During World War II, as it became apparent to Germany’s top Nazis that the possibility of defeat by the Allies was in prospect, the Nazis formulated a strategy to take the movement underground in the event of an allied victory. “When, in 1943, certain top Nazis realized that there must be at least a 50:50 chance that they would lose the war, Berlin established the Nazi International Organization at the German Geopolitical Centre which was located in Madrid, with satellite branches in Johannesburg, Rome, Lisbon and Buenos Aires. The strategies developed there are known to historians.… The Nazi International developed a ‘gradualist’ (quasi-Fabian) strategy to achieve Hitler’s aims by stealth.… The time frame was governed by a 40-year framework for German occupation.… This became the accepted time frame for the development of both German and Soviet control strategies. Forty years from 1948 takes us to 1988; the Berlin Wall was removed in 1990″ (Economic Intelligence Review, March 1998). The full integration of Europe was not possible prior to the tearing down of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of the Soviet Union. It has only emerged since the unification of East and West Germany, combined with the progressive Vatican-instigated separation of the Balkan states of Europe from Russian control. Since that emotion-soaked night, when the first fractures appeared in the concrete slabs of the dividing wall that separated East from West in Germany, the European Union has taken on a new momentum. It’s now driven by a German-led bureaucratic blitzkrieg aggressively applying pressure to member states to conform to a single monetary policy and currency and leading to the lifting of border controls between member states. “To say that the European Community was based on the Nazi version of Europe or that there are parallels would be an understatement. The entire ‘European’ enterprise since the founding of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951 (and given an enormous boost by the Maastricht Treaty on European Union) is an exact replica of the Nazis’ ideas for Europe. If there is a major difference it is that unlike Monsieur Delors, Hitler was at least elected by universal franchise, and by 1942 Hitler spoke for far more (albeit conquered) countries than does the EU today” (Treason at Maastricht, p. 133). In their startling little book, Treason at Maastricht, Rodney Atkinson and Norris McWhirter reveal the proximity of goals that exists between Hitler’s Nazi regime and those of the European Union: “But the most significant common thread running through both the Nazi and modern versions of the European State is the contempt for ‘the English system’—i.e. a belief in democratic government based on the individual, the nation state and free international trade. The defeat of Hitler and Mussolini was far more significant for its social and economic implications than for its military triumph. The ideas of collectivism, statism, trade protectionism and corporatism are not so physically apparent as the blitz and marching armies, which is why they have so successfully re-established themselves in Europe, under the guise of the ‘European’ Union” (pp. 124-125). Atkinson and McWhirter reveal very clearly in their book that the European Union presents a great threat to British and American sovereignty! Clearly, Germany is emerging as an increasingly powerful, bullying civil powerhouse dominating Europe, allied with a politically active spiritual power, the Vatican of Rome. Each is intent on pursuing the common goal of a united Europe. That this European combine will work to the detriment of Britain, America and their traditional allies is now readily seen by an increasingly concerned, clear-thinking and growing band of commentators, particularly in Britain. (Read the comments, at left, of Lord Tebbit, previous minister serving in Lady Thatcher’s cabinet, after Chancellor Kohl threatened war if Germany did not get her way in the European Union.) So much for Chancellor Kohl’s aggressive brand of Euro-politics. Concerning the Vatican’s political role, though it be more subliminal in approach, it is, nonetheless, just as effective as Mr. Kohl’s politics in practice. The influence of the Vatican on swaying the national vote to get its way has been evident in this current decade: “There is a natural affinity between the powerful state and the Roman Catholic theocratic ideal. The Church of Rome makes no bones about calling on its members to vote in a particular way, as it did in the Italian elections of 1992″ (David N. Samuel, op. cit.). Such papal influence is part of a well-considered and progressive plan for the Vatican’s dominance of Europe. A Sunday Telegraph article in 1991 had the title “Hatching a New Popish Plot” and spoke of the Pope’s plans for the “evangelization” not only of Great Britain but the whole European continent. “Karol Wojtyla [the Pope],” the article goes on, “is calmly preparing to assume the mantle which he solemnly believes to be his Divine Right—that of new Holy Roman Emperor, reigning from the Urals to the Atlantic” (
Posted on: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 17:04:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015