European Union: The End Game

When, on 26th March, 10 days after the referendum in Crimea which determined its union with Russia, the US president visited Brussels for the first time, he urgently asked for the integration of the European Union, encouraging the Europeans at the same time to support NATO against Moscow. Obama emphasized from the start that on the day after the Second World War, “from both sides of the Atlantic we adopted a common vision for Europe…and with a determination that states can satisfy the interests of their own civilians through commerce and open markets…” This is not the first time that American officials confessed that a united European continent is the best associate for the USA, overlooking the fact that organizations we know today as “European institutions” were designed and created through antidemocratic procedures. At the same time, the European Union is the biggest globalization and open market experiment in existence, founded upon lies and incomplete truths. Its lack of legitimacy though has started to show through and is now visible to the citizens of Europe.

For the same reason, the euro-elections that are coming up on May 25th – even though they are nothing more than a masquerade that aims to deceptively present the EU as a democratic institution – show this will turn into a boomerang for the Eurocrats, who are aiming to complete their coup through the federalization of the EU.

The Nazi roots of the European Union

During the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial, 28 administrators of the IG Farben Chemical Cartel were tried for crimes against humanity and many of them ended up being sentenced. The American prosecutor, summarizing the decisive role of the chemical cartel, stated that: without IG Farben the Second World War would never have been possible! After the initiation of the Cold War some of the general administrators of IG Farben who were tried at Nuremberg returned to the highest positions in West German industry. One of them was Hans Globke, who was in charge of writing the Laws of the European Reich in the Nazi occupied countries during the Second World War.

Globke became a minister in the West German Chancellery under Konrad Adenauer, one of the architects of the EU, and controlled essentially all areas of political life in postwar West Germany, from the Secret Services to the continuation of the petrochemical and drug cartel in conquering Europe through the newly formed EU.

Walter Hallstein, a prominent professor of Law during the Nazi regime, in charge of formulating the law of “Protection of German Blood and Honor…” in 1939, became the principal architect of the EU in 1957 and the first president of the “European Board” – now known as the EU Commission, the executive body of the EU.

The truth – that is knowingly hidden from the people of Europe – is that the European Union is based on the Nazi plans as published in Berlin in 1941 by Amo Solter, who was in charge of the official Nazi “Central Research Institute for National Economic Order and Greater Sphere Economy”.

The Second World War never actually finished. It just changed its strategy. Losing the war didn’t derail the European plans of the Nazis, it just turned the war into a financial one and led eventually to the creation of the European Union. The pharmaceutical empire is one of the main powers behind the European Union. The drug companies are not only involved in the control of the medical cartel but are also political designers.

On 26th February 2008, in a public discussion in the British Parliament, Rodney Atkinson – a former British government advisor, writer and a lecturer at Mainz University in Germany – spoke on the fascist nature of the European Union. Atkinson described in detail the history of an unspoken truth: “The EU was established and initially led by former Nazis and fascists, and that is why the Charlemagne Prize was awarded to Tony Blair, Edward Heath, Roy Jenkins and others for their role in depriving democratic dominance from Europe’s state-members”. The EU today has reproduced the politics and structures of 1940s Europe and is demonstrating all the characteristics of an authoritarian, antidemocratic Europe serving the interests of private firms – just as its fascist creators intended.

Isn’t it strange, states Atkinson, that “The EU has promoted the ethnic cleansing of 1 million people in the Balkans, mainly Serbs, Jews and gypsies, from Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo which all provided Waffen SS divisions for the Nazis in the 1940s”?

Those who aspired to the destruction of democratic control knew that they would not be able to succeed if they attempted their political coup within a democratic system. They therefore acted beneath the democratic system and on the edge of national borders. They established within the European Union the creation of a bureaucratic state so monolithic that many people are numbed by the size of this project.

Given that until recently their secret goal – of transforming the democratic state members of Europe into a gigantic neo-libertarian empire – was on the horizon, the new dictators are feeling emboldened.  By blocking referendums for 95% of the citizens of the EU, they have refused them the right to vote for the mass loss of their democratic rights through the Lisbon Treaty. Yet it is outrageous when, based on measurements of public opinion according to the Eurobarometer surveys, only 50% of the citizens of the EU support it today and, while they are citizens of the EU’s member states, they could be arrested and prosecuted in another country without substantial data on any crime, their abduction to a court, or habeas corpus.

Imposing the Brussels Dictatorship

One of the central goals of the Cartel during the 30s and 40s was to turn Europe into an authoritarian society and eliminate every kind of opposition to the Nazi regime, imposing the mass monitoring of the population.

In the Brussels EU today, contemporary 21st century technologies have made the monitoring and recording of civilians’ communications within a European state an easy task through mobile phones, emails and the internet, and the more commonly used high technology monitors.

Now, within the pretext of combating terrorism, the EU has published a directive which transforms Europe into an “Orwellian” state. The Data Retention Directive, passed in 2006, obliges all Brussels EU state members to ensure that telecommunications companies who provide internet services as well as other communication services save and maintain all communications data for a minimum of 6 months to 2 years.

And as if this wasn’t enough, at the beginning of 2010 it was revealed that enormous quantities of sensitive personal data on European civilians are maintained in a gigantic European computer network to which over 500,000 terminals have access. The system holds a great quantity of personal data including names, dates and places of birth, nationalities, natural characteristics and other details of civilians that are under “discreet monitoring”.

The Brussels EU spends millions of euros on the development of “Orwellian” electronic technologies that are designed for processing CCTV images and searching the internet for “irregular behavior”. Under a program known as “Project Indect”, computer software is being developed that will register and process information from websites, discussion forums, server data, networks, and even individual computers. The information collected by “Project Indect” can be used by the European Joint Situation Center (SitCen), a relatively unknown body, considered by many to be the beginnings of a Brussels EU secret service. SitCen, a department of the so-called “European External Action Service” headed by Foreign Affairs Minister and Vice President of EU Commission, Catherine Ashton, is well known to have a cell of secret service agents seconded from European capitals. And in a  scenario that sounds very much like the world predicted in the classic novel 1984, a secret monitoring system that uses hidden microphones to record public conversations is now in effect in many European cities.

In June 2010, documents concerning a mass monitoring program of the EU – designed to collect information on people and groups actively opposed to the directing of the EU by multinational interests and who are considered to be promoting “radical messages” – was exposed. The documents were revealed by Statewatch, a group based in London which defends social freedoms. According to Statewatch, the targets include people who are active in “anti-globalization” or “nationalistic” groups.

A revealing press release towards the end of 2009 published by Giesecke & Devrient, a technology company based in Monaco, proposed imposing a system of biometric cataloguing and identification on EU citizens. Outlining an experimental European plan, the press release summarizes the goal as being “the introduction of an electronic ID card in chip card format valid throughout the entire EU”. Reading between the lines, the ultimate objective seems to be for European citizens to be required to use it for everything from registering a change of address through to accessing their bank and insurance services.

The European Imperialistic War Machine

While we were focusing on the Ukraine crisis, the EU attempted to bribe 16 West African governments to sign a colonial agreement that will plunder Africa even further and make the average African even poorer. Over 40 African “puppet” presidents met with EU officials in Brussels at the beginning of April – even though the African Union (AU) discouraged its member states from attending the conference.

The Eurocrats in Brussels do not recognize the AU and they are only interested in forcing the Africans to act against their interests, allowing multinational corporations to plunder their countries, in return for certain gifts. Most of the African presidents are complying, fearful that they would otherwise become victims of a coup.

Pro-EU propaganda claims that it will open up the European market to 100% of African products; in reality however Africa essentially cannot produce manufactured products, as Western neo-imperialistic policies prevented the continent’s development. Instead Africa exports raw materials, which it has no trouble selling anywhere. In return, in the next 20 years, 16 African countries will open up 75% of their market of 300 million consumers to European multinational corporations, destroying in this way their local producers along with the dream for an industrialized Africa and any autonomous economic infrastructure. And this is no different to what they did to our own [Greek] agriculture and industry.

In order to persuade the African “puppet” politicians, Eurocrats have sponsored around 6 billion euros worth of corrupted kickbacks (which they also call “help”) for the local “high officials”, so that they can buy new villas and cars etc. (See www.siliconafrica.com, 01/04/2014).

The Eurasian Chess Board and the American Strategy

Just as Brzezinski had foreseen, “America’s global leadership depends on how long and how effective its superiority in the Eurasian continent can be sustained” (The Great Chessboard, Livani Publications, Athens, 1998, p.63). A simple look at the map, says Brzezinski, suggests that control of Eurasia means: a) control of two of the three most economically powerful and productive regions of the world, b) submission of Africa and marginalization of the western hemisphere and Oceania, c) control of the biggest part of the natural wealth in the world, which is present there both in its businesses and under its soils. Eurasia represents 75% of the global population and 60% of global GDP. Eurasia also includes 6 of the biggest economies of the world after the USA, as well as all the nations with nuclear arsenals except one.

On this huge geographical chess board, stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok, the modern “Big Game” takes place – one that will determine whether Washington shall remain the dominant superpower or whether it will lose its global influence. Brzezinski recognises 5 main geostrategic players (nations with influence beyond their borders), these are: France, Germany, Russia, China and India; and 5 critical, geopolitical axes, nations whose importance arises from their delicate position, with the first being Ukraine, without which Russia stops being a Eurasian empire. The rest of the geopolitical axes are: Turkey, Iran, Azerbaijan and South Korea.

Under these circumstances America’s favourite setup for Europe is the European Union, as a substantial geopolitical bridgehead of the United States on the Eurasian continent. That is why globalists like Brzezinski and Soros etc. say that “the downfall of Europe’s interior viability undermines the effort towards its unification”. In other words, they blame Europeans for not accepting the purpose of the European case, the way it is promoted by the unpopular, and distant from European public opinion, bureaucratic mechanism initially created by the EEC and amplified by the EU. And who is to blame? The overwhelmingly unbearable system of social providence which undermines economic viability. (Brzezinski p. 111).

Their confessed purpose from the beginning was the dismantlement of the social nation. Now, with the Soviet threat out of the way, Europeans must adjust to globalised “slavery”. Under the pretext of the economic crisis, the Troika and the alleged reforms, European unification is becoming a compulsory, ordered process.

The European States must be abolished because they favour protectionism and localism and cannot manage their new problems like immigration. This is what the globalists stand for, who believe it’s urgent that an expanded continental and federal framework is applied. And if the EU adopts the federal system, the USA asks that 1 voice and 1 vote is imposed for the whole of Europe at the UN. Otherwise it is threatening to ask for the right of each individual state of the 50 American states to have a vote at the general assembly.

European citizens do not know the whole story. From the first moment, the treaty of Nice was an attempt to establish a political Europe with its own government. And the EU didn’t tell that to its citizens. The media presented the treaty as necessary, there was no informative political debate regarding how the treaty reduced the sovereignty and independence of the member states.

At a poll produced for the EU, only 28% of Europeans citizens have heard of this European treaty or knew of its aim for the creation of a constitution for the entire Europe.

Brussels, the wounded heart of the Beast

The situation in Ukraine is changing into a historical loss for the New World Order conspiracy. This is becoming obvious on many levels. The continuing mass attack on their petrodollars is even more disturbing for the bank dynasties that control the FED [United States Federal Reserve].

China insists that the UN must move its central offices to Asia to reform the Security Council, in order to represent the population of the earth more effectively. It is also getting ready to create another organization which will have a higher budget than the IMF and the World Bank combined.

Experiencing the crisis in Eurasia, Greece has no reason to go along with the European-Atlantic interests. A new doctrine of foreign policy is needed to give flexibility to options and serve our national interests. The advantage of the Greek geopolitical field to being the meeting point of various cultures starts to work against us when decisions are taken in absentia of the people by a venal group of politicians like the current one. It is now urgent to overturn the current status quo, punish the traitors and increase the participation of citizens in decision taking. Now the euro-fanatics can see the next step: a federal state of 500 million people, following the model of the USA. Euro-skepticism is rising in front of them, spreading across a spectrum between preserving national control and the final collapse of the EU. But the EU consciously disparages the voices of euro-skepticism, portraying them thoughtlessly as racist/xenophobic voices in order to take advantage of the sensitive reactions of the people.

However, the rise of euro-skepticism and nationalism in all European countries, which will be recorded in the elections on 25th of May, will force the decision centers of the EU to speed up the federalization procedures, increasing centrifugal tendencies in the Eurozone. Europe, as we know it, will not endure for long: it will either change into a centralist super-state without the support of its people, or collapse. We are in front of the End Game, as it is whispered in the halls of Brussels, and we might again experience a European disintegration, something which is not the best outcome for America.

The most probable result will be that central Europe will stop being a European area and change to become a place with an evident prevalence of German nationalism.

On the other hand, Russian geopolitical aspirations for Eurasia and Central Europe will be triggered. This is also America’s nightmare, where the Europe of Yalta will again become the Europe of Versailles. And if we accept Brzezinski’s estimations that, in order to form this kind of Europe geopolitically, an expansion of NATO to the east is crucial – then the failure to integrate Ukraine risks the whole EuroAtlantic project. If Russia manages to maintain control of Ukraine it will seek to become the leader of a strong EuroAsiatic empire, having a dominant position in the Black Sea.

The last run of events supports the ambitions of Moscow and the influence of the EuroAsiatic theoretical school of Russian strategists, such as Aleksandr Dugin, who suggest the establishment of an anti-American coalition and the opposition to unipolar globalization and the ideology of postmodernism.

The impasse of European integration after the economic crisis and the failure of the social institutions of Europe, the Russian coalition with both China and Iran via BRICS and the opposition of Moscow for the integration of Ukraine in the EuroAtlantic framework, will be the geostrategic turning points that will determine the attempt of America to assert itself as “the first, the only and the last real worldwide superpower”. We are in an instable period of mental collapses and sociopolitical tensions, which upsets the conditions for preserving peace the way we have known it for the last 3 decades.

Sources

1. Paul Anthony Taylor, Aleksandra Niedzwiecki, Matthias Rath and August Kowalczyk, “The Nazi Roots of the ‘Brussels EU’”, 2010, Dr. Rath Health Foundation.
2. Christopher Booker, Richard North, “The Great Deception: The Secret History of the European Union”.