Translate

Friday, December 31, 2021

Book Work

 A number of years ago I had a manuscript I was thrashing through that sought to convey my insights into the awakened state. I had worked on the project for years while in an awakening process. Friends kept telling me that the manuscript looked more like three books, and that, it turns out, was just the problem. 

One morning while getting gas on the way to taking a friend to the airport for her return home she asked if I didn't have another book I was wanting to write. I explained that I didn't have another book and that I was focused on this one manuscript. My friend, though, is a gifted psychic, and she kept pushing the issue. I wasn't in any mood to be considering another book while trying to finish the first one. 

"My guidance is rarely wrong, Parker, and it's saying you have a second book in the works." She was right, of course, but I hadn't mentioned this to anyone at that point. I confessed, "It's just an idea at this point.." to which she said, "That's the book! My guidance is saying that you should work on that one because that book will be more widely accepted, and will help you in getting the second book, which is your first, read by more people." It took time for me to consider this. I had been working for so long on this first book. I spent another year editing the first book, nearlt destroying its comprehensibility, and then just set it aside just to take a break from it. 

In the mean time, I began teaching at a local university in my chosen field of art as thoughts of this second book began to percolate up to the surface. I considered that my friend Ali was right: this book had in a way already written itself in its most basic form. It had played a key role in my awakening process, and even more, I have become convinced since then that the events surrounding my initial awakening process took place in the way they did in order to open my eyes to the core content that such a book could convey. 

To explain this better, it is easiest to describe what took place in those early days as I was trying to figure out what on earth had happened to me. This takes time, but it also helps to show how the things I would discover later were contained in materials that were once hidden from most everyone for about 1600 years.

Awakening came at a time when I felt as though I had reached an empasse in my life. I had a couple of overhanging inner issues that had me tied up in knots, unable to reach any point of resolution about them. These were issues related to my own spirituality and my own destiny here on earth. Without going into detail, let's just say that I felt stuck regarding a few key spiritual events in my life, one of which involved a past life that itself tellegraphed the notion that in a future life I would go on to do something that would somehow be part of a shift in human awareness, one which would be part of a global event involving the earth as a gestalt consciousness, and humans, in an effort to get to a better place. This prophecy was rooted in First Nations prophecies about a Day of Cleansing, since my memory from my past life was of a man who had a vision about this day in the future when Earth would be swept up in this spiritual and physical event. 

From my place as my present self,  now a white man, I felt like I was at odd ends with being able to understand what this series of past life memories meant for me today. These memories lay like a burning ember in my pocket and I was finally left feeling frustrated, angry, and guilt-ridden over not having been able to figure out what the implications of this revelation made when I was 18 years old were. I had resolved to reach out to a Native holy man, a pipe holder of the Oglalla Lakota, to see if he could offer any advice to me. I wrote five drafts of the same letter and wasn't able to get my story any more clearer to this man. Something was wrong, but I couldn't put my finger on it. Why the hesitancy? I remember staring at that final letter as it sat ready to be mailed, and me swearing to myself that I would just go ahead and mail it, resistance be damned! It was then that I did something that was akin to a random act, a cosmic coin-toss; I checked my email and then did another web search using a central theme of my past life memory, which was a vision from that other life (having to do with the Thunder Beings). I wound up getting a result I had never seen before, and found myself reading a transcript of a speech another Lakota man had made about his vision which he had had that was related to my own.  Further, this man did something you hardly ever see, which was he included his phone number for anyone to call to discuss the issue with him at greater length. 

Something had happened in those few minutes while reading his account: I felt comfortable with this person even though I was just reading his transcript. I realized that all those drafts hid some sense of ill-ease about following that path. It felt like the universe was offering up a solution in the elleventh hour. I jotted his number down and promised that I'd call him. 

I did call the next morning. I had hoped to find someone who could offer me insight into this very unusual situation I was in, which had to do with how to unserstand a memory from a past life that was part of a vision quest. What actually happened was something quite different. As I spoke to Sydney Has No Horses, I found that a giant tightly wound spring began to unwind within me. I felt like I was confessing more than asking advice. No, this was all happening completely different from what I had expected it would.  And that was exactly the point!

Sydney did offer some advice, but it wasn't the answer I thought I might get. He suggested that I needed to go search for another vision in order to get clarity. He offered to help, even. At that point, though, something quite miraculous was taking place within me: a weight that I had been carrying had been lifted off of me. I literally felt eighty pounds lighter. I was walking on clouds...and all of this was completely unexpected.

This, I knew, was the first in a long string of "releases" of emotional material. This first act of release dissolved a long-standing inner division within me. It led ti an experience where more innexplicable events began to take place, and each event, in turn, led me to awakening. 

Three days after speaking to Sydney I experienced a state of nonduality. In a quiet moment I felt as though some presence was opening up to me, had suddenly become plain. It was quiet, soft, and beautiful. It melted me as it explained how I was part of everything. This was family, a kind of joke because thus family included everything: the rocks, trees, the air, and the subatomic particles that made all of this seem real. I was plunged into an awareness not of division or seperation, but of belonging, of a state if being that was fundamental to our existance here....and I had missed it all these years! I was 42 then, and all of this journey was leading up to this one simple realization. Something in me began to melt, to let go, to soften, which for me was a necessary precursor to the steps that would be presented to me as if by happy coincidence. All of this was taking place in just such a way that it would be seen as a necessary precursor that would be later described in  books I would read that came from earliest Christianity. 

About a week and a half later, a friend who I had been emailing offered me a meditation technique he had been using for years that would play a crucial role in my awakening. I hadn't mentioned my experience with Sydney nor the state I had felt rise up within me on that second week of August of 2006. 

I began using this meditation method and found within just a few days that some interesting things were happening. I checked with my friend, Brett, about it asking, "Is this normal?" To which he exclaimed, "It's working really well for you, Parker! Keep going!" So I did. Within about ten days I had suddenly become suffused in a brilliant white light. It was an event that lasted only a few seconds because of how the phenomenon wouldn't last if I turned my rational left-brained processes on in order to try and examine it. This served each time to collapse a wave of phenomenon that could only take place when using a part of my awareness that didn't analyze but instead experienced  directly, without the usual rational processes we have become so used to using. 

The earth didn't shake, I didn't even feel any different after this brilliant flash. I had even considered that someone had played a trick on me and had flashed the lights on and off in the dark room I was in. The only problem with that was that the switch that had to be used to do that was an older style switch that made a loud click, which could be heard throughout the entire house. That hadn't happened. One aspect of this meditation was how aware I was of the smallest of sounds. I soon realized that whatever this was, its source wasn't with the lights being turned on. This was, instead, an inner light, and this was my own Road to Damascus moment. I didn't understand what the implications would be, but itcwas important that I perceive this energy as a white light (some who awaken can experience it along a spectrum, all related to sensing great energy).

After this took place, I entered into a five month period of high-strangeness. There were all kinds of strange things happening. I would see things and hear things that seemed real but weren't physical. Was I losing my mind? I kept quiet about what was happening. It occurred to me that I was losing my grip on a familiar part of my mind while beginning to grasp or encounter, through unusual means, another part of my mind and being altogether. I was curious, but cautious, too.

By October, I experienced what I now know is described as a "kundalini flash" where it felt as if all the lights within me came on. The flash is that the energy comes on but soon wanes afterward. In that state, which lasted about four hours, I felt how I was able to grasp information that was encoded into the substance of reality, which I experienced as a form of living information that I felt I could tap into and translate. It was like downloading information from a vast living consciousness that contained information about anything you could imagine. I sat down to write some of what had happened to me, albeit in allegorical form. I wrote about how all of life seeks completion through an act of union, of begetting, which is expressed sexually, but which has a nonphysical component that is a part of our deepest creative impulse: genesis of new life, new awareness, a greater becoming. I titled the piece "The Yearning" and went on to experience an amazing synchronicity just after writing it. It was the first of many. 

I posted the writing a few days later to the online forum where Brett was a member, and he shot back a comment that would lead me further down the rabbit hole. He explained that a passage in my piece sounded just like a passage in the gospel of Thomas. I was completely unaware that such a book even existed. Brett explained that I could read it online and provided a link to it. In reading it, it made little sense to me. That is, until I found the passage to which he was referring, which, as it turned out, was an often-quoted passage that pointed directly to nonduality and awakening. This passage is found in saying 22 of the gospel in which it states, " When you make the two one, and when you make the inside like the outside and the outside like the inside, and the above like the below,  and when you make the male and female one and the same...."

It was a shock. How had I managed to communicate these same concepts in my own words that had existed since earliest Christianity with the implication being that these were the private teachings of Jesus? The only problem was that this all took place within a state of mind that had flashed before me that day in October of 2006 and now I was back to my old "normal" consciousness. Little of the book made much sense to me, though. It was like someone had held out a breadcrumb and was teasing me with it so that I might go deeper down that rabbit hole. It also served to illustrate to me how incomprehensible teachings like this one were to ordinary minds. To understand it all, you had to attain a certain light within mind to grasp it. The attainment of this light, I would learn, was the power of a deeper knowing, or gnosis, that was beyond most people's grasp because of how most people use their minds. This light could not be attained by way of old methods of rational grasp, but through a poorly understood means native to each person. Less about grasping, it was a cessation of chasing after ideas in a rational way, and the beginning of learning how to activate latent powers of the mind which then opened the channels in consciousness to the part of us that exists beyond time and space. This, these so-called "Gnostics" who considered themselves Christians, referred to this part of us as Sophia, Pistis, an indwelling quality we all have for knowing and wisdom. With it, one no longer needed teachers to tell them what was or was not true, because this knowledge existed organically within themselves.

Five months later, after having been guided to activate my third eye in a short meditation, I felt a blast go up my spine. I wasn't in meditation at the time. I was awake and going about my day. No yoga postures, no tongue on the roof of my mouth, and no mantras. It felt serpentine, as if a snake was moving up through the trunk of my body. It felt like the muscles in my torso were being zapped by an energy that pulsed upwards, first one muscle group, then the opposite, causing a gentle contraction of my body muscles along with a softening of them, leading to the serpentine sensation. After this took place, everything changed. The lights were back on! My body was responding to the intense energy. My body began producing fluids in an effort to shield itself from what it took as an irritant. I had developed nausea and diahrea which came and went. Prostatic fluid flowed constantly. All aspects of my endocrine system appeared to be hightened. A new chemistry in my body took hold. My senses were more acute, I caught a knife that had slipped from my hand while chopping vegetables one day. My hand reached down below my hip to grasp the handle of the falling knife. I realized I had never been able to do that before. I had never been able to speed my consciousness up that fast so that physical action seemed to pass along slower than usual. Further, this wasn't a one-off. I exhibited greatly improved reflexes and psychic abilities.

I found that I could feel what other people felt. I could hear their thoughts at night, and I could see objects and scenes from a great distance. In one case, I had glimpsed inside the apartment of someone on the online forum I mentioned earlier and found that out of the 24 distinct impression I had, all but three were entirely on the mark. I was able to describe the hallway outside this person's apartment: which direction out of the elevator I had to go to get to the apartment, where the door was in the hallway, the sconces lining the sides of the walls, the type of colors in the carpet and the colors of the walls. I could see the entire apartment and was able to identify where the windows were, their size, and the fact that they were casement windows whose frames had been painted black. I saw two bedrooms, one was nearly empty while the other was in active use. This person had not at any time described her apartment (I checked) before. I knew she lived in an apartment. I knew she lived in Cannada near Toronto. I knew she had a cat, and she was a very private person. I had never been to Canada, had never discussed with her where she lived. Up until this time, she was just another person on a message board.

I only knew about my accuracy with these impressions because, like a scientist, I contacted this person and explained that I thought I was getting impressions of where this person lived. I asked this person if they would take part in an experiment to see, and after I listed my impressions, I was told that most of them were entirely on the mark. Yes on the sconces snd thir shape, color, and spacing. Yes on the hallway carpet, the lication of the apartment in the hallway and the layout of the apartment. How could this be?

The energy continued to build and I was aware of two pillars of energy in my body. On my right side, I felt an energy that was concrete, logical  and linear. It lacked emotion. I thought of it as "The Man." On the other side of my body I felt an opposite energy. This was fluid, holistic, nonlinear, and had a great capacity for feeling. I called this "The Woman." After about two weeks following the "rise" of the energy, I could feel these two forces begin to merge along the center-line of my body and awareness. The experience was orgasmic, but it didn't arise physically. This was energetic. Out of their union came an energy which was a synthesis of these two. Lifted by bliss, this energy I called "The Child" because of how it arose out of the union of these two energies which were like man and woman. Through this union, incredible energy of mind and consciousness had flowered. Once the energy of this "child" was operative,  I found  much like the day in October had been, that I just knew things. I didn't know how I knew them, I just did. I performed a series of experiments when it was possible where I had received information that could be independently corroberated. When I was able to get material like that, nearly always what I had picked up on showed a high degree of accuracy. In each case the material I picked up on was about things I didn't know anything about. This pointed to this, for me at least, was not a flight of fancy or imagining. 

When I saw how the energies were relating to each other, I realized that this pointed to a triadic quality in human consciousness. Was there a tradition that dealt with a trinity? Christianity did, but their Trinity was clearly an all-male arrangement, so Christianity was out. Were there other traditions that might explain what I was suddenly experiencing? At this time I recalled how I had that run-in with the gospel of Thomas the previous year and wondered if I could see it with new eyes? 

I began reading Thomas and this time, it was like an entirely new book. Words lifted off the page, and I kept seeing passages that seemed to be describing just what I had been experiencing earlier. Was it coincidence? 

I read on. I read the gospel of Philip and it was there that I found the smoking gun: "Those who say Mary begot with the Holy Spirit are in error. They do not know what they are saying. When has a woman ever begotten with a woman?" My jaw dropped to the floor: here in plain words was the knowledge that the Holy Ghost was a feminine principle that led to divine union. This was precisely what I had described in my journal how two energies birthed a third in a state of orgasmic ecstacy. A little while later it was described: a female virgin and the father had entered the bridal chamber and out of it had walked the Christ!

I began consuming these books, looking for more clues, to make sure that this wasn't somehow a mere coincidence. Instead of making this all look coincidental, it strengthened my notion that indeed, these Christians were on to something really big!

There was a problem, though. How was it that these books had been decried as heretical by the early church? How did something so insightful fall into disrepute and chased once and for all from the scene of the Christian tradition? That is itself a fascinating story, and this is where my book begins. 

I had done precisely what this Jesus had commanded in these secret gospels: when you remove what divides you, you will know the kingdom. I had indeed removed a deep inner division that had been in me for almost 14 years. Sydney played a role in helping me to let go of it. After that, everything began to change. I experienced bewilderment just as described in Thomas, where I attained "The All" or awareness of the true order of the world and of consciousness. 

I went on to realize later that what I had was clearly spelled out as kundalini. The knowledge of this latent potential was present in many cultures! This wasn't due to an article of faith, this was a reality that each person faces once they have reached the maturity spiritually to cope with its corrective force (which appears as destructive at first). There was a reason why these teachings were kept silent or hidden. 

In every culture where this knowledge emerges there is always an effort to shield ordinary people from it. This is because without the proper preparation, early openings could lead to madness or great emotional instability.  It takes time to ripen or mature to where the possibility of awakening becomes a necessity. This becomes part of a process of becoming, growing, seeking, and finding that which has always been there, existing as a latent force of mind that our mainstream cultural institutions seem to do everything they can to distract us from. Instead, the world stands inverted from what it could be. While rare, awakenings have been taking place with great frequency over the last two decades (really more like a 40 year period which has been prophecied). Now awakening is a necessity if we are to bring the change needed to the race as a whole. 

The story of how Christianity was formed is an interesting one. There is what the Orthodox sect says it is, but then there is also what other sects had to say. There were numerous inputs into the tradition such that instead of Christianity being a story based on eye-witness testimony, we learn that ALL of the gospels were originally anonymous. Names were ascribed by the church later. The gospels emerge written in Greek, and not a single gospel has been found, no early ones, that were written in the language that Jesus spoke which was middle Aramaic. We do have writings before the gospels and those are the letters of Paul. But instead of making clear an orthodox view, Paul describes his experience in much more Gnostic-like terms. Further, after Valentinus seeks out a direct disciple of Paul after had had also had a vision of the risen Christ is told that Paul had a private teaching which he gave only to his closest followers and disciples. The Orthidx response is pithy: Valentinus must have lied. This, about a man who was revered as an ardent Christian who was in the running to be bishop of Rome at a time when the church was considered illegal by the Roman Empire, a position that really meant putting yourself on the line. 

It's an interesting story, and unfortunately, there are big pieces missing because of what Orthodoxy did to itself in order to extract all knowledge of the gnosis beginning in great earnest around 400 A.D. it was then that the Nag Hammadi codices were buried in Egypt, a find that would take place just as humanity was nearing its awakening moment: the explosion of the first atomic bomb and a more sudden collective questioning abouf consciousness itself. The discovery was made in 1945 and included over fifty works from gospels to letters. It took the full library decades before it could be publisged in total. It wasn't until the mid-1970's that the full library was available all in one volume (most of the books comprising the NHL had been published individually as the translation work progressed). Perhaps because of this, and less financial backing than the Dead Sea Scrolls received, it has taken more time for the importance of the NHL to seep into popular culture. Certainly Chatholicism nor its descendant Protestantism have done little to take these books seriously, so it has been up to the more Gnostic-minded of us to discover the treasure that they represent.

The great lesson for me in all of this is that belief blinds us to truth and can do so for thousands of years when authority asserts itself in such a way that people are made to believe that a myth, improperly rooted in reality, is real. It is also a story about how easily we can be fooled to follow a knowing that is incomplete, an effective cosmic dead-end of sorts, a comfortable coral for sheep who must be herded from thought to thought. This has been how the church has reaped great wealth and left its followers believing that they are broken, redeemable only by following one concept of Jesus as Savior, instead of the "heresy" that stated that the Christ is in us all. It is there where you must seek. Even Paul said as much, and he wasn't a believer. He didn't get there by believing it.  Afterall, he was persecuting Christians at the time. But like Paul, I was struck by a brilliant pure white light, afterwhich everything changed for me also.

The book will be an effort to bring the one lens missing in examining the Christ drama, which is awakening. It will help show that there have long been traditions all across the world who were describing the same phenomenon,  it will put forth evidence for why belief is itself such a poor substitute for direct knowledge and experience and why it is that it is now time to unshakle ourselves from such a deceptive practice. Humanity and its continuation here on the Earth depends on it. 

.


Thursday, August 5, 2021

Hijacking Disclosure

 

There has been and continues to be a significant amount of deceit and obfuscation in the arena of all things ET on the part of the government. It is amazingly easy to fool people to make them think that people who are working against their best interest and the interest of truth are for them. It is an exploit of a time-tested impulse that all humans have which is their natural desire to trust authority.

If you want to get to the bottom of the ET issue you will need to lay aside what you have been told by the news and the government and pay close attention to personal cases (your own are best or those of trusted friends). Learn to communicate with races who use telepathy as their go-to method for communicating between races. You can do this now. You can learn the CE5 protocols to begin initiating ET contact today. This is the single most powerful "weapon" for truth that can overturn what may well turn into the great deception getting ready to be sold to the world today - ET's against whom we must protect ourselves. Bear in mind that the narrative has not gotten to the point of ET's being a threat. Right now there are murmurings. This document is as much historical record as it is to show how the narrative will be rolled out (predictively so). Check back in a couple of years and let's see where we are by then.

Steven Greer has been a lightening rod in the space of disclosure. There are those within the community of researchers and advocates for disclosure who don't like the man. I have seen a tireless advocate for the subject who does not back down from a fight, and who has remained consistent for years. It's very easy to spin stories in this world, there is so little requirement for proof. Greer seeks to provide this and his record has been very good. I, however, always have an edge of skepticism when it comes to ANYONE in the ET arena, but it takes the shape of me taking in vast reams of data and never buying into any of it 100%. Only what I can confirm is what gets slowly moved into the trusted column. Nothing is sacred, and no one is above being something that they do not appear to be. It's not a fun place to be but there is a lot riding on the subject. Trillions, in fact. It is of utmost importance that everyone see this documentary.






The European Union Unmasked

 In my quest to understand the forces that are impacting our world, I do a deep dive into the real European Union.  To this end, I am reprinting Lindsay Jenkins’ investigative article The European Union Unmasked which was originally published in Everything You Know Is Wrong in 2002 (Russ Kick, ed. MJF Books, pub.)



If you want an anthology of many of the leading investigative journalists in the world digging into issues that mainstream media has either not reported on or does so poorly, even despite its having been printed in 2002, you will be stood in good stead with Everything You Know Is Wrong.  It is still an important collection and a means for pointing out how those with power have wielded it in the past, and as a precaution for how they are likely to wield it in the future.  It is worth noting that while Jenkins’ article was written almost twenty years ago, her analysis remains as an important reminder in our current time about the slippery slope that unions and agreements that erode national sovereignty represent.  Brexit had not happened at the time of her writing the following article, which makes it of particular interest since Jenkins’ observations formed a salient argument for why Brexit should happen.  It is well worth the read for a host of reasons, the least of which involves understanding how the EU has pushed itself onto the world stage (it's a very old idea).  My deep thanks to her for her permission to reprint her article in total here.

*Copied from our sister site: Waking The Infinite on Wordpress.

 

From the author’s website:

Lindsay Jenkins is an investigative author and journalist. She specializes in the history and current operations of the European Union.

She has dedicated years of research to exposing the rising power of the European Union, the waning power of the member nation states and the decline of freedom, liberty and democracy. Her continuing series of books, Britain in Europe, shows how far this stealthy takeover has progressed.

Lindsay's first book, Britain Held Hostage, reveals for the first time who created the EU and why. This is the historical thesis the Brussels’ bureaucrats do not endorse.

Her second book, The Last Days of Britain, starkly illustrates how far ‘Brussels’ has already taken over Britain's former national life.

Her most recent book, Disappearing Britain, The EU and the Death of Local Government, exposes how local government in Britain and across the EU is being replaced by the EU’s own local government of regions, sub regions and sub sub regions and thus marks the end of the nation state.

Lindsay previously worked for British and American investment banks in the City of London and as a senior civil servant in the British Ministry of Defence. She received an honours degree from Bedford College, London University and an MBA from Cranfield School of Management. She lives in both the UK and US.

Jenkins' website: http://www.lindsayjenkins.com/about_lindsay.htm

You can purchase her books here: http://www.lindsayjenkins.com/purchase.htm

Her speeches: http://www.lindsayjenkins.com/speaking_out.htm

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 800px-president_george_w._bush_and_prime_minister_tony_blair_of_great_britain_at_meeting_of_the_nato-russia_council.jpg
Source: Wikipedia



In his address to the US Congress on September 21, 2001, President George W Bush claimed, “America has no truer friend than Great Britain. Once again we are joined together in a great cause. I'm so honored the British prime minister has crossed an ocean to show his unity with America. Thank you for coming, friend"

In the public gallery, Britain's prime minister, Tony Blair, stood at attention, tightlipped and serious of face to acknowledge the warm applause from the congressmen below.

Blair’s support for America in the dark hours after the terrorists attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon would have been worth little had his words not been backed by Britain's world class Armed Forces, ready to support American military action.. A military coalition stood against Osama bin Laden and his terrorists.

It is therefore astonishing to review the events of less than three years earlier, when in December 1998 the same British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, went to meet the president of France, Jacques Chirac, at St. Malo in France.

Blair and Chirac effectively agreed to end the independence of the British and French forces in favor of the European Union (1) (EU) defense force.  Here is part of their joint statement after the talks ended:

The EU needs to be [able] to play its full role on the international stage… [T]he Union must have the capacity for autonomous action backed up by critical military forces, the means to decide to use them, and a readiness to do so in order to respond to international crises….The EU will also need to have recourse to suitable military means… within NATO's European pillar or… means outside the NATO framework.

Since that turning point in military history Tony Blair agreed to the EU's Rapid Reaction Force of 60,000 men backed by 300 aircraft and a naval force by the year 2003. Roughly a quarter of Britain’s armed forces were pledged to serve in the new force. With nominal rotation, most British forces will be allowed to be allocated to the EU army.



"Yet here was the British prime minister prepared to give up his country's armed forces to the control of a foreign power."





Many would argue the defense is the first duty of government. Yet here was the British prime minister prepared to give up his country's armed forces to the control of a foreign power.

Two British admirals warned: “It would probably mean that we would ultimately have to obtain [EU] approval if we wish to use [our forces] on a purely national basis." (2)

Both British and European leaders have been engaging in doublespeak with the Americans, assuring them that this is not the end of NATO while at the same time planning exactly for exactly that-the end of NATO.

George Robertson, when British Defense Secretary, quickly reassured the Americans that “[there is] no question of a European single army; no [EU] commission or European Parliament involvement in decision-making; no transfer of decision-making on military capability from individual government; and no undermining or duplication of NATO."

But the division between Britain and the US was laid bare on October 7, 1999, when the recently ennobled Lord Robertson, in his new job as NATO's Sec. General, backed the EU and not NATO: "We want to ensure that strong effective military resources are also available to the EU, so that we can take action in support of the CFSP [the EU's foreign-policy] when NATO… is not engaged militarily.”(3)

The the new president, Romano Prodi from Italy, was even franker: “When I was talking about the European army, I was not joking….If you don’t want to call it a European army, don't call it a European army….You can call it  ‘Margaret,’ or you can call it ‘Mary-Anne,’ you can find any name, but it is a joint effort for peacekeeping missions---the first time you have a joint, not bilateral, effort at European level.” (4)

A Military Committee of EU Chiefs of Defense Staff from all EU countries now means regularly. It started work in early 2000 with a projected staff of 90 for its headquarters. The first director was the German General Klaus Schuwirth. A Political and Security Committee of ambassadors controls the political and strategic direction of any crisis operation, sending guidelines to the Military Committee.

The terrorist attacks in the United States, and the resulting renewal of the “special relationship" with Britain, did nothing to stop or even slow the creation of the EU army. They did the opposite. The lack of military force obviously limited the use of world influence at a critical time, so the EU army project moved forward apace. It now included a committee of the EU intelligence chiefs. That must give us intelligence agencies pause for thought before passing secret material to their British ally.

Winston Churchill had presciently written years before: “A European army would be a sludgy amalgam." (5) Today at the heart of that “amalgam" are the forces of three countries: Britain, France, and Germany. But for Germany, sending its forces abroad represents a volte face after 50 years of legal limits on the use of its Armed Forces entrenched in it's post-WWII Constitution and a strong peace movement within the country. The EU army is further complicated because the EU includes both non-native countries and neutrals like Ireland and Sweden; there is no common language; and, last but not least, European defense is seriously underfunded.

Where will this new army be used? Anywhere up to 2,500 miles from its base, which includes the Balkans, the Middle East, and half of Africa. As Sen. John McCain shrewdly remarked: "It is not hard to envision our allies intervening militarily, under the auspices of their new defense organization and without our concurrence, in very different difficult  problems that they are unprepared to resolve, necessitating an eventual appeal to NATO to bail them out.” (6)

Though no politician would say so, creating a defense force had always been on the agenda for the new European state, but it was scheduled to be the last piece of the jigsaw to be slotted into place.

Jean Monnet, The so-called father of the EU, wrote of the outbreak of the Korean war in 1950: "the Federation of Europe would have to become an immediate objective. Army would have to be placed… under joint sovereignty. We could no longer wait, as we had once planned, for political Europe to be the culminating point of a gradual process, since its joint defense was inconceivable without a joint authority.…"(7)



"The existence of an EU army, depriving the constituent nations of their own defense and wrapping them in the foreign policy of the EU, powerfully demonstrates that free trade was a pretense."



For 50 years the Federalists pretended that the EU (and its predecessors) was no more than a trading bloc and that the acquisition of more power was only to promote free trade. The existence of an EU army, depriving the constituent nations of their own defense and wrapping them in the foreign policy of the EU, powerfully demonstrates that free trade was a pretense.

The new reality is a new country called "Europe."

Monnet's “gradual process" has already achieve the supremacy of EU law over national law, with the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg as the ultimate court of appeal. Trade farming and fishing are controlled from Brussels,; No individual country can sign a treaty, which means, for example, that only the EU can negotiate at the World Trade Organization (WTO); and foreign-policy, taxation, and national finances are already heavily circumscribed. Both an EU wide criminal justice system and an EU wide police force, which will eventually run all national police forces, are well on the way.(8)

This long process of integration has been notable by the absence of any democratic choice. The origins of the EU can be traced directly to chance meetings at the 1919 peace conference at the end of the first world war. A small group of largely British and American elites kept in touch and developed ideas for a united Europe while waiting for any chance to start the process. The first attempt, the Franco-Anglo Union, took place in the dark days of 1940s when German armies were overrunning Europe. It failed. The second try was the Council of Europe which Britain deliberately reduced to talking shop by 1950. Finally, the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) of six countries began in 1952, with the unelected Jean Monnet at its head. That, too, was nearly stillborn because of the Korean War. While the ECSC report purported to be a trading alliance, it could levy taxes and was responsible to a supranational assembly and a European Court of Justice. It was an embryonic state.

A further push with the Treaty of Rome in 1957 turned the ECSC into the European Economic Community (EEC), embracing all economic activity, not just coal and steel. Over 40 years later, the 15 countries of the European Union may enlarge to 28 countries. Even Russia is waiting in the wings. (9)

There is still a hole at the center of the EU jigsaw. The EU does not have a legal personality; therefore, it is not a state. An EU constitution is likely to be high on the agenda at the 2004 intergovernmental conference. These conferences always precede the next amendment to the fundamental EU document, the Treaty of Rome.

Progress toward one state has been made by a ratchet technique-small advances that only specialist watchers might appreciate for what they really are. Direct assaults on national independence are avoided. Some countries have held referendums on treaty changes. Most infamous where the two Danish referendums on the  Maastricht Treaty.  The Danes voted “no” in June 1992 and were promptly told they had to vote again. Less than a year later, and with substantial bribery and bullying; “You will lose your job if you vote no”—the Danes voted"Yes."

In every treaty is the term “irrevocable." The idea that the movement toward a single European state is inevitable is a constant refrain. Legally speaking, no treaty is irrevocable, and in the words of the old tag, only death and taxes are inevitable. Yet this propaganda is constant.

As a former French Foreign Secretary admitted: “The Europe of Maastricht could only have been created in the absence of democracy." (10)



"In 1984 (some might well remember George Orwell's 1984), an inner group of EU countries agreed that there should be a greater “European consciousness" to overwhelm national feeling, and they set up the Committee for a People’s Europe to do just that. The committee created a "pretend" country."



Propaganda has been keen to oil the wheels of integration. In 1984 (some might well remember George Orwell's 1984), an inner group of EU countries agreed that there should be a greater “European consciousness" to overwhelm national feeling, and they set up the Committee for a People’s Europe to do just that. The committee created a "pretend" country.

As a result, the EU flag of 12 stars on a blue background flies over the new 132 "embassies”—diplomatically called “delegations”—around the world and over its capital city, Brussels; the EU anthem, Ode to Joy from Beethoven's ninth Symphony, is frequently played in Brussels with the EU Commissioners standing to attention; every country has adopted the red EU passport; EU drivers licenses are being introduced; and 2002, the currents the EU currency, the euro, replaced the individual currencies of all EU countries except Denmark, Sweden, and Britain.

Brussels is even using religion to promote its political agenda. Some estimates suggest the European commission's program “A Soul for Europe" has given over 38 million to pro-EU projects throughout Europe. Applicants for grants must "promote the integration of Europe" and "publicly acknowledge that assistance has been received from the EU." Though supposedly to set up to promote the religious and spiritual aspects of a unified Europe “Soul for Europe" literature doesn't mention the scriptures; this is strictly political.

The Vatican sees advantages in backing the EU. To promote a Europe in which Catholicism might dominate, the Vatican has pursued EU integration from at least the early 1940s and mainly in secret. (11)The first six members of the EEC are largely Catholic countries.

The Vatican is now taking a more public stance. The Rome Synod of October 1999 declared that it is necessary to "pursue, with courage and urgency, the process of European integration." Two months later, the Vatican began the canonization process for the so-called "founding fathers of Europe" from Germany, Italy, and France: Konrad Adenauer, Alcide de Gasperi, and Robert Schuman.



"No government dependent upon a democratic vote could possibly agree in advance to the sacrifices which any adequate plan must involve. The people must be led slowly and unconsciously into the abandonment of their traditional economic defenses, not asked, in advance of having received any of the benefits which will accrue to them from the plan to make changes of which they may not it first recognize the advantages to themselves…"



In the first 50 years of political integration, it was easy to disguise what was really happening beneath an economic cloak. As a British conservative MP wrote in 1947 (while praising the good Adolph Hitler had done to make Europe one economic unit): "No government dependent upon a democratic vote could possibly agree in advance to the sacrifices which any adequate plan must involve. The people must be led slowly and unconsciously into the abandonment of their traditional economic defenses, not asked, in advance of having received any of the benefits which will accrue to them from the plan to make changes of which they may not it first recognize the advantages to themselves…" (12)

Once the police and the Armed Forces were to be combined into multinational units, with one justice system, including local EU courts, disguising the true ends would be difficult. Local opposition could even imperil the enterprise.

The EU is now poised at a critical stage. It's true nature is emerging from the shadows.

At this late stage, political union had to be achieved quickly before serious opposition—even rebellion—could appear, so an inner core of countries is essential. Rules were included in the net in the Nice treaty for five or more countries to accelerate to full union common, leaving the others to catch up later. France and Germany, the two countries that have led the integration process since the beginning, say that full union can be achieved by 2010.

Democracy has been largely conspicuous by it's absence in the creation of the EU, and the EU is not run as a democracy. The government of the EU, though not yet an name, is the unelected European commission in Brussels. At its heart is the tension between the Commission and the only institution representing the nation-states against the centrifugal power of the EU-The Council of ministers. 

Steadily, the nations are losing their powers to the Commission, as the national veto decreases Treaty by treaty. Politicians wrote in 1998: "It is therefore necessary and legitimate for participating countries to take part in each other’s domestic debate.… it is not interference in their internal affairs, of which the number is in any case constantly diminishing." (13)

Once in Brussels, the 20 commissioners are independent of their "home" government, or in the words of Lady Thatcher:  “They go native." Each commissioner swears “[t]o perform my duties incomplete independence, in the general interest other communities; in carrying out my duties, neither to seek, nor to take, instruction from any government…" (14) About a third of them are former national ministers; governments usually send to Brussels those they regard as politically dispensable. Others have been diplomats or International civil servants.

Nearly 30,000 civil servants (i.e., Eurocrats) back them, though this is still not enough to run such a huge empire. When plans were laid for the present EU in the late 1940s, the College of Bruges solved the problem of a massive and highly visible central bureaucracy. The college suggested a takeover of national civil services.

This clever scheme meant that national opposition would not be aroused; it was erosion from within. A passerby would see the same old government buildings, but inside civil service would be shutting one master, the national government, in favor of Brussels. To facilitate the process, Brussels encouraged civil servants to sit on Brussels committees. This committee system has further subverted democracy. A British parliamentary select committee deplored: "In most cases the only scrutiny of the commissions implementing measures is that undertaken by national civil service in the [Brussels] committees. In practice there is little action in European or national parliaments.…" (15)

So today, unseen by the general population, over 250 EU EU communities and influence the way every country is governed. Out of the public eye, National civil servants horse-trade their way to consensus positions on subjects of which their mastery may be limited or nonexistent. The result is thousands of directives a year, often poorly drafted and inappropriate, replacing national legislation.

A best guess is that about 80% of all legislation going through the British houses of parliament nearly rubber stamps Brussels's directives. On additional 3000 of Brussels's regulations are enacted every year by civil servants without any democratic scrutiny whatsoever. It is government by decree.

If that were not a sufficient destroyer of democracy, the EU has set up a charade of a parliament with EU-wide parties, or as the Treaty of Rome has it: "Political parties at European level are important as a factor for integration within the union. They contribute to forming a European awareness and to expressing the political will of the citizens of the Union." (16)

The European Parliament started in 1951 with nominated members until the first elections were held in 1979. Each member of European Parliament (MEP) represents a very large number of people common, Few of who can actually named their representative. Any EU citizen can vote where ever he happens to be, and national nationality no longer counts. The 626 members of the parliament are elected by proportional representation (PR) every five years.

PR voting is a clever way to divide and rule. Votes are not for an individual but for a party. The party chooses candidates, listing them in order of their importance to the party. The number of seats a party wins is proportional to the number of votes cast for that party.

The usual result of a PR election is a compromise. No one party has a majority, and government becomes merely a theater of bartering and horse-trading as coalitions form and reform.

The European Parliament has virtually no powers; it follows the Latin tradition of legitimizing the decisions of the unelected Commission. It has no similarity to parliaments based on the Westminster principle, such as the British and Commonwealth parliaments or the US Congress.

All major decisions are decided by deals between the leaders of the party groups, and MVPs cannot initiate or repeal legislation; they only amend or reject proposals submitted by the commission.

The European Parliament is like a medieval court: MEPs and their offices are constantly on the move, carrying all their files with them. The Secretariat is divided between Brussels and Luxembourg. MEPs are often absent because of the peripatetic nature of the Parliament and the technical nature most of the work as the EU extends its re-met into the smallest nook and cranny of everyday life. But day (like that Eurocrats) are financially well rewarded with excellent pensions and other perks.

Free speech is rationed. The time an MEP may speak in debates is allocated among the party groups according to the numbers in each group. A member of a small party has only 1 1/2 minutes to make his point in the debate before his microphone is automatically cut off.

MEPs vote on commission proposals by following numbers on the list and pressing a button 100 to 300 times in an hour, allowing perhaps 10 seconds for each vote. They have trouble trying to follow the voting list, which will only have been available for a few hours and is published in French.



"Some British MEPs voting 300 times in a two hour session, inadvertently agreed to corpus juris effectively abolishing the British criminal justice system common, including trial by jury and habeas corpus."



Mistakes are easily made. Some British MEPs voting 300 times in a two hour session, inadvertently agreed to corpus juris effectively abolishing the British criminal justice system common, including trial by jury and habeas corpus.

Even worse, an absent MEP is taken to have voted for this motion.

European parties, without any country links, will become the norm.. All “recognized" party groups are funded from the parliamentary budget according to the size of the group.(17) The corollary must be that parties which are not "recognized" will be closed down.

With such a lack of democracy, it is important to watch for signs that the new state may crush any dissent. Every nation has a treason law holding individuals to account for offenses against the state. So far treason in the EU has not been explicitly mentioned, but the EU set up a European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia in Vienna in 1998.(18) according to the Pan-EU party of European socialists, “Right-wing populism is one of the major dangers to the European experiment… by attacking the European integration and its alleged damage to nation states.…right-wing populism can use a new face of nationalism… this new populist nationalism is also displayed in anti-European rhetoric, blaming Brussels for all kinds of economic, political and social problems.”(19)



"The EU can cancel a country's voting and other undefined rights but leave it with all its obligations, including payments to Brussels and the enforcement of EU laws. Such a country would be reduced to a colony."



The EU has already taken action against the country. The EU can cancel a country's voting and other undefined rights but leave it with all its obligations, including payments to Brussels and the enforcement of EU laws. Such a country would be reduced to a colony.

The first case was Austria. Following a free and democratic election in February two thousand, with the conservative People's Party. In a move which sent shock waves around the world, the other 14 EU countries promptly sanctioned Austria, claiming the freedom party was fascist.

In retaliation the Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel, set a deadline for the EU to end sanctions against Austria;  otherwise he would pull Austrians for their endorsement of using”all suitable means" against the EU, which would have derailed the Treaty of Nice. The EU immediately appointed three "wisemen" to find a face-savings solution. Sanctions were duly lifted.

After the Austrian debacle one British MEP asked in the European Parliament if anti-EU parties should be banned.(20) many MVPs shouted,"Yes." The EU's attack on Austria may be just the beginning. The Nice treaty strengthens the provisions of Article 7, under which Austria was sanctioned. Only two-thirds of the member states (i.e.,10) would be needed to ban a country, so even if the victim country had an ally or two, it would not be enough to save it from colony status. It will be even easier for the EU to gang up on one country, saying it is violating the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the rule of law. Those principles are open to any interpretation: who's law and whose freedoms?

Even worse, to attract a ban, a country may not have to violate the vague EU principles; it may merely pose "the threat of such a breach." Again, that is open to interpretation.

If countries and parties might be banned, what about newspapers, books, magazines, even television and radio stations? The only evidence to emerge so far that this could be in the cards is the case of Bernard Connolly, a former head of the EU commission unit for  "EMS, national and community monetary policies."



"In the European Court of Justice on October 19, 2000, the EU’s Advocate-General surprisingly argued that Connolly's book, The Rotten Heart Of Europe, an academic analysis of monetary union, was akin to the publication of a blasphemous work. Since blasphemy could be punished under the European Convention on Human Rights, then a punishment was permissible for "blaspheming" against Europe."



In the European Court of Justice on October 19, 2000, the EU’s Advocate-General surprisingly argued that Connolly's book, The Rotten Heart Of Europe, an academic analysis of monetary union, was akin to the publication of a blasphemous work. Since blasphemy could be punished under the European Convention on Human Rights, then a punishment was permissible for "blaspheming" against Europe.

A further hint came at a conference in 2000" Media and Democracy" when the European Socialist Party (PES) proposed a European Communications Authority. Such an authority could "recognize" journalists, fund programs, and exert EU control over the media.

The EU commission is not only emasculating the power of each state, but it has divided it to the 15 EU countries into 111 regions. All EU regions are described in the same way—for example, as “London in Europe”—thus abolishing the name of the country and making clear that it is not free or independent.

Each region is in the process of acquiring an elected assembly and a development agency with the same boundaries as the European parliamentary constituencies. Their remits include regional planning, transport, and increasing regional ownership, economic development, agriculture, energy, and waste, all to fit in with the EU planning and funding. All have offices in Brussels.

Each region sends two representatives to the EU’s Committee of the regions "representing" the people in Brussels. A second committee of 222 people,, the Economic and Social Committee, entrenches lobby groups in the EU, such as employers's groups, trade unions, farmers, consumer associations, charities, and family groups.

Both committees are no more than Brussels wallpaper, but they have created a new political class in every EU country, an inner group to match the new political class in Brussels. Many local officials have reacted enthusiastically to more power and links with other regions in the EU. A few who have benefited financially in a substantial manner. Not surprisingly, they are eager apostles for "more" EU. It may not occur to them that this destroys the nation-state.

What will the future role of the national parliaments be when all the regional "governments" are fully operational? The EU is silent on this point, and the assumption must be that they will fade into obscurity, as decisions are made in Brussels and rubberstamped in the EU regions.

The commission has invented even larger areas, Euro-Regions, linking places which have never in recorded history been united or which once belong to a neighboring country, deliberately reopening old wounds. The EU funds television and radio to broadcast across these borders, to build a new identity, although many locals switch off their sets.

Part of the British Southeast's "link" across 70 miles of sea with the French area of Haute-Normandy and Picardy. Germany, abutting eight countries, has Euro-Regions enveloping neighboring lands once claimed by Germany. For example, Rhine-Maas, A German-speaking area of Belgium, is joined with part of Germany; and Southern Jutland in Denmark is linked with Schleswig and Holstein in northern Germany, which the Germans conquered in the war of 1864.

The EU plans by 2004 all "internal" border controls will be abolished and one outer EU border set up. A huge border police force is being built up. From 2001, the German and Italian governments exchanged border troops as a vanguard of an EU force to secure the EU’s outer frontiers after the next wave of enlargement to the east.



"While the EU is outlawing most national differences, from imperial weights and measures (anyone selling an pounds and ounces is now a criminal) to currencies and legal systems, it is promoting other local differences at great cost. This can only be part of its deliberate policy to divide and rule."



While the EU is outlawing most national differences, from imperial weights and measures (anyone selling an pounds and ounces is now a criminal) to currencies and legal systems, it is promoting other local differences at great cost. This can only be part of its deliberate policy to divide and rule.

English, the world's leading language, is spoken by half of the EU, yet the signatory countries to the charter of minority languages of 1992 agreed to promote regional or minority languages. Across Europe there are over 100 languages, usually around national borders, reflecting Europe's checkered past. Most of them had virtually died out by 1600. In a bizarre move to reverse this historical trend, within one generation and with EU money, much of local life may once again be carried out in these languages.

Insistence on the use of minority languages, especially in educating children, will ensure that the locality is isolated and limit the opportunities for people in the wider world. It will make them second-class citizens and easier to control. All regional assemblies will have multiple translation services, each will further reduce their effectiveness.

The EU, which describes itself as a Tower of Babel, already has 11 official languages, which causes confusion and vast expense with every document translated and every speech interpreted. On enlargement the number will shoot up again. Germany is already promoting German to become the EU official language, reducing English to minority status.

Why is it that so many countries have queued to join the EU? The answer, Simply put, is money. Only a few countries are net contributors to the use funds (is by far the largest), and most get more than their own money back but naturally only to find EU-Approved projects. And surprisingly few politicians across Europe understand the EU’s undemocratic nature.

The EU’s superstructure is already in place. Enlargement to include countries of Eastern Europe is on track for 2006. The dividing rule policy, actively pursued for years, is accelerating. Strong national governments are being replaced with weak regional assemblies speaking a of languages and reporting directly to Brussels. The EU inner core, led by Germany and France, is gaining strength and may have the power to advance to one country by 2010.

If so, the United States of Europe will have arrived. It will not be a democracy but a dictatorship. Unless there is rebellion, the world may become an even more unstable place.









Endnotes

1. The European Union is currently compile comprised of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Denmark, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Greece, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Finland, and Sweden.

2. letter to the daily telegraph(London) 13 June 2001.

3. Chatham House lecture in London.

4. Independent (London) for February 2000.

5. Quoted in Mayne, Richard et al. The Federal Union: The Pioneers. London: Macmillan, 1990.

6. From a Kansas State University lecture, 15 March 1999.

7. Monnet, Jean. Memoirs. Trans. Richard Mayne. London: William Collins and Son Ltd., 1976 (Author’s italics)

8. For a review of how far national governments have already been abolished, see Jinkins, Lindsey. The last days of Britain: The final betrayal. Orange State press, 2001

9. For the history of who created the EU and Y, C Jenkins, Lindsey. Britain held hostage, the calming euro-dictatorship. Second ED. Orange State press, 1998

10. Clause Cheysson.

11. For the early history, sea Cornwall, John. Hitler's Pope: The secret history of Pious XII. New York: Viking press, 1999.

12. Booklet published in 1947 under the banner"Design for freedom" Whose 24 members were mainly conservative MPs led by Peter Thorneycroft.

13. Dr. Schauble and Karl Lamers in a CDU/CSU paper.

14. Treaty of Rome, article 157.

15. Extracts from the House of Lords select committee on European communities third report, delegation of powers to the commission: reforming Cosmetology, 2 Feb 1999.

16. Treaty of Rome, article 191.

17. Nice Treaty, article 191.

18. Amsterdam treaty, article 29, title V I.

19. A discussion paper produced for the Bern roundtable of the PES, July 2000.

20. Jeffery Titfod, a UKIP MEP.