[eu] next step in the backdoor agenda

This item has come from the Eurosceptics group but unfortunately, they have no way to link back to them. I've written to Euroserf about this but in the meantime, the whole article, with references, is here. This is the import of it:

German think tank, the Bertelsmann Foundation recently presented a draft paper to top politicians from twenty EU countries and the USA over the “strategic reorientation” of the EU in which it recommended, as a first step, that the national armed forces of all member states should be combined into a single EU army.

'Think tanks' can present papers all they like but will they be adopted by the legislatures? In the case of Germany - yes.

The German Chancellor has taken up this suggestion. Frau Merkel warned against refusing so-called integration. She said “The ideal of European unification is today again a matter of war and peace”.

Why? Why war? Against whom? Against America? Against the infidels in the Holy Land? Or against their own people?

Government circles have let it be known that the method of instituting the “Berlin Declaration” is “ of value in itself because we wish to use this method for progressing the second half of our presidency and the road map for the constitution, if member states can live with it and something useful comes out of it”.

The method referred to here is to ignore referenda results and bring in what you wanted anyway, without reference to either national assemblies or the European Parliament, to present it as a fair accompli.

The foundation funded by the German media group Bertelsmann is demanding further large steps. At the end of February it called together 45 high ranking participants from 21 countries to a “Strategy Group”.

The Bertelsmann Foundation publicised the event, claiming that “the hand-picked circle of participants (…) covered all the great geographical areas of today’s European Union, EU candidate states and the USA,” aimed at “the strategic reorientation” of the EU. (4)

According to the report, further development of the EU “is only possible on the basis of an altered treaty”. (5)

The EU constitution proposed in Berlin today is “simply the point of departure to enable the achievement of totally new goals”.

“Europe wishes to be acknowledged alongside the United States of America as the voice of the West,” it states in a “memorandum” upon which the debate was based.

“For this, considerably greater efforts are necessary on the world stage, from world trade through global environment up to civil and military crisis management”. (6)

Civil and military crisis management? What sort of crisis from the people themselves would necessitate 'crisis management'? How would they facilitate this?

As the next step, the members of the “Strategy Group” took into their consideration the merging of European national forces into a unified EU army. The German Federal Chancellor has now made this suggestion her own.

“In the EU itself we must move closer to a common European army,” demanded Angela Merkel in Berlin’s tabloid press last week. (7)

This drives the EU debate far beyond the EU constitution and limits the elbow room of those previously opposed to it. The same goes for another suggestion by the Bertelsmann foundation which was laid before the “Strategy Group”.

According to this proposal, the internal hierarchy of the EU should be more strongly formalised than proposed in the constitution. Increased powers of political decision should be conferred on those states which have adopted the euro currency.

“The euro group should have a special role in designing the future of the EU”. (8)

So, if you're not on the Euro, you're not on the inner - formally.

To increase pressure on the smaller EU members, the German government is portraying their EU plans as a method of avoiding descent into a new catastrophe – war.

That word again. Why speak of war when we are in an era of unprecedented peace in terms of national conflict within Europe?

The Federal Chancellor announced, “We should not take peace and democracy for granted. The ideal of European unification is still today a question of war and peace.” (9)

Why should we not take them for granted? Isn't that what the EU is for - to ensure this?

Similar threats already enabled the Federal Government to force through the Eastern expansion of the EU against massive resistance in the mid Nineties.

Then the present Minister of the Interior, Wolfgang Schaeuble, declared in a strategy paper that, “Germany might be required or compelled by its own security considerations to achieve the stabilisation of Eastern Europe alone and in the traditional manner”.

It never alters, does it? The Bruderheist then financed Hitler's rise from street thug to Chancellor and now, in yet another manifestation, the Bertelsmann Foundation is at it again.

This paper was published on 1st September 1994, the 45th anniversary of Germany’s attack on Poland. (10)

Interesting, don't you think? Of course, the main obstacle to their plans is France and Britain - France because she'd want to be the glorious leader of the Euromonolith [and she has more claim to this than the Axis] and Britain because she must be onboard to facilitate the process.

Unless, of course, Britain broke into little pieces. One way to ensure this would be to covertly assist Scotland to 'devolve', causing England to boot them out and they'd then take up the promises which were made by the EU.

Then England, the main difficulty, would be given an ultimatum on rejoining the EU. If she refused … well …

The numbered links are referenced here.