Zapatero outlined Spain's 60-point
national plan and pledged to appoint a coordinator to implement it. This is a prime example of applying law internationally in the name of peace and security. When you look at the basic thrust behind the AoC, it is to eliminate elements from religion that offend others. One of the main points is the battle against those who claim sole ownership to the Truth, like the Bible does and therefore all who believe it. (Jews and Christians) This war on religious fundamentalism is a necessary step in order to get the world to worship the antichrist as Bible prophecy foretells, this is the New World Order. When you see this in light of Albert Pike's 1871 letter talking about fomenting a third world war between Islam and Israel/West and the many quotes by past dictators on how to direct nations through terror and fear, there seems to be a convenient correlation between terrorism and taking away freedoms both in America and abroad as well as setting up the legal framework for the world to be beholden to international law over sovereign nations that declare their own laws. When the policy-makers are centered in Europe at a time that Bible prophecy is being fulfilled, watch out! America is already ceding power to Europe slowly. Now check this story out, also above in this issue of the Watchman Newsletter: Joint US-EU-NATO security body mulled UN Alliance of Civilizations to stage first forum in Madrid Monsters & Critics (January 14, 2008) - Nearly 400 political leaders and other representatives from about 100 countries were expected Tuesday in the Spanish capital Madrid for the first annual forum of the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations project, organizers said Monday. The forum was to provide participants with a platform to develop initiatives and partnerships in an attempt to overcome the gap of cultural prejudice and misunderstandings, especially between the West and the Muslim world. The forum was to be inaugurated by the Spanish and Turkish prime ministers, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero and Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who launched the alliance, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, and former Portuguese president Jorge Sampaio, the UN high representative for the project. The guest list included the presidents of Algeria, Slovenia and Finland, European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana, Arab League Secretary General Amr Musa, actor Antonio Banderas, author Paulo Coelho as well as other personalities representing religious communities, the business world, academia, arts and civil society. The United States, which is not a member of the 'Group of Friends' network supporting the alliance, will send its ambassador, while Israel was not expected to participate officially. Soon after Zapatero launched the idea of the alliance in 2004, it received the backing of Erdogan, and was adopted by the UN in 2005. In 2006, a group of 20 notables ranging from former Iranian president Mohammed Khatami to South African archbishop Desmond Tutu presented an action plan, issuing recommendations for areas ranging from education and the media to the integration of immigrants and peace initiatives. The idea is for every country to now make its plans, according to the Spanish government, which was to present its own four-year plan at the two-day forum. Official AoC Site| EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | Solana | NewWorldOrder | If you have not already, please read the Treaty of Lisbon collection of documentation and information relating to the coming fulfillment of Bible prophecy. Some attendees are: Javier Solana [Secretary-General WEU], Ban Ki-Moon [Secretary-General U.N.], Joel Hunter [National Association of Evangelicals], Islamic and Jewish representatives and a bunch of media and educators from around the world. Media does matter as well as education of youth to determining future policy and acceptance of policy. The Alliance of Civilizations is against the core of Christianity and the Bible's claim to being the only Truth.
Report launch for "Towards a Grand Strategy for an Uncertain World"
Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) (January
10, 2008) - The CSIS Europe and International Security
Programs, in partnership with the Noaber Foundation, hosted the
launch of "Towards a Grand Strategy for an Uncertain World: Renewing
the Transatlantic Partnership," a new report authored by Gen. Dr.
Klaus Naumann (Germany), Gen. John Shalikashvili (United States),
Field Marshal The Lord Inge (United Kingdom), Adm. Jacques Lanxade
(France), and Gen. Henk van den Breemen (the Netherlands), with
Benjamin Bilski and Douglas Murray. The event also featured
commentary by Robert E. Hunter, former U.S. Ambassador to NATO. In
the report, these five distinguished military leaders consider the
complexity of emerging global security challenges and the
capabilities of existing institutions to address them. They conclude
that dealing with these challenges requires a new transatlantic
grand strategy that ensures a better integration of military and
non-military capabilities. They argue that a transformed NATO,
working closely with the European Union, should serve as the core
element of a future security architecture. The group advances a
number of near- and longer-term proposals to enhance NATO and
transatlantic unity of effort. They advocate replacing the
two-pillar concept of U.S.-European relations with an alliance of
democracies ranging from Finland to Alaska.
AUDIO
(02:12:47 mp3) |
REPORT (pdf)
World Powers call for Coalition Government The
Australian (January 4, 2008) -
EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana and US Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice called for the creation of a coalition government in
violence-wracked Kenya. The pair "agreed the focus should be on
pressing the parties to agree on setting up a coalition government," the
spokeswoman for Mr Solana said. Mr Solana and Dr Rice also discussed
sending EU and US envoys to convince Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki and
opposition leader Raila Odinga to negotiate, but no decision was taken,
the spokeswoman said. Kenya's main opposition party claims the vote
count after last week's presidential election was rigged. More than 340
people have been killed in violence since the election and tens of
thousands displaced, mainly in western regions. European Commission
external relations spokeswoman Christiane Hohmann earlier appealed for
calm. "Violence does not have any place in a country after an election,"
she said. International diplomatic efforts to halt the Kenyan crisis
have been intensifying. Germany's Foreign Minister Frank-Walter
Steinmeier called for mediation to stop the violence, while South
African Nobel peace laureate Desmond Tutu was in th capital Nairobi on
Thursday to try and mediate between Mr Kibaki and opposition Mr Odinga. SWF'S - Saviours or Harbingers of Economic Apocalypse? Financial Sense University (January 3, 2008) - Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWF's) are being hailed as the saviours of the financial world, but in reality are more akin to harbingers of the economic apocalypse for countries such as the United States and United Kingdom. The SWF's have been stepping in of late with tens of billions in financing and investments into the cash starved US banking and finance sector with financial institutions such as Citicorp selling off large chunks every other week to funds such as that to the Abu Dhabi SWF at 4.9% of the company for $7.5bn on a fixed yield of 11%, the terms are far more favorable than offered to domestic investors. Most recent speculation is that Rio Tinto maybe inline for a Chinese SWF bid of as much as $150 billion. As petro and trade dollars flow into these SWF's, we will find increasingly larger and larger slices of important US and western world capital producing infrastructure flowing into the hands of asian and the middle eastern government controlled funds as part of a multi-pronged strategy. The effect of which is literally to gradually transfer sovereignty of the United States to these countries. Whilst there are many arguments as to the value of sovereignty to the average citizen given the observed quality of the democratic institutions where as little as 50% actually turn out to vote, and further diminished by suspected corruption in the voting process such as hanging shads and denial to thousands of democratic black voters in Florida during 2000. The transfer of sovereignty has consequences that could be deemed to be permanent and irreversible. The Multi-pronged strategy towards the transfer of sovereignty -
1. Transfer of manufacturing base
eastwards. Whilst trillions of dollars flowed into US government bonds to support the dollar, the US government and Fed were able to effectively manage the influence of bond holders via monetary policy i.e. to maintain the US economy and corporate infrastructure via foreign financing in the form of lower domestic taxation, corporate favorable laws and foreign policy. However the SWF's are invested in assets that are priced to fluctuate inline with profitability and the value of the underlying assets such as mineral and energy reserves, therefore are less influenced by monetary policy and the exchange rates then the bond markets. As SWF's buy up hard assets, these resource and technology corporations and banks are increasingly going to come under the influence of the sovereign wealth funds, which have their own agendas at work based on national self interest. The amount in SWF's continues to grow at an astonishing rate as the giant US deficit of $700 billions continues to feed their coffers. Current estimates put the funds at more than $ 3 trillions and growing as more of the trade surpluses flow directly into the funds... What does this mean for the US and UK? As part of the multi
pronged strategy of the transfer US based assets and the means of
production. The key to the strategy is to support the US dollar will for
the time being at least, by the likes of China, Arab states and Japan ,
so as these countries can continue to buy US assets and transfer US and
British jobs abroad through outsourcing and maintain supply of goods and
services to the US consumer in exchange for more dollars to buy more US
assets with. However the situation has reached a point that the amount
of sovereignty and manufacturing base transferred to date may be so
great that even the strategy of supporting the dollar is breaking down.
The eventual inevitable outcome is for a sharp fall in the currencies of
the UK and USA as a result of market forces so as to diminish the
ability of these countries to be able assert themselves economically and
militarily across the globe as these countries will no longer have the
economic base to do so. Russia being more immature and a late comer to
the game, is prematurely eager to demonstrate the impact of the trend
towards transfer of sovereignty then China is, hence the increasing
noises emanating from Putin's Kremlin. This should be taken as a strong
warning of what the future holds as sovereignty continues to drain
eastwards. If Russia is this aggressive with a $150 SWF, how will it
behave once currency reserves allow it to create a $1 trillion SWF?
more... The destruction of America as a power must happen for power to be ceded to Europe. As I've pointed out before, Albert Pike's plans for America have been accomplished in fomenting chaos between Islam and the West supporting the existence of Israel, being responsible for Israel's creation. Now those behind the West do not want Israel to exist either because they are opposed to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and are part of the New World Order that will give their power to the antichrist and fight God at His return. The first hour of the January 1, 2008 Coast to Coast AM show focused on trend watchers in examining where America is headed. The financial crisis that has been unfolding was the main focus of the shaky year they predicted would be coming. Those that own American business and finances own America. What are you going to do when companies lay off employees, the banks close and the dollar collapses? What about the mortgages on houses? The banks own the land and the government can take it if we don't pay taxes. Can you see how quickly those who don't participate in the bail-out will be left with nothing? Be aware so you are not blindsided and trust God. Trends to a New World Order: Part 1 Transnational Elites and Pernicious Globalization Old-Thinker News (January 3, 2008)
As we enter the new year of 2008, themes of a "global community" and a "unified global approach" are becoming more prevalent. When keeping an eye on current events and reading various think tank projections regarding the future of the world, a sobering picture begins to emerge. Forecasts are being made of a world in which a sharp divide exists between the elite and the rest of humanity. Advanced technology offers those who can afford it a means of personalized "auto-evolution". "Pernicious globalization" takes its toll on the world and global elites thrive, leaving the rest of us in the dust. Increasingly open borders, unchecked immigration and trends to world governance cause communal conflict between various groups. The middle class becomes revolutionary as economic hardship hits hard on millions of Americans. Dictators utilize life extension technologies to prolong their reign of terror. A computer simulation offers government agencies and corporations a system to test marketing strategy and psychological operations on a virtual mirror of the real world in real time. "Gen-rich" and "Gen-poor" classes emerge to form a new "biological caste system". All of this would make for a thrilling Sci-Fi novel, but these trends come not from science fiction - though science fiction has proven to be a prophetic precursor to these developments -, but from present day realities seen by the U.K. Ministry of Defense, the CIA and other prominent individuals in the fields of technology, science and government. This short two part report will attempt to answer these questions: What impact has globalization had on us and how will it effect us in the future? How do present day trends in technology, globalization, politics and government relate to the prospect of a New World Order? The New World Order A "New World Order" has been heralded by global elites for many years. We are told by these elites that trends to a system of world governance are only natural, that national sovereignty must be eliminated. James Paul Warburg, speaking before the US Senate in 1950, stated that, "We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent." Globalization and advances in technology have undoubtedly impacted our lifestyles, world-views, and lives dramatically. A "global outlook" has planted itself in our society, but more so among elites. Zbigniew Brzezinski writes of this global outlook in his 1970 book, Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era,
The dissemination and injection of globalist ideology into the collective vocabulary and consciousness of society has been a leading goal of such transnational elites. Regional governance in conjunction with regional economic systems inside a world government has also been a long term goal of globalist organizations. In order for these regional systems to operate smoothly and to be generally accepted, think tanks have undertaken projects of social engineering on a massive scale to rid the population of "outdated" ideas of national sovereignty. [2] The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars hosted a conference in 2002 which was dedicated to the development of strategies to overcome such "outdated" ideas. The political, social and economic integration of the United States, Canada, and Mexico into a union similar to the European Union was discussed. America was acknowledged by the conference panelists as being one of the largest obstacles to globalist planning. Expanding the definition of "we", framing integration in a non threatening manner and a "winner at the polls" were some of the suggested social engineering strategies. A summary of the conference states, "Further economic, political, and social integration will depend on how citizens of the three countries define their national identities and the degree to which they are willing to cede some of their countries’ sovereignty to a larger entity." [3] As we enter the new year of 2008, themes of a "global community" and a "unified global approach" are becoming more prevalent. The United Nations has recently begun an initiative to bring more into agreement with the "global consciousness" with a comic book geared towards children. Marvel Comics has teamed up with the UN to create a comic book that will teach children "...the value of international cooperation." [5] Another example comes from the London based think tank mi2g, which released a statement in late December of 2007 that stated in part,
Combating climate change with a "global unified approach" is a concept that Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, is quite familiar with. In an article carried in the Taipei times, Haass writes that sovereignty must become weaker in a globalized world faced with climate change, "Some governments are prepared to give up elements of sovereignty to address the threat of global climate change..."more... | EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | Technology | NewWorldOrder | America | Earth Changes |
The Coming of Eurabia International
Analyst Network (January 2, 2008) -
According to Moorish legend, Boabdil, the last Muslim (Moorish) king of
what was left of Al Andalus (the great Moorish Empire in Spain),
surrendered the keys to his city Granada on January 2, 1492, and on one
of its hills, paused for a final glance at his lost Empire. The place
would become known as El Ultimo Suspiro del Moro - "the Moor's Last
Sigh." Over 500 years have passed since the end of the Moorish Empire in
Andalusia, but for the Muslim world, the memory, the humiliation and the
pain still linger. Bin Laden, in the wake of the March 11, 2004 Madrid
rail attacks called for the restoration of the Muslims’ lost Islamic
caliphate. D'himmis, whether Spaniards or Israelis, must never be
allowed to rule over Muslims in lands previously conquered by Islam.
Once lands formed part of the Muslim umma ("community" - in its global
sense), they remain part of the Muslim umma. In a strange twist of
irony, history may now be coming full circle. If Muslim population
growth continues at it’s expected pace, the Europe of today will become
the Eurabia of tomorrow. What kind of European Islam will evolve,
however, remains to be seen. The demographic Arab and Muslim weight in
Europe is combining with the flow of Arab capital, the globalization of
markets and the huge European financial investments in Arab lands to
produce a gradual but inexorable movement toward the Islamification of
Europe. The ascendancy of Islam in Europe began in response to the
booming European economy of the 1960s and the need for cheap foreign
labor (mostly from North Africa) and as a political consequence of the
Arab oil embargo in the early 1970s where Europeans became so afraid of
losing their oil supplies that they decided to pander to the requests of
OPEC, discarding Israel and beginning an intense dialogue with Arab
countries. The political trappings of this change can be seen today in
Islamic control over Middle Eastern Studies Departments at European
universities; the re-writing of European historical textbooks; allowing
Euro-Arab bodies to screen cultural exchanges and publications relating
to Islam and the Arab Muslim world for “unwelcome” content; taboos
imposed on issues related to immigration and Islam; disinformation
campaigns demonizing Israel and America, while fostering a comprehensive
and “brotherly” alliance between European Union (EU) and Arab League
countries on the political, economic, cultural, and social levels; and
the servile obedience of the EU's mainstream media to all these
initiatives. The National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher
Education (NATFHE) which voted to adopt boycott of Israelis
universities, professors and students followed by the British National
Union of Journalists voting for a boycott of Israeli products were two
actions instituted by these increasingly powerful Euro-Arab League
relationships. But these are just the surface manifestations of more
ominous developments unfolding on the European continent. Over the past
three decades, liberalization, secularization, and the need for cheap
labor brought about liberal immigration policies that resulted in
millions of impoverished Arab Muslims flocking to the continent for its
wealth, it’s higher standard of living, its freedom and its ethnic and
religious tolerance. Europe opened its borders to them, while turning a
blind eye to the hundreds of minarets that began rising in the shadows
of its basilicas and bell towers.
Cyprus and Malta make the switch to Euros International Herald
Tribune (January 1, 2008) -
EU newcomers Cyprus and Malta adopted the
euro on Tuesday, bringing to 15 the number of countries using the
currency with increasing clout over the slumping U.S. dollar. The
Mediterranean islands, both former British colonies, scrapped the Cyprus
pound and Maltese lira at midnight. Malta's Prime Minister, Lawrence
Gonzi, had to wait a little before getting his hands on the new
currency. An automated teller machine did not work when Gonzi tried to
withdraw euros, and he was obliged to use a different ATM. "We are the
smallest member state of the European Union, but we are proud," he said.
Both countries welcomed the euro with outdoor celebrations, including a
fireworks display in Malta's rainy capital Valletta. The euro has risen
more than 11 percent against the dollar during the year and nine East
European countries are waiting to convert. The euro's strong exchange
rate of $1.4599 on Monday - up 79 percent from its lowest point of 82
cents in 2000 - has given more pocket power to European tourists in the
United States, while curtailing the movements and spending of many
American tourists and workers abroad. We are in a region that could have
some geopolitical surprises," Cyprus's Finance Minister, Michalis
Sarris, said. "Although the pound has been a loyal and faithful servant
of the Cyprus economy, we felt that things could happen that could
destabilize a small open economy, so it was to your benefit to join the
euro zone as soon as possible." Only the southern, Greek-speaking part
of Cyprus will use the euro. The government in the north is recognized
only by Turkey, but many Turkish Cypriot merchants will also accept
euros along with Turkish lira. Cyprus's euro coins will be inscribed in
both Greek and Turkish, with designs that include the mouflon or wild
sheep, a national symbol. Malta's 1 euro and 2 euros coins will bear the
Maltese cross. "We're sorry to say goodbye to our pound but happy to
welcome the euro," Cyprus President Tassos Papadopoulos said moments
after midnight on the island. more... Just wanted to remind everyone in light of the initial video and the information here. Global governance in an emergency... U.S. under U.N. law in health emergency World Net Daily (August 28, 2007) - The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America summit in Canada released a plan that establishes U.N. law along with regulations by the World Trade Organization and World Health Organization as supreme over U.S. law during a pandemic and sets the stage for militarizing the management of continental health emergencies. The "North American Plan for Avian & Pandemic Influenza" was finalized at the SPP summit last week in Montebello, Quebec. At the same time, the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, has created a webpage dedicated to avian flu and has been running exercises in preparation for the possible use of U.S. military forces in a continental domestic emergency involving avian flu or pandemic influenza. With virtually no media attention, in 2005 President Bush shifted U.S. policy on avian flu and pandemic influenza, placing the country under international guidelines not specifically determined by domestic agencies. The policy shift was formalized Sept. 14, 2005, when Bush announced a new International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza to a High-Level Plenary Meeting of the U.N. General Assembly, in New York. The new International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza was designed to supersede an earlier November 2005 Homeland Security report that called for a U.S. national strategy that would be coordinated by the Departments of Homeland Security, Health and Agriculture. The 2005 plan, operative until Bush announced the International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza, directed the State Department to work with the WHO and U.N., but it does not mention that international health controls are to be considered controlling over relevant U.S. statutes or authorities. Under the International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza, Bush agreed the U.S. would work through the U.N. system influenza coordinator to develop a continental emergency response plan operating through authorities under the WTO, North American Free Trade Agreement and the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization. WND could find no evidence the Bush administration presented the Influenza Partnership plan to Congress for oversight or approval. The SPP plan for avian and pandemic influenza announced at the Canadian summit last week embraces the international control principles Bush first announced to the U.N. in his 2005 International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza declaration. The SPP plan gives primacy for avian and pandemic influenza management to plans developed by the WHO, WTO, U.N. and NAFTA directives – not decisions made by U.S. agencies. The U.N.-WHO-WTO-NAFTA plan advanced by SPP features a prominent role for the U.N. system influenza coordinator as a central international director in the case of a North American avian flu or pandemic influenza outbreak. In Sept. 2005, Dr. David Nabarro was appointed the first U.N. system influenza coordinator, a position which also places him as a senior policy adviser to the U.N. director-general. Nabarro joined the WHO in 1999 and was appointed WHO executive director of sustainable development and health environments in July 2002. In a Sept. 29, 2005, press conference at the U.N., Nabarro made clear that his job was to prepare for the H5N1 virus, known as the avian flu. Nabarro fueled the global fear that an epidemic was virtually inevitable. In response to a question about the 1918-1919 flu pandemic that killed approximately 40 million people worldwide, Nabarro commented, "I am certain there will be another pandemic sometime." Nabarro stressed at the press conference that he saw as inevitable a worldwide pandemic influenza coming soon that would kill millions. more...| EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | NewWorldOrder | America |
|
Donald J. Eberly is the president of The International Associations of National Youth Service -- an umbrella group that includes the Peace Corps, National Service-Learning Clearinghouse, National Service Learning Partnership, and others. At the 1998 "Fourth Global Conferences on National Youth Service," he traced the history of this global project. Ponder this progression:
UNESCO was a major participant in that Youth Service conference, which worked with over "140 member organizations."[16] The United States was represented by key leaders in social and corporate development -- including the Rite of Passage Project and the Ford Foundation which has been funding "progressive" world programs for decades.[17]
Few have been more zealous for interfaith education and global service than former UN Under-Secretary Robert Muller. In 1989 UNESCO honored him with its Peace Education Prize, and his acceptance speech touted cosmic world education. That's not surprising, since his beliefs are largely based on books penned by Theosophist Alice Bailey, who received them from her "spirit guide." [More on Alice Bailey and the mystery of iniquity]
Her message is now everywhere -- not because people read her books, but because her occult cosmology is promoted by Oprah Winfrey and communicated through a variety of popular New Age and "New Spirituality" books. They include A New Earth by Eckhart Tolle, The Secret by Rhonda Byrne, and A Course in Miracles received from a "spirit guide" called "Jesus."[18] In Education for a New Age, Bailey's spirit guide summarized the basic principle behind "service learning:"
The notion that "self-love" leads to a universal "God consciousness" is a demonic lie! So it's not surprising that Alice Bailey's books were published by Lucis [initially Lucifer] Publishing Company. Saul Alinsky drew inspiration from the same occult source. Like Alice Bailey, he called for rebellion against the God we love:
THE RAGING BATTLE
The actual answer to the initial question is found in the Bible. It tells us that "the whole world is under the sway of the evil one" (1 John 1:19), and he uses every possible agency to win his battle against Truth. In fact, his servants are driving the transformation in every arena.[20]
This is spiritual war! Unthinkable lies are now accepted by blinded masses who have forgotten the foundations of our freedom! Dialectic groups (led by trained facilitators) -- no matter how nice or "Christian" they sound -- are prompting people to shift their trust from God to the group. In that context, even the Bible is conformed to the group's changing visions.
In contrast, our sovereign God calls each of us to take a stand, resist compromise, and follow His unchanging Truth. Those who choose His way will walk together with Him. He will strengthen us for the battle and enable us to stand firm on the solid rock of His Word -- no matter how fierce the battle.
Endnotes: