01 February, 2017

Brexit Spivs in London and Brussels? Or Humpty-Dumpties?

Is HMG, Her Majesty's Government, acting like a Spiv or Humpty Dumpty?
If you don’t remember what a wartime and postwar Spiv is, the dictionary says it is a petty crook living dishonestly by his wits with a little bit of blackmail thrown in. Typically he opened his coat to show sought-after articles like nylon stockings for sale without ration coupons or watches of dubious origin.

Do we have Spivs running Whitehall and Brussels? You judge. One of the weakest parts of HMG’s position on Europe — if not the weakest — is Euratom. It retains a semblance of democracy which the EU has abandoned.
The much vaunted Article 50 deals only with exiting the Lisbon Treaty. It is a pretty poor treaty and many would say: “Good Riddance to it!” Legally it smells like rotten fish. The Lisbon Treaty is practically identical with the dead Constitutional Treaty that was rejected in their Referendums by the French and Dutch .
It would have been rejected by the British and a whole string of other democracies — if they had had the chance to vote. They didn’t. Instead the articles were forced undemocraticly through Parliaments against the wishes of their populations. Now that UK referendum that was refused so many times for Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice, the Constitutional and the Lisbon treaties is coming back to haunt both HMG and Brussels.
The Lisbon Treaty has nothing to do with Euratom, the European Atomic Energy Community. It was agreed as a Treaty of Rome in 1957. It was supported by referendums and free votes in parliaments when all of the present Member States joined.
Lisbon only is rejected. On 23 June 2016 37 percent of the electorate voted to Leave the European Union. (63 percent refused to vote or voted Remain.) Prime Minister Theresa May wanted to leave immediately but it was as difficult to herd the Brexiteers in her government into a single policy direction on how to leave and what to negotiate. She wished to use royal prerogative powers, just like Henry VIII. "I decide, no debate or vote in Parliament!"
That failed when Gina Miller brought the matter to Court.

Brexit, Miller and Henry VIII FCover
PM May has now been forced by the UK Supreme Court to introduce an Act of Parliament before the Government can issue the Article 50 letter that says the country would like to leave the EU. Presently, in the European Union (withdrawal) Bill before Parliament, the UK Government is trying some very dubious skulduggery. It is attempting to withdraw from both the European Union and Euratom.
The 23 June 2016 Referendum was on Remaining or Leaving the European Union.
The EU is a product of the Lisbon Treaty. The EU is quite separate from the Community.
As far as Brussels and lawyers at the European Court of Justice would look at it, there are two separate treaties with two separate clauses on exit.
The Lisbon Treaty has Article 50. Euratom has something quite different. It has a NON EXIT clause Article 208. Why? because it is about the democratic control of nuclear material and nuclear security. Its aim was to stop an atomic war in Europe. It says:
“The treaty is concluded for an unlimited period.”
The Government has tried to confuse this (but only in British eyes) in the UK’s EU (Amendment) Act of 2008. In it they say that when “they” say “EU” they mean “EU and Euratom” if there is a context that “permits and requires this”. Who judges the context– especially if none exists? Who judges the legality of a surreptitious sale of nylon stockings without a ration coupon? A Spiv or a Humpty Dumpty! The Act has a spiv-like features! Back in 2008, the Act was also the means to refuse the British people a referendum !
Here we can say there is no context given in publications or official Statement that allows HMG to say it is permitted or required to include Euratom with its No-Exit Article.
Are ministers living in Wonderland? This misdemeanor is more serious than Alice in Wonderland where words mean whatever you want them to!
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” Through the Looking Glass, chapter 6.
This tactic of HMG is fraudulent. The Humpty-Dumpties might want to add exit NATO, the Council of Europe or the UN !!
humpty-dumpty Words Mean What I say
It is like saying when I bought your second hand car for two hundred pounds, I own your house too because when I say car, I mean ‘car and house’ !!
Besides this the real owner — the depository of the treaties — has no document saying that the 27 other Member States agree with this fraudulent, spiv-like practice! Hence the European Court of Justice could not agree with this.
The fairest and simplest amendment to any EU (Withdrawal) Bill would be to omit all mention of Euratom. No one campaigned for exiting Euratom!
In the Brexit campaign I know of no Government Statement or any publication where HMG has specified that the UK is leaving the Euratom treaty. Do you? If so then HMG has NO MANDATE to leave Euratom or alter its status.
Further backgound is available in the free eBook on academia.edu. It is at
In other words the present negotiations will be useless until Europe’s core problem is tackled — distrust of Brussels and also HMG’s refusals to hold timely referendums. The UK should work for democratic reform in Brussels. This should start with the treaty requirements that all Councils should be open to the public AS THE TREATIES SAY. The European Community was initiated by Robert Schuman to bring honest Government to Europe. The Commission, Europe’s Honest Broker, should be composed of honest men and women who refuse to be members of partisan organizations or interests.

26 January, 2017

500 years ago, Erasmus predicted a Golden Age of Knowledge, Science and Technology

In 1934 Stefan Zweig in a biography said Erasmus represented the supranational ideal He used the term ‘supranational‘ many times throughout the book. What did he mean?
Robert Schuman declared on 9 May 1950 that peace could be built in Europe based on the same supranational principle. It brought an end to 2000 years of Western Europe’s internal wars.
Look back over the last 500 years since the great work of Erasmus in 1516, and we will see a world changed from top to bottom. Science and technology are the great dominant forces in society. We owe much of our comfort and prosperity and the fecundity of earth’s population to science and technology. So it would seem.
But the elements, the materials and the means to assemble the proponent parts of inventions existed throughout the history of mankind. Are we more intelligent today? Probably not, probably the reverse. Many of our everyday books on mathematics, philosophy, and politics originated one, two three millennia ago. How many people today could write from first principles a book on the geometry of conics or work out how to predict eclipses like the ancient Babylonians did?
Why is it then that only our last half-millennium was able to put the various pieces of these many different jig-saw pieces together to create a jet plane, satellite technology or a probe to the limits of the solar system and beyond? What sparked our scientific and technological revolution from around 1500? Up till then society plodded along at the same speed as the Romans.
We have electricity – a force that propels much of our traffic. It sparks our internal combustion engines. It propels our electric cars, some of which now drive themselves without the aid of a human. Electricity activates tiny splodges of metal on boards made from the same silicon material as seaside sand. We call them our computers. It also makes our light for us to see at night. It powers our ability to communicate as I am doing right now. Artificial intelligence answers our verbal questions.
What lies behind this great change of society, this supranational innovation that changes the way we live and think? Was it the genius of one man? Do we owe all this to someone like the practical Michael Faraday or the mathematics of James Clerk Maxwell?
Here we are confounded by the facts of history. Our west European society was not the first to have electricity. We may have been the first to exploit it on such a wide scale.
Parthian Battery
Two thousand years ago, the Parthians, that great super-power that rivaled and defeated the Roman Empire many times, possessed the electric cell. The construction of it implied that they used the cells in series to create a stronger current of electricity. They may have used the electricity to electroplate base metals with gold or for other uses we know not of.
But they did not, as far as we know, create semi-conductors as the essential elements for digital computers.
Some intellectual impulse far greater than the life-and-death battles, that the Romans fought on the Euphrates, in Israel and Greece, ignited and motivated our western society. The Parthians had abundant wealth, wealth so great that it provoked the covetous Romans to try vainly to conquer them.
The Parthians also debunk a common assumption of today’s Erasmus programme of student exchanges. The presumption is that students will gain from cultural exchange. Science will progress because one set of students or scholars interact with another who approach a problem from a different cultural point of view.
Parthia map-X
Yet the Parthians had global reach in their cultural interactions. They traded with the Far East. It was probably the Parthians who in the first century introduced silk from the Far East to the Romans in their Far West.
Yet despite all this cultural exchange neither Romans or Parthians had aeroplanes. The native brilliance of Parthian rulers established a rich and long-lived empire that confederated different tribes and competing religions for nearly 500 years from 250 BCE to 226 CE. Neither Romans or Parthians produced a scientific society like our own. Why? The Romans on the contrary may have destroyed the early roots of it.
One can perhaps excuse the Roman Empire for its lack of accomplishments in these areas. It was for most of its time involved in a bloody struggle to attain the peak of a military dictatorship. Once they had reached the emperorship, many of the emperors gave themselves over to sexual excess and the persecution of dissenters.
What of the great engineering accomplishments of the Roman Empire? These have been much vaunted by too many of the West’s historians who still live under the Stockholm symptoms of the Roman conquest of their lands. Many of the most extraordinary achievements of the so-called Roman Empire were in fact due to engineering skills that existed prior to Roman conquest. Take for instance, the building of harbor at Israel’s Caesarea, the largest port in the Roman world. Jewish engineers set huge limestone blocks 15m by 2.7m by 3m exactly in place, one exactly on top of the other, in 60m depth of seawater. Figure that out.
Then look at the great fort of Jerusalem, Antonia. How would you manoeuvre a polished limestone oblong block 13.6m x 3m x3.3m still in its foundations? How would today’s engineers, smooth it to perfection and place it exactly within millimeters? It weighs an estimated 570 tons.
 Masada stamp
Look high to the mountain fortress of Masada where a city and a palace with its Roman baths were created in what many would today say was barren, arid Dead Sea.
In the west Keltic Britons built hundreds of astronomical circles and ellipses to measure the calendar and examine the stars. Hero of Alexandria, Egypt, created a steam engine but neither he nor the next generation built a locomotive.
 Hero Aeolipile
The Antikythera Mechanism was a fished out from a vessel sunk off the Greek island. It contained an amazing array of cogs and delicate settings. What was its purpose? it was a mechanical computer able to predict the movement of the planets, eclipses and dates based on the 19-year Metonic cycle that controls our seasons and religious festivals.
Our last 500 years has not just seen great engineering achievements and computers, it has seen together with the microscope the realization that human beings are composed of cells. Further, for the proper functioning of the human body, we call on 100 trillions of bacteria and other creatures. Each human is really a community of living organisms. Scientists have explored the material components of the cell such as its DNA and the part it plays in genetics.

Antikethyra Mechanism

Why did ancient societies not investigate these vital matters themselves? Were the microscope or the telescope too complex for a society that could create the Antikythera mechanism around 100 BCE? Not at all. Did the microscope require the intervention of a highly educated scientist and advanced optics?
Leeuwenhoek_Microscope x
A century-and-a-half after Erasmus, the Royal Society in London was amazed at the extraordinary sketches of microscopic creatures coming from a correspondent, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, in the Netherlands. From 1670s he wrote more than 500 letters to the Royal Society about his discoveries. This self-educated, independent-minded businessman invented a single-lens microscope that could render visible unicellular bacteria, sperm, blood, and minute water life.
Today we know that the human body is composed of nearly 100 trillion cells, with more than half independent uni-cellular bacteria etc. This form of life makes up most of what we are, not our own flesh! With specimens attached to the spike he could examine the various types of life on this planet — some of these forms were eternal — and they did not need sex to reproduce.

Leeuwenhoek_Microscope lens
Yet Leeuvenhoek, “the father of microbiology” created his single lens from a small sphere of glass. And glass has been around for 4 or 5000 years. It was a recognized profession and trade. Ancient Egyptians made multi-colour glass vessels that compete with the finest Venetian glassware. Where were the ancient Leeuvenhoeks in antiquity who looked through a tiny ball of glass? Why don’t we have an Egyptian name for the father of microbiology?
From around 1500 all areas of knowledge, science and technology flourished all across Europe. What was the motor? Did Erasmus know it in 1516? What was the secret that Erasmus spoke of, when in 1517 — 500 years ago, he wrote:
” At the present moment I could almost wish to be young again for no other reason but this — that I anticipate the near approach of a golden age.”

19 January, 2017

Davos exposes Europe's Fake News and Fake History

Davos Wld Ec Forum Which Europe Now x
The World should note and shudder! Fake News is being spouted by European leaders about the crisis of Europe’s future.
Meeting at the Davos World Economic Forum, a special discussion was held on “Which Europe Now?” Sixty minutes of hot air followed, enough to melt the Alpine snows.
Citizens, be afraid! The leaders seem to know little about how Europe got its peace after 2000 years of warfare, how it got its unprecedented prosperity.
Robert Schuman and the founding fathers created a system to build trust between nations and peoples and industries. Lack of public trust in Brussels is the prime cause of today’s crisis. Schuman said: “Bureaucratic expansion and complexity are no guarantee against a breach of trust. They encourage political nepotism. Administrative inflexibility is the prime danger threatening our supranational services.” Elections, he said, should be Europe-wide not national. They should accord with the Great Charter of the Community (that de Gaulle buried.)
Leaders today have little clue how to best deal with the future. Would you hire a hot air salesman to be in charge of a fire brigade, someone who knew nothing about fires and could not even drive a fire engine?

Rutte at Davos 19 1 17 x
Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte boasted that “I am a historian”. He then destroyed that illusion. Just four minutes into the conference he said that the treaty that made sure “No More War” was that of 1958. What was he thinking of? Euratom? Or the so-called “Common Market”. What happened between the end of the World War and then when the Cold War raged?
In its first announcement of the year the European Commission gave the same Fake News. They said they would celebrate Europe’s 60th Birthday in Rome in March this year. Is Fake News contagious? The treaty that made war “not only unthinkable but materially impossible” was the Treaty of Paris, signed on 18 April 1951. The quote comes from Robert Schuman’s speech of 9 May 1950 that launched the Community process and the European Coal and Steel Community.
Then we had the French moderator, Maurice Lévy, the boss of Publicis. This is a communications and media group. Why, any normal person would ask, does the European Union require a marketing consultant to get its message across? Is lack of trust not apparent or do leaders just want to cover it up?
Mr Levy asked: What are the great ideas that Europeans need? What makes a better Europe?
Mr Levy came up with the false and hoary old story that Jean Monnet had said that “if I had to start again” (with presumably single-handedly creating the European Union), he would “start again with culture.” It takes a minute on the internet to prove this is a Fake!
It is also false to say Monnet “invented” the Community. It has long be debunked as false. Monnet’s Memoires even claim he invented the word ‘Community’ on 21 June 1950! False! When did he have this brainwave? The day after he had sat next to Schuman at the opening of the Schuman Plan conference on 20 June when Schuman described exactly how a Community would work.
As for the quote about culture, it is rubbish. The Community was created in 1950 when nuclear war loomed between USSR and the West with Germany playing one off against the other. It was not created to make films.
Davos Ana Botin, Santander x
Nor was it designed to create a uniform European culture as the other panelist, the banker Ana Botín of Santander, seemed to want. If she wants her fellow bankers to understand Europe she should buy them some decent history books. The bankers of Europe could learn about what Schuman called the supranational management system of Europe. That’s what he called it in his speech of 10 August 1950 before the Council of Europe in Strasbourg. Its use in banking, commerce and services would revolutionize the economy!
The quote about “starting again with culture” probably originated with Jack Lang, once a French Minister of Culture. He admitted it. But it certainly did not come from Jean Monnet.
Nor did Jean Monnet have much to do with “creating” the first European Community except distracting the Prime Minister Georges Bidault from Schuman’s activity (which he opposed vehemently). The Schuman Declaration was written by his fellow Lorrainer, Paul Reuter, the deputy Jurisconsult at the French Foreign Office and his watchman there against nationalist and Gaullist plots. He used Monnet’s office and secretarial help. You can read the account on schuman.info or in Reuter’s own words in the book: Robert Schuman, Jalonneur de la Paix Mondiale.
So what did Martin Schulz, the long-serving president of the European Parliament, say about Monnet and starting with culture?
“He (Monnet) was right!” He blamed politicians who came out of closed door meetings of the Council and refused to tell the truth of what had gone on! Secrecy is not democracy!
Next we had the Commission, in the person of Vice-President Frans Timmermans. He faked his own News/ history. Today, he said, “governance is more important. Some of the facts — we’re talking about history — need to be reassessed. No more paternalism. That was Schuman etc. Very paternalistic people. They said we are going to fix Europe but please don’t tell the people how we are going to do it. ”
Whaaat! They created Europe's peace for the first time in 2000 years and Schuman didn't tell the people how he did it? Schuman created the major forums for public opinion to act "like lighthouse" for the new idea of supranational democracy.
What an insult. Who created the Council of Europe with its Assembly to act as a public laboratory for new ideas? Who created the European Parliament? Who created the institution of which Mr Timmermans holds an office (in spite of his party political membership which contradicts his oath of office for impartiality?) Mr Timmermans got into a verbal fight with Prime Minister Rutte. He denounced his party political ideas and theories.
Mr Timmermans, why are you so ignorant about European history? It involved the greatest postwar public debates. Why are you so defamatory of humble, democratic Robert Schuman? Are you confusing him with the autocratic Charles de Gaulle? 

In either case you should have thought before you spoke. Distrust springs from fakes.
Schuman and the treaties say that the Commission should act independently of party, country and profession. He used the term “supranational“. I wonder how many "Commissioners" and "leaders" even know what it means. Why today do so many "democratic" leaders prevent the European Council being held in public like the treaties say?
As multinationals announced they were quitting Britain, UK Prime Minister Theresa May also visited Davos. She praised the institutions that brought peace and prosperity. She said:
“We should never forget… So we must uphold the institutions that enable the nations of the world to work together. And we must continue to promote international co-operation wherever we can.”
Democracy in Europe requires open Councils and elected Consultative Committees. It requires many elections that Europeans have never had in 75 years. Democratic leaders should read article 15 of the Lisbon treaty TFEU which says
“Union institutions, bodies, offices, and agencies shall work as openly as possible. …” It adds the Council shall meet in public like the Parliament.

08 January, 2017

Fake News! EU governments try old "Birthday" scam again!

In its first announcement of 2017, the European Commission has started with quite obvious Fake News. The European Commission Spokesman announced that
This year, 2017, the EU is becoming 60 years old.
He added:
“The European Project is turning 60 this year with Birthday celebrations being scheduled for Rome in March”
Wrong! March will not be the 60th anniversary of the European Union. The EU was formulated by the Treaty of Maastricht 1993.
Wrong Again! The Birthday of the European Project, after the Schuman Declaration of 9 May 1950, was the signing of the Treaty of Paris on 18 April 1951. Schuman read out the Great Charter of the Community that all governments signed.
The documents declared that on 18 April 1951 they were creating a European Community and specifically a European Economic Community. The basis for its governance was supranational democracy.
The first sectors involved in this great European experiment in democracy were coal and steel. The European Community of Coal and Steel began to function in August 1952.
Are all today’s European officials and 28 governments so mathematically challenged?
How does the Commission explain this preoccupation with 1957? The spokesman said:
“First of all we like the Treaty of Rome, because it was the treaty establishing the European Community that preceded the European Union. We like … the Treaty of Rome because it is a milestone that enabled the six signatory Member States to trigger a level of cooperation through common policies that was unprecedented and was not enshrined in law before the Treaty of Rome. So we use the 25 March 1957 as the formal departure, if you like, of this fantastic historical experiment of the European Union.”
He said nothing about supranational democracy and how it works. How should it work?
On 18 April 1951 the six governments initiated the European Community’s five democratic institutions.
The Six also signed what Schuman called the “Charter of the Community”. That title recalls the Magna Carta of British history. It emphasizes its importance.
It describes entry and exit conditions based on supranational Community democracy. (‘Supranational’ also appears for the first time in an international treaty in the ECSC article 9 to describe the High Authority, later called the European Commission.)
A supranational Community was totally new in history. It was neither confederal (like NATO) nor federal like the Federal Republic of Germany or USA. Only one institution was given federal powers and that was controlled by a European Court of Justice and a Consultative Committee composed of equal membership of entrepreneurs, workers and consumers.
The Charter also defines which States can become members of any Community. The States have to be among those whose people ‘are free to choose’. That ruled out the States – the so-called People’s Democratic Republics – of the Soviet Bloc.

They were invited to join. Schuman said that Russia was free to join. The condition meant that the States had to sign up to the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of the Council of Europe.
The State had to guarantee freedom of information, religion and assembly. If any citizen had a complaint against the State he or she could take it freely to the national courts. An appeal could be made to the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
This was a hard pill for governments ruled by a Politburo to swallow. So none of them applied.
The first Community also initiated the Single Market. Single markets for coal, scrap iron and steel were opened across the Community in 1953. This broke nationalistic competition, which in turn led to wars.
With the Single Market came the right of workers to move freely around the Community. The Community budget paid for housing projects in the coal and steel industries, and for retraining of workers when inevitably worn-out mines were closed. Consumers had access to the cheapest coal and steel products. Workers and firms could redeploy. It fulfilled the promise made by Robert Schuman when he explained the Community project on 10 August 1950 in the Council of Europe.

“Its only preoccupation must be the improving of the productivity of the industry and the rising of the standard of living. … In no case will workers’ standards be lowered. This is an absolute rule that we laid down among our basic principles from the first.”

The budget was paid for by a levy on coal and steel products, up to a maximum of one per cent. There was no Court of Auditors. None was needed. The enterprises were very careful about the contributions they had to pay, the workers too watched carefully over their budget for their social requirements. Consumers made sure money was not wasted.
That one percent levy seemed a small price to pay for stable, full employment and increased, cheaper production. Nevertheless, to the surprise of many, the Treaty of Paris, with its duration of fifty years, was not renewed in 2002. Lobbying by steel firms may have something to do with it. There was no referendum in Member States. The matter was decided in the Council of Ministers, its doors still shut from the Gaullist period.
Shortly afterwards, the prices of steel rose sharply. Firms were bought by foreign investors. Many workers were thrown out of work.
In 2016 the EU apparently “forgot” to celebrate the 65th Birthday of European democracy. What is their substitute?
Europe of 1957 was entering the Gaullist Dark Ages for European democracy. It contrasts with the founding democratic principles of Europe’s true Birthday in 1951.
The Charter of the Community was buried by Gaullists in the archives of the French Foreign Ministry. It was again published in 2012 thanks to M. Bernard Cazeneuve, the present French Prime Minister, following a request by the Schuman Project.
Ten years ago EU Governments colluded to spend millions of taxpayers euros to “celebrate”this totally FALSE Birthday! Why? They thought that by spending millions on public relations (that is false propaganda) they could persuade the public to accept the renaming of the Constitutional Treaty (that had been rejected in referendums). They forced it through parliaments without a free vote. They renamed it the Lisbon Treaty.
What is the result of this shameful Machiavellian scam? Brexit! Loss of trust of both the governments and the central institutions of the EU. Massive crises of legitimacy from Greece to Finland. European Council President Donald Tusk feared the worst
“As a historian,’ Mr Tusk told the German newspaper Bild, ‘I fear Brexit could be the beginning of the destruction of not only the EU but also Western political civilisation in its entirety.”
Deceit and secrecy have their consequences. Will the European Commission maintain its ‘Fake News’ and its mathematically challenged “Birthday” to March this year? Or will we have politically effective and scientifically correct democracy?

02 January, 2017

Europe's interest when Trump clears the Washington Swamp

Image may contain: one or more people and closeup  
Why did President Obama expel 35 Russian diplomats from USA? Why did Russian President Putin not react with American expulsions? Why did Washington Post get into a panic about Russian hacking into the Vermont Electricity Utility and then admit it was a fake scare? It was adware on a laptop. Why, before exiting gracefully, has President Obama been bringing in a record-shattering 97,000 pages of rules and regulations, some which will restrict press freedom?
The short answer is fog and smoke. Let me explain.

This is not just a simple matter of espionage. It is not about Russian manipulation of the US elections to “force” Donald Trump on a reluctant American electorate. Nor is it just outgoing Obama being nasty to in-coming Trump.
In a democracy all the electorate is free to vote for whomsoever it wants. That is based on information.The crux of democracy is openness and transparency. If there is an attack on democracy itself, then bipartisan or multi-partisan action is required. Not here apparently.
If some Democratic party scandals are spilled by anyone, that does not make the election result invalid. A better informed electorate is what all Democrats should applaud. After all Democrats tried their hardest to paint the dirt on Mr Trump’s past. At the heart of the complaints of the Democrats are the leaking of emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and its chairman John Podesta. These are seen as explosive as Hillary Clinton’s normally highly illegal, non-secured server, plus 650,000 more emails involving Huma Abedin, her Saudi-educated assistant from a prominent Muslim Brotherhood family. She worked also simultaneously for the Clinton Foundation.
According to Julian Assange of Wikileaks, both the Clinton Foundation and also ISIS (Islamic State) received tens of millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
In the email sent on August 17 2014, Hillary Clinton asked Mr Podesta, who at that time worked under president Barack Obama, to help put “pressure” on Qatar and Saudi Arabia regarding the countries’ alleged support for the terrorist group Isis.
“We need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to Isil and other radical Sunni groups in the region,” Ms Clinton wrote.
Who is shocked that the Russians are spying on Americans or Americans spying on Russians? Who is shocked that the USA or Russia might want to be involved in “regime change”?
First two things should be made clear.
Russians are expert in disinformation. In Soviet times the biggest department of the KGB intelligence services was the Disinformation Department. One of their major areas of disinformation, as revealed by the highest level defectors, was to instigate the idea — still paralyzing western society — that a Palestinian (non-Jewish) nation exists and that Yasser Arafat was not an Egyptian-born agent of Nasser, but the leader of the phantom nation fabricated in 1964. Previously Arabs refused to be called Palestinians. That was the name the world called Jews! We presented those facts on several occasions. Repetition of lies is a technique used by the Nazi Goebbels and false religions and ideologies throughout the ages.
Secondly, a foreign intelligence service that reveals some truth and fact could well be doing a western audience a favor. Western governments have been losing public trust, typified by Brexit. They have their own disinformation services — they are generally referred to as public relations campaigns. “Spin” operations by definition do not tell the unvarnished truth.
A disinformation service wants to hide the truth and emphasize what is irrelevant or distracting. That’s why we are hearing a lot about Russians and so little about Saudis and Qataris.
The big issue also revolves around the media. The Obama and Clinton camp accuse a multiplicity of non-mainstream news sources of being ‘Fake News’. But it is many of these independent news sources using diverse proofs that call the big mainstream media organizations the real ‘Fake News ‘ sources. They refuse to discuss the most sensitive and hence newsworthy stories.
The Mainstream Media (MSM) have proved themselves incompetent, willingly out of touch, or acting like Spin-Meisters. They plumbed for Jeb Bush as the obvious Republican nomination. They lampooned the very idea of Donald Trump becoming president. Out of the question, they said. But the non stated spin was ‘He is not part of the set-up or the game we have been playing for decades.’ Those who said ‘Trump is the man,’ were ridiculed. But they were right.
So what is the background? What are the present issues?
Petroleum power, Presidential pretender, Podesta, Psychology pioneer, pedophilia . One can add a couple of Cs for Cartels and corruption.
Many these explosive issues are likely to be exposed during a Trump presidency and with an active Republican Congress. The outcome is, as this column said several years ago, likely to open major crises on both sides of the Atlantic.
Power politics is a dirty game and involves the use of inculpating information from the time of the Kennedy assassination and the Nixon Watergate tapes.
Geopolitics use heavy weapons. War, corruption, blackmail. Moral policy will bring peace but is seldom applied. Fifty years ago this year Saudi Arabia tried oil blackmail — the oil weapon — in order to change the foreign policy of USA and Great Britain. Muslim OPEC States tried the same thing again in 1973 during the Yom Kippur war with Israel — this time against the whole of the European Community. They said Europe would not get a drop of oil unless they became anti-Israel in their foreign policy. That would be called Petro-Jihad.
That should give a clear idea about where the battle lines of global politics are drawn.
Instead of selling oil at a profitable 2 dollars a barrel, Saudi-led OPEC ratcheted up the price by cartel action. It reached 147 dollars, then crashed. It doubled in 2016 and is on the way up again. Each year oil States rip the equivalent of multiple times the EU budget from the European economy. That can be compared to sucking the blood out of a free-market economy.
Then they re-invest the cash profits and “spin” it via media and public relations to further jihadi aims. Saudi and other petro-jihad money finance Wahabi mosques across Europe. It finances chairs of Islamic studies in universities. It finances school text books to teach the younger generations about how to worship like a Muslim, facing towards Mecca. Unbelievers are second or third class citizens. There are no churches in Saudi Arabia, nor Bibles.
How much blackmail money is involved? Since 1973, Saudi Arabia alone must have made profits over production costs worth multiple trillion dollars. OPEC as a whole probably gained around 9 trillion.

Where did this fabulous wealth go? Not all went to building castles in the Saudi sands but much went on armaments to jihadi armies fighting enemies of their religio-political theocratic monopoly. (Secularists like Saddam, Qaddafi and Assad). Billions went on warfare to cut territory for pipelines from the Gulf States through to the Mediterranean Sea. This again means having the Sunni-friendly Al-Qaeda and Islamic State bite off parts of Syria. Russia, whose economy depends on exporting high price gas and oil to Europe made ties with Shi’ia Iran. It held the line for Assad. Iran needs its own pipeline to the Europeans knowing they will pay any price in oil and gas blackmail.
Europe has long been more vulnerable than the USA, which now has its shale gas and oil. Nevertheless the Obama administration’s bias is apparent from the rebuke it got from UK’s PM Theresa May. She objected to the unwarranted condemnation of Israel as being under “extreme elements” in Secretary of State John Kerry’s parting speech. That epithet came because Israel would not instantly agree to a Two State Solution with “Palestinian” elements who have the destruction of Israel as part of their Muslim Brotherhood-based Charter.
While the Middle East goes up in flames, women are raped en masse, slavery becomes part of IS consumerism, Christians are expelled or beheaded if they do not convert, the US seems to be transfixed by a few cabins, houses, garages or homes for Jews. Jews should not live in Judea of all places! Why? The UN originally called it ‘Judea’. ‘Palestine’ is just disinformation.
Let’s turn to Germany. In her new year message, Chancellor Merkel says that the biggest threat to Germany is the threat of Islamist terrorism. The German intelligence services have warned that Jihadi groups in Germany are being funded by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait.
Does that shock us? Apparently it shocks President Obama. He has refused to use the term “Islamic terror”. Son of a Kenyan Muslim, he also had a Muslim step-father in Indonesia. “They (terrorists) have perverted and distorted and tried to claim the mantle of Islam for an excuse for basically barbarism and death,” he said. He says more Muslims are being killed by Muslims than Christians. That is true. They are in full jihad against each other.
Unless Europe takes stern and intelligent action, it should not expect the bloodshed to pass it by. We are living in an unusual period when there has not been major warfare with Islam. Since Islam’s inception in the seventh century, some 270 million lives have been lost by Islamic invasion. They were not national invasions but invasions driven by Islamic ideology to convert or kill.
According to Robert Schuman, founder of the European Community, peace requires tolerance and the patience search for truth. President of Egypt al-Sisi told Egypt’s top clerics and scholars at Cairo’s Al-Azhar university that they must change their {political} ideology and bring the seventh-century religion of Islam up-to-date with realities. The ideology had become ‘hostile to the entire world.‘ He asked:
Is it conceivable that 1.6 billion Muslims would kill the world’s population of 7 billion, so they could live on their own?

Dr Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam has tabulated 548 battles of Islamic armies in Europe or formerly Christian areas.
islamic-battles-1680-1700-x islamic-battles-1260-crusades-end-x

In contrast the Crusades had less than a score of battles in Syria, Israel and Egypt. The dynamic of this process can be seen in the short video Battles with Islam or the longer version.

Now it is abundantly clear why Donald Trump has selected Rex Tillerson, a former oil company executive — who knows how to negotiate without making enemies — as his new Secretary of State. It is also clear why the outgoing Obama administration and the disappointed Clinton supporters are seething for having lost the election.

30 December, 2016

2016 Who celebrated Erasmus's greatest achievement?

  1. Erasmus and how to win a Nobel Prize
Desiderius Eramus. That name should have reverberated throughout the year of 2016. Five hundred years ago, Erasmus published his most important book. It revolutionized the entirety of west European society.
That exploit has much to tell us. It can explain to us
  • how to counter the all-enveloping propaganda and see through the fog of Fake News.
  • It tells us how to get to the truth of the matter as the world’s disinformation machines, Islamic, Chinese, Russian, commercial and ideological, all aimed to deceive.
  • It puts a spring in our step and leads us to the way of true happiness.
  • It shows us the way and the means to outclass those of dull eyes and closed minds.
  • It may even lead many to a Nobel Prize and will certainly increase any student’s chances of getting one.
Today Erasmus is more known as a university exchange programme. More than three million young adults have benefited from Erasmus. His name figures as part of their curriculum vitae. They are students. Some, in their turn, became professors. They are beneficiaries of a university mobility programme where students are able to be taught, not just at one university, but to take up learning across participating colleges and centres of learning in many different countries.
This programme reminds us that universities should be about learning not about indoctrination from a single source. Nor should they be about absorbing the latest faddish theories that, with modern global communications, are pollinated worldwide as if from mushroom spores.
Erasmus was known in his time as a wandering scholar. He was born in Rotterdam, Holland. He worked as a private secretary in Bergen, Brussels and Malines. He studied at the university of Paris. In 1499 he came to Britain, a country he visited four times. He was professor at Cambridge. He obtained his doctorate of theology at Turin. At the time Pope Julius II was brandishing his sword and leading armies against the French, he sought refuge from war in Florence whilst Leonardo da Vinci was there. In Switzerland, fountain of publishing and intellectual freedom, he published many of his works, editions of classics and translations by the great printing house of Froben. In Venice one of the great free printing centres of Europe, Erasmus published some works with the house of Aldus Manutius
To many students today Erasmus represents the freedom to move to another university to learn. In reality Erasmus represents much more. He was one of the handful of men that opened up critical learning and research. That is the basis for Europe’s spectacular rise as a powerful civilization of thought and technology after the “Dark Ages”.
The mobility that students presently enjoy is only a minor part of his legacy. Immobility is a relatively recent phenomenon. British scientists, like Humphry Davy and Michael Faraday, could visit France while the Napoleonic wars raged on the battlefields. The borders of countries were largely closed by two World Wars. Nothing is more isolationist than nationalistic wars where the civilian population is part of the target.
After WW2 the European Community brought in the idea of Erasmus scholarships. The Community had provided the means and the opportunity for a Single Market . The first single markets of 1952 were in coal, iron and steel. Workers could move freely. It was therefore logical that students should gain from this asset.
But what was the greatest achievement of the European Community? What made it all possible? Peace. The European Community brought an end to internal wars in western Europe. How did Robert Schuman come up with the intellectual conclusion about how to do it, integrate the right people and means to bring it about and, above all, have the political courage to devote his whole life to the project?
When around 1903 Robert Schuman had to choose where he would go to study, it was a perplexing choice. He was the son of a patriotic Frenchman who had fought in the siege of Thionville against the Prussian Germans. His mother was a Luxembourger. Robert was born in the Grand Duchy because his father refused to live in German-occupied Lorraine.
After having passed his High School exams with flying colours and determined his destiny, he was faced with the question: Where to go to study? He made an unusual choice. He decided to study at German universities. It required extensive extra studies to pass his entrance examination, the Abitur. The German-speaking states had only been unified by Bismarck in 1871 but the mobility of students to major university towns was still practiced. Schuman studied in Bonn, Munich, Berlin and finally Strasbourg where in 1910 he gained a doctorate cum magna Laude.
Before World War One broke out Schuman was an active agent among intellectuals and statesmen across Europe to prevent a catastrophic world war. He had but a few years for his activities in Germany, Belgium, France and in western Europe. In Berlin at the outbreak of WW1 four eminent scholars (among whom was Albert Einstein) published a “Wake-up Call to Europeans” calling for a supranational Community of scientists, philosophers, industrialists and workers to oppose war.
Schuman’s great achievement was not due to his ability to move from university to university. Nor was it due to the particular brilliance of any one of his teachers, although they were among the most brilliant of this golden age of intellectualism.
His main asset came from Erasmus. We live in an Age of Information. But it neglects Wisdom at its peril.
Peace in Europe owes a great debt still to Erasmus.
(to be continued)

15 December, 2016

Quick Brexit is becoming a fading reality

At the press briefing for the 15 December European Council here in Brussels, a “high European official” revealed how little the EU-27 have measured the widespread consequences of Brexit on their timetable.
Brexit Front Cover 8
The rush, rush attitude of Commission President Juncker, European Council President Tusk, EP president Schulz and as articulated also by Guy Verhofstadt is up for a surprise. The treaty of Lisbon calls for a 2 year negotiation. Guy Verhofstadt MEP and the Commission’s Brexit pointman Michel Barnier say this must realistically be reduced to 15 months to allow for preparation and ratification in all 28 States. All the lose ends have to be wrapped up well before the 2019 elections, they all say.
They don’t want UK to be electing MEPs while it is about to leave the EU under Article 50.
What they haven’t foreseen is clear from the briefing. That is regardless of what happens with the Lisbon E U negotiations, the UK will still be obliged to elect MEPs — not under the Lisbon Treaty but under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, Euratom. (The EU is not the same as the European Community in law!)
The Founding Fathers of Europe were democratic and the Assembly was created by the founding Treaty in 1951. The first was the Coal and Steel Community with an Assembly which required elections by universal suffrage.
There were three Communities. Each treaty had full democracy based on one person one vote. But initially the parliamentarians were delegated by the national parliaments until the politicians provided the single statute for all Europe.

We are still waiting for them to do so.
The institutions of three Communities merged to have a single Parliament which is the present European Parliament. In the Merger Treaty of 1965 they have a single Council and the same Consultative Committees such as the Economic and Social Committee. When MEPs are elected they are elected to be parliamentarians for Euratom and for the EU.
Nuclear matters were responsible to this Assembly and other bodies such as the Consultative Committees which also should be elected. The public is still waiting for elections there too.
The European Union arose from modifying just one of these three Communities, the EEC “Common Market”. This was done by the treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and the failed and rejected Constitutional Treaty whose articles were illegally incorporated as the Lisbon treaty.

Euratom remains a separate body and requires in its articles that States elect parliamentarians.
What does this mean for Britons living on the Continent? What does it mean for Britons in the UK? That has to be worked out.
Have the EU27 or the European Council considered the implications of this treaty? The answer is No. And officials said they won’t even be discussing it on Thursday, 14 December. They will leave it until after the negotiation date is set.
What will they find?
That (1) this Community treaty has a “perpetuity” clause like the EEC used to have before it was changed to the Article 50 of Lisbon.
(2) They will also find that, even if they come up with a legal device to overturn the perpetuity clause (which at the very least will require unanimity first, then treaty change and parliamentary ratification by 28 States) they will be faced with a world of highly complex additional negotiation to deal with. That is the common market of nuclear materials and safeguards that will prevent countries like Iran getting hold of it. It adds a new braking action for the fast Brexiteers.
The EU-27 States estimate that it will take a decade or more to negotiate merely the trade aspects. So says UK's Brussels diplomat, Sir Ivan Rogers. That assumes there will be no legal delays by angry citizens and consumers.
Conclusion: Fast Brexit is looking more like Mission Impossible.