The BBC is informing us that Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski "has urged EU governments to contribute to a special fund to maintain the Auschwitz death camp memorial site." The camp, where Nazi Germany murdered more than one million people - most of them Jews - now consists of decaying buildings, mostly in need of repair. Poland wants international support for a €120m foundation to preserve Auschwitz.

View full article here

The only people who feel guilty about the holocaust, or fear its return in some way, are people who still hold the views the motivated it in the first place, so it's only natural they feel implicated in it. The EU's promotion of Palastinianism ("Poor oppressed and displaced people versus racist fanatics - Zionazi's" ) is disturbingly instructive in this regard.



There have been many horrors on the Continent and elsewhere in modern times. Uniquely modern horrors. The Nazi mass-murder of Jews is one of them. The EU is a continuation of the spirit unleashed by the French Revolution, the revolution that inaugrated for the first time that society must be remade anew to eternal concepts discovered in the reaches of the mind (i.e. gnosis). Revolutionists believe that according to the evolving force of "history" (Evolution) sometimes certain social organisations, classes, certain nations, are rendered unfit to exist. For the Nazi's it was Judaism and Slavdom. For the communists the "Kulak", the Ukrainians, the Baltic nations. These were all regarded as impediments to historical "progress" that must be euthanised or else there will never be peace. So it is with the EU. Dozens of nations must be spiritually demolished, enmeshed in the quango cancer state, Islamised, the ruins reconstructed to fit gnostic intellectual principles. An almost mystical conception. They believe if they do not accomplish this there will be war.

Make no mistake, for their hubris, it's likely they will get war.

I thought the Poles would have made enough money out of the parking charges and the gift shop they`ve got at that extermination camp.

Do they really believe it's the EU that's prevented war?

It's increased trade for sure, but also (in no particular order) the Americans, (somewhat) greater education, easier and more affordable travel, much easier communication, the common English language (ha!) and the long term move to less deference. What else?

Except in the Balkans any call to arms to fight a European neighbour would be greeted with derision. So yes, time to move on.

Yes they do, passionately and deeply - a view seriously and sincerely held with religious fervour. It is an article of faith on which the whole project is based.

I always thought that it was the threat of using the ultimate weapon that has kept the peace,along with NATO.

What you think, and what they know, are two different things. You cannot argue against an article of faith.

Dr North said,
"This is the fundamental principle whereby, if we are all so heavily synchronised - "interdependent" is another word - we will no longer have the wherewithal to go to war with each other."

Since WWIII was predicated on Soviet tanks rolling West,who cares if the French can't surrender to the Germans any more?
The main concern is,can Europe defend itself against ant future outside aggression.Secondly,if there was such an aggressor,who would collaborate and who would surrender ?

It is an odd psychology ... which we explore in The Great Deception. The thinking went back to post First World War and "le plan" was there waiting to be put into action. The rise of Nazism prevented its adoption but, post WWII, there came an opportunity. The "colleagues", therefore, were already living in an unreal world, adopting in the 1950s a solution to a post WWI problem, conceived in the 1920s. It was one which then bore no relation to the geopolitical situation with which it had to deal. Thus, in their unreal world, fixed on the problems of the past, they were never going to let the real world interfere ... not then and not now. Thus, under the umbrella of Nato - where the Americans took the strain of dealing with the Cold War and the Soviet threat - the Europeans got on with what they thought far more important and real - the political integration of Europe. It always was a fantasy and remains so to this day.

I find it interesting that at the time the General Affairs Council knocked back the EU commissions request for EU 5 billion the EU is accepting a fundamental change in the status of Galileo. The almost hidden part of this is communications systems. The best way to achieve a complete break from the US, NATO and former cold war alliances is to divorce the EU countries from the US GPS and communications systems.

Soviet Russia, presumably, did all it could to encourage the integration of a centralizing yank-wary super-power?

Yup ... it is the small things that matter. EU member states forces using the equivalent of a "blue force tracker" with completely different electronic architecture and frequency set ... and even a completely different digitisation code, means that you cannot have an integrated network. Communication can only be through upper echelon "nodes" which means the different forces have to have spatial differentiation and cannot occupy the same battlespace. Thereby, different systems not only encourage integration between EU member states, but prevent integration with US forces.

Richard writes:

Those who care would do well to remember that when confronting another (O/T) non-secular problem.

Amazing, Richard. So they have no sense that the world's been changing while they've been in their ivory tower. I forgot TV, by the way, and I should have given blogs and the internet specific mentions.

By the time the Common Market was founded, it had become obsolete. (Exam question!)