EU 2025: crippled by bickering and that citizens don't want it

Quite a few people have reported on this Global Trends 2025 document by the US, which amongst other things has some pretty interesting stuff about the EU in there. Loved that image by the way whoever did that, very much along the lines of my own thinking.

"EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - By 2025, the European Union will be a "hobbled giant" crippled by internal bickering and a eurosceptic citizenry. Eastern European organised crime could dominate one or more member state governments, and the bloc will likely be kowtowing to Moscow after having failed at all attempts to wean itself from Russian energy supplies."

It talks about the 'European public being alienated by a perceived democratic deficit' Nothing merely perceived about it of course.

read more here... or the report itself.

An interview.

Apologies for being out of it this year guys and sorry if I have disappointed anyone. This has not been a good year at all for me.

I wanted to post this:

http://mediadownload.soundwaves2000.com/rliberty/09-24-07a.mp3

as I think it is very good recent interview from Dr Stan Monteith's show with Colonel Barry Turner, who's a very interesting political researcher.

EU: 'a monster that must be destroyed'

A couple of days ago via Kurt Nimmo:

"It takes a victim of sovietism to recognize a likewise process in Europe. “Vladimir Bukovksy, the 63-year old former Soviet dissident, fears that the European Union is on its way to becoming another Soviet Union,” writes Paul Belien for the Brussels Journal. “In a speech he delivered in Brussels last week Mr. Bukovsky called the EU a ‘monster’ that must be destroyed, the sooner the better, before it develops into a fullfledged totalitarian state.”

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

Bukovsky fingers the usual globalist suspects:

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

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

For Bukovsky, the European Parliament resembles “the Supreme Soviet. It looks like the Supreme Soviet because it was designed like it. Similarly, when you look at the European Commission it looks like the Politburo…. If you go through all the structures and features of this emerging European monster you will notice that it more and more resembles the Soviet Union.”

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

Continued...


EU European Union

Where can Blair be installed to do the most damage ?

Contrary to what some people may think, no one wants to make horrible predictions that seem to be edging towards the truth, especially in their more terrifying, more outlandish sounding, and more 'conspiracy'-themed moments.

Well, I hate to say I told you so, really I do, but for some time I've been effectively warning about this kind of scenario which is now being presented to the public re: Blair. It was utterly inevitable in my book.

"Tony Blair has been accused of 'knifing' Gordon Brown by holding secret discussions about a job as the first ever President of the European Union. The Prime Minister was entertained in Paris by new French president Nicolas Sarkozy at an upmarket restaurant called Thiou, where they agreed a joint agenda on Europe. French political sources have confirmed that President Sarkozy is keen for Mr Blair to take on a full-time paid role as the 'face' of the EU after he quits Downing Street

[..] Mr Blair's private dinner with Mr Sarkozy and his wife Cecilia at the Thai restaurant on the banks of the Seine has echoes of a previous restaurant encounter where Mr Brown was outmanoeuvred. In 1994, at Granita in Islington, Mr Blair is said to have made a deal to hand over power to Mr Brown during his second term, leading to later accusations of betrayal. The Paris meal, revealed here for the first time, took place on May 11, days after Mr Sarkozy's presidential victory and hours after Mr Blair publicly confirmed his retirement date" ^{(Daily Mail)}

As I've tried to say on my blog, and as far as I am concerned pretty much confirmed by this piece, and other stories from last year, I think it's best not to look at Mr Blair as an individual, but as a conduit or gateway for a set of inherently international interests that, to a greater or lesser extent, perhaps loosely or directly, manifest their will through him, or at least are in full agreement with him.

A lot of people believe, understandably, that Blair is a kind of poodle of Bush and US power, myself I just never quite believed that to be true. I don't believe Blair has any admiration of Bush, has any love or understanding of America at all, other than as, today, a vast military might under a neocon coup that has corrupted the country into destroying Iraq, trying to lay the groundwork to attack Iran, while creating some pretty horrendous dictatorship laws domestically and exporting torture globally.

And certainly, Blair's actions both foreign and domestic simply cannot be fully explained in the normal expectations and flow of British politics.

Instead, I always believed that there was a reward inferred for Blair if he did what he did, and that's what I think you are looking at here, and there is the possibility that Blair has effectively been told he can have a significant chunk of power, in a different future order.

And this would explain why there has been a great difficulty in directly trying to get rid of Blair, because he is essentially being protected and groomed. To put it simply they are not done with Mr Blair yet.

And the plan seems to be to try to fit Blair in where he can do the most damage as an effective President of the World figure. The Carlyle Group, speculated about early on, didn't really cut it properly and Blair has no understanding of business. The UN, which a lot of good people have many reservations and concerns about, is simply not enough under the control of whatever you want to call this trend or axis...indeed the UN has come under enormous criticism (including from Blair) that it simply isn't war-mongering enough and is too sympathetic to Palestinians...or too sympathetic to terrorist states etc, indeed, particularly in the US you may have read some other articles about 'how we need a new UN', 'how it's out of control'...now you understand those kind of articles.

But the EU presidency would be ideal, as apparently this is where a significant chunk of pretty horrific intention congeals itself, and would effectively allow the Blair-gateway to destroy the nations of Europe in a way they haven't been yet.

One would hope it would be fairly obvious that this Sarkozy character is seriously bad news. Sarkozy's endorsement of Blair who has feverishly been destroying his own country as well as Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon should be an enormous warning to the French that they are now in serious trouble with Sarkozy.

And one would also hope this would finally put to rest the idea that the quango of the EU via Sarkozy, seeking to endorse a known war criminal and traitor and destroyer of society, utterly despised by his own UK population, as its new permanent leader, can ever be seen as some sort of world 'good cop'.

EU President Blair Sarkozy