January 27, 2013

To take the Europe over


To take the Europe over(photo )
Eastern Europe became now a scene of at least three global parties competition to dominate, and for all of the three for very good reasons. For Germany and Russia it is to continue developing reciprocal strategic partnership leading to strengthen both sides, and to establish ‘new European deal’ abolishing last ‘Yalta conference establishments in  action’, i.e.: US presence in Europe, and its - to the very recent - dominating military position. However, it looks as if the future allies’ cooperation is not going that smooth, as only two-three years ago one could anticipate. Germans seem to be surprised by increasing influence of the Russian policy in the countries of the former Soviet block, including countries the Germans believe should be in their zone of economical interests, as Poland or Baltic Countries.

That resulted in a counteraction, and unexpected declarations of Polish, as well as Lithuanian and Latvian authorities, to join the eurozone as soon as it is possible, despite it would be devastating to the internal economy or not. On the other hand, the Ukrainians play the US card, signing contracts on excavations of the shale gas on their territory by the US companies. It has already triggered hostile reaction from the Russian side, and a threat of financial blackmailing.
Poland is ruled by two political centres, one located in the government, following to the last detail German policy in EU, and another, located in the presidential Palace, with its Strategic Bureau Centre declaring in its documents that Russia is to be a military warrant of Polish security; what seems to be strange considering Poland being a member of the NATO pact.

Forget Brussels: now we are ruled by the giants of Geneva


Much of the regulation issuing from the EU is being passed down from even bigger, global bodies

Geneva hosts the largest collection of UN staff on the planet
Geneva hosts the largest collection of UN staff on the planet Photo: ALAMY

As predicted, that speech on “Europe” delivered by David Cameron at eight o’clock on Wednesday morning put one in mind of the White Queen’s boast that she could “believe six impossible things before breakfast”.
He wanted us to believe that he could persuade the EU to change its nature and the purposes for which it has been built up over 60 years. He wanted us to believe that it could breach its core rule that powers of government once surrendered to Brussels are never handed back; and that he can somehow persuade Brussels, and the other 26 members, to allow us to retain full membership, while opting out of much else except the right to continue trading freely in the single market.

January 26, 2013

EU Publishes Plan to Regulate Press

January 26, 2013  •  From theTrumpet.com


January 24, 2013


Rodney Atkinson
25th January 2013

Cameron repeatedly gave the reasons why the UK should stay within the constitutional structures of the European Union,thus negating any bargaining power he might have had.

Repeated reference to "democratic nations" ignored the Heads of State of Italy and Greece, never elected but imposed by the EU Commission and the ECB, both unelected.

Worst of all Cameron offered no alternative vision for a Free Europe of democratic sovereign nations in which Greece would feel protected, in which Eastern Europeans could feel free from Russian threat and EEA countries like Norway and Switzerland could be free from EU bullying and intimidation.
At a time of the greatest peacetime crisis in Europe he offers only an undeliverable promise on a vague manifesto in 5 years time. Like the Euro-fanatics in Berlin and Paris Edward Heath's Tory Party "set his points" long ago and the Cameron train will hit the buffers.

David Cameron's speech on the future of Britain in the European Union 
changed nothing. Of course he had to admit that those he has called "nutters" were right after all and Britain in the present European Union is unacceptable. The only choice after Cameron's renegotiation will be between a completely new relationship and leaving altogether.

So having supported the ERM Cameron had to admit it was a disaster and having promoted the EU he has had to admit it is a disaster. Having himself voted not long ago against an In/Out referendum he now proposes just that. 

January 23, 2013

The Prime Minister's speech on Europe, January 2013


The Prime Minister's speech on Europe, January 2013

Rt Hon David Cameron, Wednesday, January 23 2013

David Cameron
This morning I want to talk about the future of Europe.
But first, let us remember the past.Seventy years ago, Europe was being torn apart by its second catastrophic conflict in a generation. A war which saw the streets of European cities strewn with rubble.
The skies of London lit by flames night after night. And millions dead across the world in the battle for peace and liberty.
As we remember their sacrifice, so we should also remember how the shift in Europe from war to sustained peace came about. It did not happen like a change in the weather. It happened because of determined work over generations. A commitment to friendship and a resolve never to re-visit that dark past - a commitment epitomised by the Elysee Treaty signed 50 years ago this week.
After the Berlin Wall came down I visited that city and I will never forget it.
The abandoned checkpoints. The sense of excitement about the future. The knowledge that a great continent was coming together. Healing those wounds of our history is the central story of the European Union.
What Churchill described as the twin marauders of war and tyranny have been almost entirely banished from our continent. Today, hundreds of millions dwell in freedom, from the Baltic to the Adriatic, from the Western Approaches to the Aegean.
And while we must never take this for granted, the first purpose of the European Union – to secure peace – has been achieved and we should pay tribute to all those in the EU, alongside NATO, who made that happen.   

Remarks of the President at the Wiener Com.Sult Congress: Europe Has Not Yet Made the Necessary Change


Many thanks for inviting me to attend your congress once again and for giving me a chance to speak here this morning. I remember being here two years ago with my criticism of the fact that the European political class did not face up to the seriousness of the current European problem. In the past two years, nothing has changed in this respect, to my great regret. We still continue marching in the same blind alley.

In the meantime, I wrote a book about it with the title “European Integration Without Illusions” which has been published also in English, German, Italian, Spanish and Bulgarian. The Danish version will be completed in several days. The British publisher called it “Europe: The Shattering of Illusions”, the German “Europe braucht Freiheit”.

The book reflects my frustration with the situation in Europe. It discusses the European institutional developments since the Second World War till the outbreak of the Eurozone debt crisis as well as the current reaction to it and its costs. As the most important I consider the chapters devoted to the polemics with the excessively optimistic expectations of the economic benefits of territorial integration (and centralization) as well as the chapters devoted to the discussion of the undemocratic consequences of denationalization and communitarization of Europe. The first one is an economic issue, the second one a political topic.

All the available evidence – both the economic data and the measures implemented in Europe up to now – suggests that the economic future will not be easy for those of us who live in Europe together with our families, children and grandchildren, and have, therefore, a genuine, not only academic interest in the European future.

January 22, 2013

United Kingdom Moves Away from the European Project

By Adriano Bosoni
British Prime Minister David Cameron will deliver a speech in London on Jan. 23, during which he will discuss the future of the United Kingdom's relationship with the European Union. Excerpts leaked to the media suggest that harsh EU criticism will figure prominently in the speech, a suggestion in keeping with Cameron's recent statements about the bloc. But more important, the excerpts signal an unprecedented policy departure: renegotiating the United Kingdom's role in the European Union. London has negotiated exemptions from some EU policies in the past, even gaining some concessions from Brussels in the process; this time, it is trying to become less integrated with the bloc altogether.
Cameron has pledged to hold a referendum after 2015 on the United Kingdom's role in Europe. He has also said he would reclaim powers London surrendered to the European Union. While they no doubt reflect similar anxieties across the Continent, such statements are anathema to the European project, and by making them, Cameron could be setting a precedent that could further undermine the European Union.

Cameron's Compromise

Cameron's strategy partly is a reaction to British domestic politics. There is a faction within the ruling Conservative Party that believes the country should abandon the European Union entirely. It was this faction that pressed Cameron to call a referendum on the United Kingdom's EU membership. Some party members also fear that the United Kingdom Independence Party, the country's traditionally euroskeptic party, is gaining ground in the country.

January 21, 2013

Europe—Defining How the World Works

January 21, 2013  •  From theTrumpet.com
Of all the key regions of the world, it is Europe that is set to dominate the developing global order in 2013.

Taken as a single geographic entity, Europe has the largest economy in the world. Should it choose to do so, it could become a military rival to the United States. Europe is one of the pillars of the global system, and what happens to Europe is going to define how the world works. I would argue that in 2013 we will begin to get clarity on the future of Europe.”
So states George Friedman, CEO of respected think tank Stratfor (January 3).
The tendency for Bible prophecy for our times to be so rapidly coming to fulfillment, daily, at present, would seem to support Dr. Friedman’s contention “that in 2013 we will begin to get clarity on the future of Europe.”
Three elections will be held in nations that play a key role in end-time prophecy this year—Israel on January 22, Italy in February and Germany in September. The leaders elected will find themselves enmeshed in the rapid-fire consummation of many of the Bible prophecies for our time, each of these nation’s political machinations impacting the other. The key political role influencing the geopolitics of each of the others will be played by Germany.
Israeli elections will see that country’s leader elected for a four-year term, though given the volatility of Israeli politics few prime ministers hold the job for that term before another election is forced upon them.

January 18, 2013

Multiple Paths Lead To One World Government

UK Column

That we live in a world of “Agenda Politics” is absolutely clear. Governments come and go, but the agenda never changes. Policies left incomplete by one government are taken up with gusto by the next. Civil servants get involved in writing party manifestos.
One of the most obvious of the agendas that our politicians are pushing is that of “World Government”. The British Parliament is now subservient to so many foreign bodies and institutions it is hard to keep count.
Duke of Edinburgh
This is not a new agenda. It has been pushed since before the twentieth century by, among others, the “rat pack” of the Huxleys, H.G. Wells, Bertrand Russell and the like. And it finds its expression in a host of organisations, “think” tanks, NGOs and committees.
The most obvious example of those organisations, of course, is Julian Huxley’s United Nations.
It was Franklin Roosevelt who first coined the term “United Nations”. His vision, however, was for a forum of sovereign nations; a world apart from what the United Nations has become.
Perhaps a less obvious path to world government is the Commonwealth, and a question which has long been on our minds is, which is the path which is most likely to get us there?
A hint came in July 2010, when the Queen addressed the UN General Assembly. She said:

January 17, 2013

Marxism & Community Oriented Policing

Marxism & Community Oriented Policing
© 2000 Phillip Worts, Detective, San Diego Police Department
Phillip Worts shows how Communist strategies have been revived, redefined and are now being used to control the American .
     Few people today understand what communism really is and just where the political battle lines are actually drawn.  But if you crack open a dictionary and look up the term “Dialectical Materialism.”  You should find something like this:
A philosophy founded by Karl Marx… which forms the basis of Communist doctrine:  it combines the materialistic idea of matter over mind with the Hegelian dialectic in which opposing forces are constantly being reunited at a higher level.”  -- Lexicon Webster Dictionary
But that definition might beg the question, “What is the Hegelian dialectic?”  For modern man, the answer to that question is epic.  The Hegelian dialectic has profoundly impacted the world in which you live.

 What is communism?

The Dialectic: Fomenting the Revolution

The concept of the dialectic has been around for a long time.  It is simply that of opposite positions:  Thesis (position) vs. Antithesis (opposite position).  In traditional logic, if my thesis was true, then all other positions were by definition untrue.  For example, if my thesis is 2 + 2 = 4, then all other answers (antithesis) are false.  Georg W.F. Hegel, the nineteenth century German philosopher, turned that concept upside down by equalizing Thesis and Antithesis.  All things are now relative.  There is no such thing as absolute truth to be found anywhere.  Instead, “truth” is found in Synthesis, a compromise of Thesis and Antithesis.  This is the heart and soul of the consensus process. 
This is diametrically opposed to the Judeo-Christian world-view prevalent in the Western world for the better part of two millennia that held that God existed, that He existed outside of the material creation and that man had a moral obligation to Him and His laws.  God was transcendent and thus truth was absolute and transcendent, outside of our ability to manipulate it.  
This all changed with Hegel and modern man was born.  Man could now challenge any authority and position, even God.  Since there is no such thing as absolute truth, “my truth” is just as good as “your truth”, so don’t tell me what to think or how to behave.  As Nietzsche, the “God is Dead” philosopher, would later say, “There is absolutely no absolute.”  Now 2 + 2 can equal 5, or 17, or whatever you feel is right. 
(Hint:  This is why our schools are failing.  All teachers are certified on Benjamin Bloom’s work.  He said “…we recognize the point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and all places”). 
At about the same time that Hegel was passing from the scene, Karl Marx caught the revolutionary fever.  He drew heavily from Hegel (the dialectic) and Feuerbach (materialism). He picked up where the other philosophers left the discussion, but with a twist.  He scornfully stated, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world in different ways.  The point, however, is to change it.”  
To CHANGE the WORLD was to become the warp and woof of Marxism.  In the Marxian interpretation of reality, God had been abandoned.  Alone in his universe, man was to fill the vacuum left by religion with materialism.  Religion was the enemy of all progress.  As he wrote in 1843, “Religion is the opium of the people.” 
No longer bound to a relationship with his Creator, the social relationship of “man to man” became the principle of Marx’s theory.  It followed that these social relationships, which necessarily involve conflict, cause the changes in human progress.  As the opening words of the Communist Manifesto announce: 
The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.” 

January 16, 2013


Britannia Radio

This explains a lot-it is long, but well worth reading. In attachment also. 

A The National Platform EU Research and Information Centre
24 Crawford Avenue
Dublin 9 Ireland

Web-site: nationalplatform.org Tel.: 00-353-1-8305792 Tuesday 15 January 2013

 Dear Friends,

 May I send you below the text of a short critical pamphlet on the EU/Eurozone in the hope that you may find it useful in influencing your fellow countrymen and women to oppose this profoundly undemocratic and reactionary project.

 This document briefly outlines the historical background to the EU, how it is run, why national politicians in Europe are willing to surrender ever more powers to it, how it is incapable of being democratically reformed and why the Eurozone, and perhaps the EU with it, is historically doomed.

 It should be helpful in giving people who know little about the EU/Eurozone's development and structure the basic critical facts about these.

 Please feel free to adapt this document wholly or or in part for your own purposes and to circulate it to others in your country for their information without any need of reference to or acknowledgement of its source, although if one wishes to make such a reference that is of course fine.

 If desired, one might like to add in a section at the end relating to your own country's experience of the EU/Eurozone, in place of the addendum on Ireland and its current economic debacle below.

This document is issued to mark the 40th anniversary of the UK, Ireland and Denmark joining the then EEC in January 2013 and the occasion of the Irish State assuming the rotating EU six-monthly EU "presidency". Yours faithfully Anthony Coughlan Director _________________________


January 14, 2013

Overthrowing the Money Power


BY JR NYQUIST01/14/2013

Oswald Spengler once wrote, “A power can be overthrown only by another power, not by a principle, and only one power that can confront money is left. Money is overthrown and abolished by blood.” One might ask what Spengler meant by this. What was he referring to? What is signified by the power of money opposed by the power of blood? According to Spengler, “Through money, democracy becomes its own destroyer, after money has destroyed intellect.” Next comes the rule of naked force – the power of blood and the ways of war. In the end, this is what Spengler saw overthrowing the power of money. And if we look with a discerning eye we will not see Francis Fukuyama’s “end of history” or the final triumph of democracy. Something altogether different is being played out today.
Today’s news is instructive: A former CIA spy is claiming that Iran has built a nuclear bomb with Russian and North Korean help. Writing for WorldNetDaily, former CIA agent Reza Kahlili has published an article based on “a source in the Revolutionary Guards intelligence unit” with “access to Iran’s nuclear program.” The source claims that Iran obtained weapons-grade uranium and plutonium from North Korea which was used to assemble the weapon at a previously “unknown underground” facility that former CIA analyst Peter Vincent Pry says “is proof that the U.S. is probably underestimating the advancement and sophistication of Iran’s nuclear weapons program.” It is alleged that Russian and North Korean technicians are assisting the Iranians at the facility. (See the WND article titled Iran’s Nuclear Bomb Program Complete.)

January 13, 2013

Lisbon treaty text by Article: Article 50 TEU (withdrawal)

Britannia Radio

It is sometimes said by EU supporters that EU sceptics should vote for Lisbon because it is the first EU treaty to include a specific provision on withdrawal. This is a highly disingenuous. International treaties (like those on European Union) may be divided into those (like Lisbon) which include provisions on a party withdrawing and those (like Rome through Nice) which have no such provision. But the lack of such a provision does not mean that withdrawal is impossible. Article 56(1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law on Treaties states:

Article 56(1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law on Treaties (applies now under Nice)
1. A treaty which contains no provision regarding its termination and which does not provide for denunciation or withdrawal is not subject to denunciation or withdrawal unless:
a) it is established that the parties intended to admit the possibility of denunciation or withdrawal; or
b) a right of denunciation or withdrawal may be implied by the nature of the treaty.
A leading text on the law of treaties says ‘the constituent instrument of an international organisation…almost certainly falls within paragraph (b)’. In other words a signatory state is free to leave an international organization even if the treaty setting up that organisation has no specific provision on withdrawal. What Lisbon does do (in Article 50 TEU) is include such a specific provision on withdrawal. because of that Article 54 of the Vienna Convention on the Law on Treaties would apply should Lisbon come into force. It states:


January 11, 2013

President Obama should keep his nose out of our affairs

10/01/2013 13:16 - webmaster
President Obama’s advice is arrogant and unwanted. Britain needs to be a truly independent country, not just from the EU but from the USA as well. We need to  start running our own country for our own benefit, writes UKIP MEP Gerard Batten.

President Obama has said that he wants Britain to stay in the European Union; saying it was in America’s interests for us to do so.

Yes that is the point, it may be in the USA’s interests but it is not in ours. Remember when Henry Kissinger said, “when I want to speak to Europe, who do I call?

America wants Britain to stay in the EU because it only wants to deal with one centralised political state, not have the inconvenience of dealing with different democratic governments.

Obama and the US Government couldn’t care less about our national interests or democratic rights. They just want an easy life.

This is a new twist in an old story.  Very few people are aware that in the 1975 referendum on continued EU membership the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) pumped money into the ‘Yes’ campaign. It is estimated that the Yes campaign had up to twenty times more money than the No campaign; as well as having the BBC and other organs of the media campaigning for a Yes vote.

The CIA’s involvement  is a matter of historical fact and the relevant documents are filed in Georgetown University. A British academic, Dr Richard J. Aldrich of Nottingham University wrote a book on this entitled, The Hidden Hand, published by John Murray 2001.

We don’t have a ‘special relationship’ with the EU, even if we ever did. We have a servile relationship. President Obama’s advice is arrogant and unwanted. Just like his previous advice that Turkey should join the EU.  Let Turkey become the 51st US state instead.

Britain needs to be a truly independent country, not just from the EU but from the USA as well. We need to  start running our own country for our own benefit.

We know that the British political establishment has got the wind-up over UKIP’s rise in the polls and the increasing unpopularity of the EU with the  British people. Now it seems the Americans are concerned too. Good!  It means UKIP is being more and more effective


German Master Plans


(Own report) - German foreign policy makers are reacting with great anticipation to the most recent announcement of an economic "opening" of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. According to head of state, Kim Jong Un's declaration, the country is facing a "radical change of course," which would not even exclude a "reunification" with the Republic of Korea. According to reports, German economic scholars and jurists are in Pyongyang helping to elaborate economic policies, which could also open up lucrative business opportunities for western companies. It has been reported that North Korea disposes of large deposits of natural resources and an extremely cheap work force. For several years, German experts, under contract of the FDP-affiliated Friedrich Naumann Foundation, have been working in Pyongyang to promote the "transformation from a planned to a market economy." In addition, because of its experience in taking over the German Democratic Republic, South Korea considers the Federal Republic of Germany an important partner for advice and cooperation on the issue of "reunification." The development taking place on the Korean peninsular is very important for the People's Republic of China, whose national security is seriously affected

Radical Change of Course

January 9, 2013

Alex Jones vs. Piers Morgan: "1776 Will Commence Again If You Try To Take Our Firearms"


Alex Jones, one of the people behind the petition to get British host Piers Morgan deported, appeared on his CNN program tonight to explain his support of the Second Amendment and and to denounce those who want to confiscate weapons.
ALEX JONES: We did it as a way to bring attention to the fact that we have all of these foreigners, and the Russian government, the official Chinese government -- Mao said political power goes out of the barrel of a gun, he killed about 80 million people because he's the only guy who had the guns -- so we did it to point out that this is globalism, and the mega banks that control the planet and brag they have taken over -- in Bloomberg, AP, Reuters, you name it -- brag that they're going to get our guns as well. They've taken everybody's guns, but the Swiss and the American people and when they get our guns, they can have their world tyranny while the government buys 1.6 billion bullets, armored vehicles, tanks, helicopters, predator drones, armed now in U.S. skies, being used to arrest people in North Dakota.

The Second Amendment isn't there for duck hunting. It's there to protect us from tyrannical government and street thugs. Take the woman in india, your piece earlier on CNN earlier, I was watching during Anderson Cooper's show, didn't tell you the women of India have signed giant petitions to get firearms because the police can't and won't protect them.

January 5, 2013

Europe—Key Issues of 2013

January 5, 2013  •  From theTrumpet.com
There’s a rapidly emerging congruency between the best geopolitical projections for 2013 and Bible prophecy.

Our readers would be aware of the esteem in which we have held Stratfor among the motley collection of geopolitical think tanks that comment regularly on the world scene.
Stratfor’s analyses of world events most often reflect deeply-thought-out scenarios that project clear predictive forecasting based on a chain of events currently happening on the world scene, with a particular view to non-revisionist history.
Inevitably this approach may be traced back to the keen mind of Stratfor’s founder and CEO, George Friedman.
Being of Hungarian Jewish descent, it comes as no surprise that Friedman’s appreciation of European history and current events is most acute. Thus it is that we find ourselves currently agreeing with him that the most vital geopolitical events of 2013 will center on Europe.
Friedman introduces his prediction for Europe in 2013 as follows: “Taken as a single geographic entity, Europe has the largest economy in the world. Should it choose to do so, it could become a military rival to the United States. Europe is one of the pillars of the global system, and what happens to Europe is going to define how the world works. I would argue that in 2013 we will begin to get clarity on the future of Europe” (January 3).
George Friedman argues his position from a secularist perspective. We are in general agreement with his prediction, but are so because of our biblical prophecy perspective. These are two distinctly different views in the one sense, yet in reality, they are quite congruent in the sense of their current timing and much of the detail of the moment.
The tendency for Bible prophecy for our times to be so rapidly coming to fulfillment, daily, at present, would seem to support Dr. Friedman’s contention “that in 2013 we will begin to get clarity on the future of Europe.”
Two key elections will be held in Europe this year. They each involve a nation that has a significant role in end-time prophecy.

January 3, 2013

Agenda 21 being implemented: Removal of Rural Populations

Retired superintendent in the School District somewhere in rural America explains how populations are forced off the land with the help of state and federal regulations. This is in keeping with Agenda 21 so you see it's going according to plan. Beware!

The plan is to bar access to the wilderness and the countryside to people so the wildlife can thrive again. It's all in the name of environmental restauration but this is just an excuse to operate property transfer to the rich without proper payment to property owners. In other words, land theft.


Europe in 2013: A Year of Decision

The end of the year always prompts questions about what the most important issue of the next year may be. It's a simplistic question, since every year sees many things happen and for each of us a different one might be important. But it is still worth considering what single issue could cause the world to change course. In my view, the most important place to watch in 2013 is Europe.
Taken as a single geographic entity, Europe has the largest economy in the world. Should it choose to do so, it could become a military rival to the United States. Europe is one of the pillars of the global system, and what happens to Europe is going to define how the world works. I would argue that in 2013 we will begin to get clarity on the future of Europe.
The question is whether the European Union will stabilize itself, stop its fragmentation and begin preparing for more integration and expansion. Alternatively, the tensions could intensify within the European Union, the institutions could further lose legitimacy and its component states could increase the pace with which they pursue their own policies, both domestic and foreign.

The Embattled European Project

It has been more than four years since the crisis of 2008 and about two years since the problems spawned by 2008 generated a sovereign debt crisis and a banking crisis in Europe. Since that time, the crisis has turned from a financial to an economic crisis, with Europe moving into recession and unemployment across the Continent rising above 10 percent. More important, it has been a period in which the decision-making apparatus created at the founding of the European Union has been unable to create policy solutions that were both widely acceptable and able to be implemented. EU countries have faced each other less as members of a single political entity than as individual nation-states pursuing their own national interests in what has become something of a zero-sum game, where the success of one has to come at the expense of another. 

January 2, 2013

What you’ll see in the rebellion

Written By: Bob - Dec • 28 • 12

Let me explain, gun grabbers, how your confiscatory fantasy plays out. Let us imagine for a moment that a sweeping gun control bill similar to the one currently suggested is passed by the House and Senate, and signed into law by a contemptuous President.

Perhaps 50-100 million firearms currently owned by law-abiding citizens will become contraband with the stroke of a pen. Citizens will either register their firearms, or turn them in to agents of the federal government, or risk becoming criminals themselves. Faced with this choice, millions will indeed register their arms. Perhaps as many will claim they’ve sold their arms, or had them stolen. Suppose that as many as 200-250 million weapons of other types will go unregistered.

Tens of millions of Americans will refuse to comply with an order that is clearly a violation of the explicit intent of the Second Amendment. Among the most ardent opposing these measures will be military veterans, active duty servicemen, and local law enforcement officers. Many of these individuals will refuse to carry out what they view as Constitutionally illegal orders. Perhaps 40-50 million citizens will view such a law as treason. Perhaps ten percent of those, 4-5 million, would support a rebellion in some way, and maybe 40,000-100,000 Americans will form small independently-functioning active resistance cells, or become lone-wolves.

They will be leaderless, stateless, difficult to track, and considering the number of military veterans that would likely be among their number, extremely skilled at sabotage, assassination, and ambush.

America’s New Best Friend?

January 2, 2013  •  From theTrumpet.com

The United States is abandoning Britain in favor of a new friend—the European Union.

British Euroskeptics have long dreamed of leaving the European Union and forming a new relationship with the Commonwealth and the United States. Unlike the EU, this alliance would share Britain’s fundamental values—their laws flow from the same tradition. It would be a trade alliance that would benefit all involved.
The problem is, America’s not interested. It’s more pro-European than most of Europe is.
America’s response to Britain’s growing Euroskepticism shows that it views Britain as a bridge to Europe, rather than an important ally in its own right. If Britain leaves the EU, its usefulness to America is over.
The UK Independence Party is growing in popularity. Prime Minister David Cameron recently said that a British EU exit was “imaginable.” Faced with this shift, U.S. President Barack Obama himself is reportedly lobbying Cameron to keep Britain in.

January 1, 2013


Que les élites dirigeantes puisent leur légitimité dans la tradition, le charisme ou la légalité, selon la typologie bien connue proposée par Max Weber (1919), elles doivent savoir gérer les crises qui, périodiquement, frappent les sociétés dont elles ont la charge pour se maintenir au pouvoir. Faute de l’avoir compris, la noblesse française, crispée sur ses privilèges et désireuse d’en obtenir davantage, a tout perdu en ouvrant, entre 1787 et 1789, la boîte de Pandore d’un réformisme incomplet parce qu’exclusivement destiné à lui profiter.

Depuis, le rôle de nos élites est plus complexe. Au travers de quinze changements de régimes, elles sont restées au pouvoir sous divers avatars dans le cadre d’une démocratisation relative mais réelle et au prix de concessions importantes. Dans sa fresque monumentale, La Responsabilité des dynasties bourgeoises (1943-1973), Beau de Loménie présentait l’extraordinaire capacité des mêmes familles et des mêmes réseaux à se maintenir au sommet, en dépit d’effondrements nationaux dont ils étaient, en grande partie, responsables, et qui s’étaient payé à chaque fois par l’occupation et le démembrement du territoire : 1815, 1870, 1940 ! Caricatural dans ses détails – l’auteur relayait par exemple le « mythe des deux cents familles » –, le tableau présentait un fond de vérité. Au cours des Trente Glorieuses, ces mêmes élites n’en ont pas moins défini une nouvelle politique sociale, construit une industrie moderne et animé, à partir de 1958, sous la direction du général de Gaulle, un régime qui a fait rayonner la France. 

Lorsque mourut Beau de Loménie en 1974, sa fresque semblait décrire un passé révolu.