Information is Power 4 – Ambitions for EU Defence in 2020

From the very able Calling England blog: Sometimes I feel as if I don’t exist at all except as a blip or a statistic in someone’s in-tray, to be dealt with when they’ve finished their tea & biscuits.

‘What Ambitions for European Defence in 2020?’

From the foreword:

Let it be stressed again that the distinctiveness of the European Union greatly depends on its sustained preference for soft power instruments, for persuasion rather than force. Deviation from this rule, in particular when confronting non-military, non-security challenges of a ‘societal’ nature, be they social, economic, energy or environment-related, would kill European distinctiveness altogether. Reliance on hard power to meet ‘soft’ challenges – a rough equivalent of ‘disproportionate response’ – would not only be inconsistent with the lessons learnt from the European experience, but a sure recipe for alienating partners and pushing the goal of global governance well out of reach.

This leaked 175-page .pdf was produced by the EU Institute for Security Studies, an EU policy think-tank. It covers long term EU security strategy, including the problems of hierarchical class society, with the elite of the world on one side, and the so-called ‘bottom billion’ on the other.

They describe themselves thus:

In January 2002 the Institute for Security Studies (EUISS) became an autonomous Paris-based agency of the European Union. Following an EU Council Joint Action of 20 July 2001, modified by the Joint Action of 21 December 2006, it is now an integral part of the new structures that will support the further development of the CFSP/ESDP. The Institutes core mission is to provide analysis and recommendations that can be of use and relevance to the formulation of the European security and defence policy. In carrying out that mission, it also acts an an interface between European experts and decision-makers at all levels.

To avoid “global systemic collapse”, the document suggests that the “full spectrum of high intensity combat” be used to protect what is called “globalisers” from “localisers”. Localisers, (making up 80% of the world population) include the “bottom billion”, states in the Middle East and the so-called “Alienated Modern States” like North Korea.

Globalisers include not only members of the OECD and “Rapid Transition Societies” like China and Brazil, but also “Transnational Corporations”—the “Fortune Global 1000”.

The paper discusses “barrier operations shielding the global rich from the tensions and problems of the poor”. “As the ratio of the world population living in misery and frustration will remain massive, the tensions and spillover between their world and that of the rich will continue to grow. As we are unlikely to have solved this problem at its root by 2020 – i.e. by curing dysfunctional societies, we will need to strengthen our barriers. It is a morally distasteful, losing strategy, but will be unavoidable if we cannot solve the problems at their root.”

Excuse me while I pinch myself to see if I’m really here. Two things seem certain in all this: (1) my views, my votes, don’t count, and (2) the past 13yrs of Labour’s authoritarian legislation are merely stepping stones. To Authoritarian Communitarianism.

One commenter said:

There have been people warning about this for decades. But who listened to the ‘conspiracy theorists’?

Somehow (God knows how!), there are millions, even billions, of people still of the opinion that the people who contrive to be our rulers have our best interests at heart, despite the visible evidence!

I forget which anthropologist it was who first described human beings as the ‘story-telling species’. I have an alternative: the ‘gullible species’.

Do we so desperately need someone to look after us, to make decisions for us, to determine our moralities for us, that we will risk enslavement?

How many of us will resist this to an extent that is more than grumbling? I don’t know. As I see the growing compliance of traditionally powerful organisations, like the Press and the Unions, I begin to wonder whether there is anything that can be done.

There is a section of the Global Warming movement that believes the damage is already irreversible and nothing we can do now is going to make a damn bit of difference.

Maybe that is the case with the Globalisation movement. Perhaps it has a momentum that cannot be reversed. I hope not, but even if not, it is pretty clear that something very big and very dramatic has to happen soon to stop it.

Another opined:

Yes, we are statistics. We are parts of “groups”. That’s how collectivists think. The individual is not important. Ergo, they do not value our vote. That is why democracy has being going down the toilet because it is not part of their grande visage.

There is hope in your italicised text – their acknowledge vulnerabilities.

That they believe their goals cannot be achieved by anything but “soft power instruments”, seems to suggest that they need our acquiescence in order to proceed. Legally, they can’t send the European Military to control the masses until the Lisbon Treaty is ratified by all member states.

Given the above, it is all the more imperative that we put our fear of ridicule aside and inform people about what is going on.

My hubby doesn’t believe the NWO exists, even though I’ve shown him videos of the world’s leaders such as Bush, Brown, etc. include the term in their speeches.

He doesn’t believe that our PMs and Presidents are mere puppets of the globalists.

He thinks the government is on his side. He’s otherwise a reasonable person!

My younger son has a Class 1 Physics degree from Cambs and is a deep thinker and a perfectionist. He, too, believes that the government couldn’t possibly be up to something so horrendous as to sell us out. He is but 24.

I’m still working on them and have told them to at least remember what I say, so that when they encounter startling developments which seem to make sense and which fit the pattern of the picture I have outlined, they might have a Eureka moment.

The Authors view:

Thanks v much for all your input – it’s appreciated and makes me, at least, feel a little less crazy.

The Lisbon Treaty is pivotal to their plans so this is a crucial time and the more this document is out in the open the better – and anyone else is welcome to spread it around as well.

“Morally distasteful … but unavoidable” is how they describe the steps they might have to take in order to force compliance so they won’t be afraid to use hard force.

Me? – I shall repeat what I have said so many times before on this blog.

Extreme reform and change that is undertaken without the explicit consent of the people, can only be maintained through force and repression.


About IanPJ

Ian Parker-Joseph, former Leader of the Libertarian Party UK, who currently heads PDPS Internet Hosting and the Personal Deed Poll Services company, has been an IT industry professional for over 20 years, providing Business Consulting, Programme and Project Management, specialising in the recovery of Projects that have failed in a process driven world. Ian’s experience is not limited to the UK, and he has successfully delivered projects in the Middle East, Africa, US, Russia, Poland, France and Germany. Working within different cultures, Ian has occupied high profile roles within multi-nationals such as Nortel and Cable & Wireless. These experiences have given Ian an excellent insight into world events, and the way that they can shape our own national future. His extensive overseas experiences have made him all too aware of how the UK interacts with its near neighbours, its place in the Commonwealth, and how our nation fits into the wider world. He is determined to rebuild many of the friendships and commercial relationships with other nations that have been sadly neglected over the years, and would like to see greater energy and food security in these countries, for the benefit of all. Ian is a vocal advocate of small government, individual freedom, low taxation and a minimum of regulation. Ian believes deeply and passionately in freedom and independence in all areas of life, and is now bringing his professional experiences to bear in the world of politics.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.