 |
| Read the rest of the article by going to http://tinyurl.com/lddtlul Another link carrying it also is http://www.mareeg.com/globalizing-european-security/
Well, I was really starting to suspect that Dr. Solana had decided that he was through with global politics, except in a professorial role. My "google alerts" brought this to my attention within the past 15 minutes of writing this to my readers. It appears to me from this and reading of his current roles in European Security organizations that he may have been carefully biding his time. He is suddenly making strong calls for "global governance" with a rearmed Europe being in a predominant role in his hoped for structures.
Now, I don't know what his motives are. It appears from my current perspective that Catherine Ashton may have been underestimated by those who may have perceived her job as a sinecure. Catherine Ashton has been given much credit for helping to achieve at least an interim international agreement with Iran over its nuclear development. That was a goal that had been elusive to Dr. Solana during his tenure which started with his representation of virtually the rest of the world to Iran which was announced by President George W. Bush on the rather auspicious date of June 6, 2006.
Catherine Ashton, it has been reported, has gone from "zero to hero." When she entered her job, it was not expected by her critics that she would long survive in the position. She retorted to them, "I'm a stayer, not a quitter." This past April Javier Solana was recently on a panel with the Brookings Institution relative to the Iranian nuclear crisis. He had lots of explanations as to why it fell through and expressed pessimism as to the efficacy of future negotiations with the Iranian foreign minister Jalili. Apparently Catherine Ashton had her successes with him and his successor. Many many former Solana aides (e.g. Robert Cooper) and applauders (e.g. the London Financial Times) have decided that now it appears that Catherine Ashton deserves the credit she was formerly and long denied.
I suspected that the "High Representative" position with the very high salary and combined military and foreign policy powers had been created for the benefit of Javier Solana who was expected to be the super-powerful European Union Foreign Minister prior to the referendum failures. Only after Solana announced he would retire and not seek the post did Ireland finally reluctant approve the Treaty. That was in 2009. Now 2014 is nigh and that will be the last year of Catherine Ashton's 5 year term. Does Javier Solana perhaps still want the job that had initially been created for him? Others who have aspired to jobs Mr. Solana wanted eventually went down to relative political obscurity. Witness Tony Blair and Joschka Fischer.
How will all of this sort out? I don't know, but watching it is sure fascinating.
Stay tuned!
CONSTANCE
|
Monday, December 16, 2013
Javier Solana and Global Governance -- Back Again??!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
79 comments:
There has been a big move to bring the Ukraine into the EU, which the govt. has rejected. The people, probably manipulated by the oligarch controlled media, seem to be rioting about this or at least protesting against this refusal to join.
Ukraine is not geographically Europe. This whole effort makes no sense whatsoever, except as a kind of regional imperialism move by Europe, with its corruption (economic, sexual and euthanasia mindedness) probably compatible with the oligarchs who are essentially the Russian mafia's respectable side.
In Russia they get stomped down, in the Ukraine they run the show sort of. Go figure. Apparently they don't run it as much as they might do so, or the Ukraine would have joined the EU.
Re concerns on new Pope -- He just replaced Cardinal Burke with less conservative one on a powerful Vatican committee, per the New York Times today. This is not considered a good sign per conservatives.
Constance
As regards the Nephilim theories -- and that's all they are -- my Bible says "all men are one blood."
The Nephilim theories just don't reconcile with that IMHO.
Constance
Indeed, all men are related to each other all descended from Adam, ergo of one blood. If there is other DNA doped in by ancient transgenics, and there is some slight DNA migration via viruses in nature anyway, that does not change that fact.
A major problem with the nephilim theories is that they sooner or later posit the non savability of anyone with such ancestry. Indicators of its presence vary.
This can only produce despair.
And at least one small group devoted to hunting and killing such has emerged online.
I think it wise to continue to watch Solana. It is his playbook the high representative Ashton is following afterall. I think in the right "crisis" he can make a comeback since he is a still a mover and shaker in all things global and it's best cheerleader bar none. He is a smooth operator, that one, and his influence has only grown since he left that post.
The one to watch is Sarkozy. I told everyone 2 years ago when he lost the election that he was not finished, that he would be back. Everyone scoffed, including any on this blog that commented on him. Well, he's BACK!!!
Christina, your claim Ukraine is not geographically part of Europe is false! Have you heard of the Caucasus mountain range? Half of The Ukraine used to be part of Poland ... So you would rather the Ukrainian people remain trapped under Russia? By the way, go and check the make-up of the Ukranian population and you will find a very large percentage are of Russian descent ... you'll be very hard pressed to find anyone of
Ukranian origin wanting to remain under the yoke of Russia. Your ignorance is exhausting! So you want to find Mystery Babylon? Then take a much closer look at home: The United States of Abominations!
An Obama-Nation indeed! Run by Obama Sin Laden himself!
Constance,
Do you have a reference for that "All men are one blood verse".?
Doreen
Doreen,
I suspect Constance is referring to Paul's sermon on Mars Hill in Acts 17, in which he explains their "unknown god":
24 “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. 25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. 26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. 27 God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. 28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’[a] As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’[b]
[a] Acts 17:28 From the Cretan philosopher Epimenides
[b] Acts 17:28 From the Cilician Stoic philosopher Aratus
I should add that the KJV/NKJV adds "blood" in verse 26:
And He has made from one blood every nation of men
Some Greek manuscripts read more literally see NASB and ESV) "And He made from one every nation of men...", though the text underlying the KJV/NKJV adds "blood" after "one". Hence, a more direct, literal translation is
And He made from one [blood - added in KJV/NKJV] every nation of men...
Most textual critics are of the belief that "blood" was added later by a copyist (specific to one geographic locale), though some believe that "blood" was omitted by these other manuscripts.
anon 5:42 thank you for making my point for me.
"Europe is generally divided from Asia by the watershed divides of the Ural and Caucasus Mountains, the Ural River, the Caspian and Black Seas, and the waterways connecting the Black and Aegean Seas.[2]" cites Nat. Geo. Atlas of the World 1999. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe
The wikipedia article on Eurasia incl. both landmasses, "The division between Europe and Asia as two different continents is a historical and cultural construct, with no clear physical separation between them;" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasia
"According to a popular and well established theory, the medieval state of Kievan Rus was established by the Varangians in the 9th century as the first historically recorded East Slavic state. It emerged as a powerful nation in the Middle Ages but disintegrated in the 12th century. By the middle of the 14th century, present Ukrainian territories were under the rule of three external powers: the Golden Horde, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and the Kingdom of Poland, during the 15th century these lands came under the rule of the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland, Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth (since 1569), and Crimean Khanate.[11] After the Partitions of Poland (1772–1795) and conquest of Crimean Khanate, Ukraine was divided between Russia and Austria, thus the largest part of Ukraine was integrated into the Russian Empire, with the rest under Austrian (known as Austro-Hungarian since 1849) control."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine
"Part of Poland" of course means under Polish rule. the part in Austro-Hungary was under Austro-Hungarian.
Now, the way this definition of Europe goes, you could have the EU logically trying to get Russia itself into its membership.
Meanwhile, the Carpathian Mountains divides the Ukraine now from the rest of Europe, and also present are countries that though called "European" might more accurately be called "Eurasian,"
in the sense the term is used about human genetics, a cross between white and oriental But "Eurasia" is geographically used to mean all of Europe and all of Asia, which is probably back of the ridiculous attempts of Turkey to join the EU. That and slow conquest by building up immigrant population that is technically muslim, till the proportion is such that Shariah can be established. Bit by bit.
As I said before, the oligarchs of the Ukraine run the media, and the media generally runs the people who listen to it.
Russian Federation is not Stalinist USSR.
Yes, I agree that USA is either Babylon the Great or working at becoming it, or so fitting that role at the moment that it is likely to receive judgement on it as a Babylon precursor.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/09/where-is-europe/?_r=0
article on definition of "Europe" is instructive here.
"Russian Federation is not Stalinist USSR" .... again your ignorance is only outdone by your arrogance Christine! Who, I ask do you think the last head of the KGB (before it was renamed as the FSB) was? The Hegelian dialectic at the micro and macro level is at work there. The Devil and his minions have no softened at let go of Russia. If you think so, the folks overshadowed by the newly placed missiles at Koenigsberg would sorely disagree with you! You think by googling a few sites with keywords of your liking means you understand the spirit of the pages you draw from? How blind and insular you are! Would you prefer I tell you so in German, French, Italian or Spanish? A little learning is a perilous pasttime, Christinne! You are as clueless about human and physical geography as you are about the hard sciences or the other stuff you no doubt merely google, swallow and then vomit here on Constance's blog. If you think I have proven your point for you then you are even more deluded than was first apparent. Why not stick to what you know and post accordingly? In so doing you will learn something of humility, self-control, and no doubt will manage to honour Constance's kind request that you post no more than once daily on her blog!
"Russian Federation is not Stalinist USSR" .... again your ignorance is only outdone by your arrogance Christine! Who, I ask do you think the last head of the KGB (before it was renamed as the FSB) was? The Hegelian dialectic at the micro and macro level is at work there. The Devil and his minions have no softened at let go of Russia. If you think so, the folks overshadowed by the newly placed missiles at Koenigsberg would sorely disagree with you! You think by googling a few sites with keywords of your liking means you understand the spirit of the pages you draw from? How blind and insular you are! Would you prefer I tell you so in German, French, Italian or Spanish? A little learning is a perilous pasttime, Christinne! You are as clueless about human and physical geography as you are about the hard sciences or the other stuff you no doubt merely google, swallow and then vomit here on Constance's blog. If you think I have proven your point for you then you are even more deluded than was first apparent. Why not stick to what you know and post accordingly? In so doing you will learn something of humility, self-control, and no doubt will manage to honour Constance's kind request that you post no more than once daily on her blog!
Dead on 9:21. She still wants to overwhelm this blog with %&$@)*!$. That's all she's got. A whole lot of nothin' useful, just taking up space.
"It would be irresponsible to treat December’s Council meeting as just another summit. Europe and an increasingly unstable world need a viable framework for global security. A fully developed CSDP – itself the cornerstone of further European integration – must be a fundamental component of such a system."
Read more at http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/javier-solana-argues-that-the-eu-s-common-defense-and-security-policy-should-play-a-key-role-in-ensuring-global-stability#w4ywhhyZJtSBBHZr.99
Very much still involved at the core for getting his vision realized.
anon 9:21, It it your ignorance and arrogance, not to mention vomit, I have been following the situation in Russia for years.
I merely googled to give you quick info backing up my statements.
Ukraine is not being offered full membership anyway more like neo colonial stuff.
Russian people were happier with strong leadership, and resented its loss when CP fell, so started agitating for communism's return. Putin gives them this strong leadership without communism.
Christine
ancient transgenics ?
doped in ?
Paul, okay, at the risk of being challenged on posting more than once a day again, I will answer this.
the concept here is that pre Flood civilization was, at least among the ruling elements, high tech. At least regarding the things that promoted power, glory, etc. all sins of pride and of course violence and dominance. By this time probably nationalist competition fairly vicious, as well as individual viciousness. and totally amoral. In other words, a modern world.
transgenics is when DNA from species A is doped into the chromosomes of species B to have some effect. A classic example are the goats, whose milk contains spider silk proteins, that can be processed out of the milk to make spider silk in quantities greater than spiders easily give, which has various uses.
The nephilim as hybrid theory is normally referring to the idea, that the children the women bore to the fallen angels, were in fact human angel hybrids.
But considering the increase in knowledge hinted at in Genesis, and detailed in the Book of Enoch (which most nephilim theorists rely on more than on Genesis, plus throw in concepts of bloodline concerns and pollution to prevent the coming of The Messiah, which is NOWHERE indicated at all in Genesis or Enoch), it is more likely that these women were the ones who produced children by means of the technology that the fallen angels helped mankind develop. The angels then would have been putative fathers not genetic fathers.
In nature, DNA wanders cross species without going through mating (where a sharp species or at least genera barrier stops this, resulting in nothing or else sterile hybrids) bypassing this by going directly to the chromosomes.
This happens by means of viruses.
This is what the recombinant DNA scientists today learned and borrowed to develop Genetically Modified Organisms, but they are taking it a lot farther and develop genes that will produce insecticides and herbicides.
When we eat GMO crops we are eating Roundup herbicide and other poisons with it, because these PRODUCE these chemicals now.
Back to ancient transgenics, the goal would be to make something of use to the military, or to some power grab game by some individual.
I suspect that the arms race so to speak, evident in the development of fearsome size and teeth and claws in the fossil record, was more than helped along. Consider t-rex as a war machine. Not a machine in the technical sense but in the effective or practical sense of application as this.
I go into this more in A POSSIBLE HISTORY OF LIFE ON MARS, where I argue that all intelligent life, possibly all animal life, started on Earth, and went offworld.
This blog post doesn't give space enough to defend this. And the attempt would draw more fire cluttering up the blog.
Christine, I asked for the once per day limit because other people feel overwhelmed by your volume, the time to read same, and then feel as though the site is too crowded for their postings. I would suggest one per day and then if you have more to say, give them a link to your blog where they can read an "AMPLIFIED VERSION"
Christine, it is not true that transgenic plants produce herbicides (such as RoundUp). Rather, transgenic plants have been engineered to tolerate herbicides such as RoundUp that normal plants can't tolerate, so that RoundUp can be used to drench fields and the weeds (which are natural plants) die, whereas the crops (which are transgenic) survive. I do think that we are asking for trouble with such practices but it is not the case that RoundUp is contained in the plants and is therefore ingested when we eat them. Good washing prevents that.
"pre Flood civilization was, at least among the ruling elements, high tech"
Not the slightest evidence exists for anything hi-tech among the archeological traces. This claim is based on inference by elimination - ie, ie what other than hi-tech could account for the face on Mars, the lines in the desert, etc etc? That is a dangerous game to play because it supposes that all of the other possibilities have been exhausted, but you never know what people will think up. The face on Mars looks like nothing of the sort once the magnification is turned up, for instance.
'At the risk of being challenged at more than once a day again'. .. What insolence! You have already vomited many times today Cursetine. You think you know something of Russia and Russians? Chto der'mo vy govorit, babushka! Your ignorance is vast traversed only by your arrogance as evidenced by your trail of seemedly endless vomit! Ignoramus, num de cane vomitum.
Anon 4:46,
Thanks for correcting Christine's post, as I did not have the energy to do so. When I skimmed through her comment I did a triple-take as I read that particular section. GMOs are immune to all our insecticidal battering, but they do not actually produce insecticides.
The blog just got a Christmas present from Constance!
This kind of says it all in Christine's 10:53 post (and how glad we are that Constance stepped in)
"I merely googled"...
There is a vast difference between mere info and actual knowledge(and the wisdom to rightly apply it.
Give it up with Solana, PLEASE!! He is nothing, he is a has been, he is old news!! And NO! He is not pulling the strings on anything. He is just a tool that Satan has used, and certain people still show him respect because of his prior experience and position. THAT'S ALL!!
I have been away from this blog for sometime, and upon returning I see things are still the same. The way some of you treat Christina is shameful and you should be embarrassed. I do not agree with everything she says, but I've not seen her become as nasty as some of you unless she is insulted or provoked for her opinions.
Christina- as I've said, I don't agree with everything you post, but I do not mind differing viewpoints and I think you should continue on, because differing viewpoints are what actually stimulates ideas and conversation.
Anon at 5:23 PM, is that you Christine?
It would not surprise me ... as your impertinence knows no bounds!
@ 5:31 PM, not only are you in the minority (perhaps of one?) but you go against the kind requests and long patience of Constance whose blog it is. I suggest you support Christine on her very own blog and save your sactimonious breath for there.
Craig, anon $:46 did not "correct" me only show his vast ignorance. Very little exists of old times, even post Flood. Archaeologists know this, also that vast areas have not even been touched yet that MIGHT contain ruins, and as everyone but the mainstream ignoranti knows, most tech traces would be lost and decay or be cannibalized to make tools, while stone remains.
Also, almost all pre Flood cities would be buried under tons of silt and whatever besides being scattered and not intact.
http://www.ancient-wisdom.co.uk/suppressedarcheology.htm
http://s8int.com/
these two are a couple of real eye openers.
Gobekli Tepe is a case in point, a recent find with no precedent and a big puzzle it seems to have been deliberately buried in sand. Or so it is thought by "scholars" and "archaeologists" without a biblical bias.
A more likely reason for the sand burial is that it is pre Flood, and the sand was dumped throughout it by The Flood.
anon 5:33 NO THAT IS NOT ME, but it does reflect my attitude about Solana from day one, though I was too nice to say so. Solana is important as a study because it shows how fringe cult nonsense can in fact be part of mainstream leader mentality and an influence on him.
The only reason Solana matters to prophecy speculation is because of the error of assuming that a ten nation Roman revival is needed, but even if that is so, it need not be in Europe since the Roman empire included large stretches of Asia and Africa.
At this point, I am beginning to find otherwise irrelevant EU politics interesting, because of their involvements with our elites and their imperialistic plans, operating via NATO.
anon 5:31, thank you for your kind words and I would welcome you and others at my blog, but I think there are people here, lurkers likely who don't post, that might benefit from some of your research and opinions.
What a rude and shameless creature you are Christine! I refer you to Constance's post at 4:42 PM, where she kindly reiterates her plea that you post no more than once a day.
Absolutely right, 5:14 PM!
Constance, several posts of mine over the past two or three blog entries have been in response to specific questions. I have tried to keep them shorter. I should have left my last set of remarks for tomorrow, that is true. sorry.
Anon 5:23 and 5:31 are one and the same, and they are not Christina.
Christina- you see, the problem is this, if you heaped constant praise upon the blog owner and conformed to the views of all the fans (groupies), then you could post as many times as you like in one day.
7:20 P M.
How true!
If you're not a member of this quasi religious cult, you are going to receive ridicule.
Hello again Christine (supposed anons 7:20 PM & 9:44 PM) ?
well, its past midnight, here's my post for the day. (in CA my posts don't show as PST.)
I have no criticism for the blog owner by and large. the quasi religious cult seems to exist independently of her among some here.
I am not the one posting as anon.
now, on the previous blog comments, someone asked me a question which is VERY IMPORTANT, and I answered there but to be sure it is read (and some people here undoubtedly need to read it) I am going to repeat it here.
"Anonymous said...
"they were also REQUIRED to give the third year's tithe to the poor, and they were REQUIRED to make a public accounting showing they had in fact done so."
Interesting, where's that please?
12:58 PM"
Deut. 14:28, 29 Also Deut. 26:12-15, where a formal reporting of having accomplished these orders is described also.
http://davidagrant.blogspot.com/2008/09/malachi-3.html
discusses the general ignorance about and lack of teaching about this tithe for the poor.
Not sure how the verse in Acts really applies to the subject at hand. Maybe Constance is talking about another verse?
Doreen
I am agreeing with the poster who says people are unjustifiably unkind and disrespectful to Christine. For those doing it thinking it is Christian behavor, it is not.
I also believe that Christine should encapsulate and limit her posts to one per day for the sake of balance on this blogspot board.
Constance
Hello Constance,
It occurs to me that perhaps Mr. Solana is our new "Henry Kissinger".
He seems like one of the few whose feet never touch the ground.
Thanks
Just a quick note as I'm short on time.....
Catherine Ashton "got her legs" when she was an administrator for the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament in the 80s. As part of the European Peace Movement and the originators of the peace symbol, CND has had New Age sentiments from it's beginning. At the same time, they were considered a front group for the KGB, especially during the Nuclear Freeze movement of the early 80s which was primarily active in Western Europe, in which groups like CND were actively supported, financed and organized by KGB agents as part of the Soviet Union's "active measures" against the West.
Now that Russian missiles have been placed on Europe's doorstep, I wonder how much noise Ms. Ashton will make. I'm guessing not much. What hypocrisy. Perhaps she is still working in an anti-Western, pro-Russian mode.
I am waiting for (and so far not seeing) this so-called rearmament of Europe. Even if undertaken, it is a matter of too little, too late. In the time it would take Europe to rearm, Russia and others will have had the time to prepare an invasion force and do what it has always wanted to do - invade Western Europe (probably along a southern route) and rule the entire land mass from the Pacific to the Atlantic.
It will probably never happen, but it doesn't mean they won't try.
I agree though... interesting to watch.
------------
Quick note on Ukraine:
In my readings, I seem to remember that part of Ukraine (Northwest?) is culturally closer to Russia than the rest, and would consider becoming part of the Russian empire once again. The rest is very anti-Russian. This division is a cultural (and racial?) one that goes back quite a ways, if I remember correctly.
Constance Cumbey said...
" I am agreeing with the poster who says people are unjustifiably unkind and disrespectful to Christine. For those doing it thinking it is Christian behavior, it is not.
I also believe that Christine should encapsulate and limit her posts to one per day for the sake of balance on this blogspot board.
Constance 10:51 AM"
-----------
With all due respect, Constance, I do not agree with your sympathy for Christine. It doesn't help her to be encouraged. There are apparently a few of us online who which to exchange with you, and not Christine. She has been way out of line.
It is very Christian to call out insanity for what it is. Nobody every condemned her to doom. A few of us did use foul language, for which there is no excuse. We could do better. We all can, and we all have the freedom to go elsewhere.
Christine acts like one of the eddys that pool around one's feet when looking to see what is at the bottom of things. There is nothing Christian about suffering fools. I am sure that she will be back when you are not looking. Just watch. She has done it before.
There are a number of people who respect you for your convictions and making a stand for Christ. I can only speak for myself, and will just say that it is a shame that the world has become indulgent of the those who want to get in the way of a real conversation, wittingly or not.
If this is a problem, I am glad to withdraw from this blog. I obviously don't respect it enough to even put my name. I guess I am a coward, but there isn't time left to pretend anymore.
Cannot Have It Both Ways
Constance,
I am not one of those who attacks Christine's personality, although I have vigorously attacked her words when I consider that she is in error, which is unhappily often.
Although I agree with you that such personal attacks are out of order, I think that you would do well to consider why people make them. We long for you, as the owner of this blog, to restore it to its former quality by enforcing some kind of restriction on Christine Erikson's posts. She has wantonly ignored your polite requests and it is clear nothing other than enforcement will reduce the torrent of low-quality, unordered and irrelevant material with which she floods this blog - even though she has her own.
Anon
Marko, NATO still exists and any attempt by Russia to invade Western Europe will trigger a nuclear response if conventional warfare fails to deter. In Britain CND used to spout "better red than dead" while blithely ignoring the fact that Britain was neither at the time. CND tacitly assumed that the West would blink first. But we didn't (no thanks to Cathy Ashton, who was CND's Treasurer and did she know where the money came from?) The Reds blinked.
It is the eastern part of the Ukraine that is pro-Russia, as it is adjacent to Russia while the western part of Ukraine is adjacent to Poland.
Being anonymous is not synonymous with cowardice. Some are here not even trying to get a following, or any type of notice, just want a place to come to exchange actual knowledge or good questions that pertain or coincide to the actual postings of Constance herself (and that is not too much to ask among respectful people) but not the case around here, because hardly a day goes by without all the hullabaloo of Christine's antics of distraction and bulldogging to "educate" us the ignorant masses in her mind and approach, and pretty much all we get are from her is mostly half true posts. Half truth is more dangerous than outright lies because of it's ability to tie real issues into a knot.
If ever we needed clarity, it is now.
Christine can easily make short statements and then refer the truly interested in her opinions (the one or two them)to her own blog. That was the suggestion by Constance and we have been waiting for a real respect for everyone on Christine's part to honor that. So it's a good thing I'm not holding my breath. It is Christine's behavior, not her person, that is taking some heat and rightfully so.Some people refuse good manners in person and in their communications. As one of the frustrated among a few others, I have fallen down in that, and plan to rectify, as to be more careful with my own words.
This is still a good place to come to know of what all of Constance's work and warnings are proving so true in the world today. But truly, Christine, please consider what has been offered here as a olive branch for making this blog a more civil and useful place as it is intended to be. Thank you.
All we need now is the cheese.
Anon 2:26....
Thanks for the input and correction. I was picturing northeast Ukraine in my mind, but typed northwest.
Is it safe to say that of all the former Soviet states, a minority of them are truly anti-Russian? Say, Poland, the Baltic states, the Czech Republic, and Georgia? (And half of Ukraine, as you stated.)
Appreciate all the good comments and advice and hopefully Christine will limit herself to useful nuggets and avoid rambling. It takes more time to encapsulate than to do streams of consciousness.
Constance
Something interesting I just found:
"http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-19/eu-shops-for-drones-warplane-fuel-as-u-k-opposes-joint-army.html.
or
http://tinyurl.com/mbtcg8z
So, the EU is now shopping for DRONES. I don't like the USA having them, I don't like the EU having them -- I just plain don't like drones unless it was for something like weather watching or hurricane studies and I'm not sure of that even!
Constance
EU mission creep = EU firepower = EU will eventually collide with UN to rule Eurasia and North Africa and the Middle East or at least the Levant.
(Someone else saw this coming I forget who before this mission creep, noted inherent competition between EU and UN for Europe.)
"noted inherent competition between EU and UN for Europe."
Given that EU stands for European Union... EU is actually pro-UN, far too pro.
The real battle for Europe is between secular humanism and rising Islam. Europe is committing suicide by letting in large numbers of Muslims.
Dear Constance,
Re: I don't like the USA having them, I don't like the EU having them -- I just plain don't like drones unless it was for something like weather watching or hurricane studies and I'm not sure of that even!
Someday, Amazon may have "delivery drones!"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/01/amazon-prime-air-delivery-drones_n_4369685.html
http://www.foundationsforfreedom.net/References/OT/Pentateuch/Deuteronomy/Deut26-12-15_Kind.html
Just going on the air in a minute or two -- open lines today by calling in toll free to
888-747-1968
Tell me what's on your mind!
Thanks
website is
www.themicroeffect.com
or
chatroom.themicroeffect.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gOJEQBiJIo
I am suspicious that Ashton has followed Solanas lead and that Solana is allowing others to take his credit. It has been said there is nothing that one cannot achieve if they are willing to allow others to get the credit or glory.In the meantime Solana has been kept hidden until the time when just possibly he will be revealed. In 2009 even in the Jordanian press there were rumblings about Solana as the antichrist. He was becoming too well known for his success and Biblical possibilities. Remember the Michigan Hutteree Militia were acquitted of the charges against them and there concern about Solana made fun of. It is still possible for someone else to make a treaty or even a seven year treaty that he Solana breaks and stops sacrifice or some-other such unpredictable possibility. The standard scenario as envisioned by Herb Peters is failed but until Solana is gone from the scene he remains the best antichrist figure in the History of the world and he is still alive in a day when Israel might just start sacrifices.In the meantime those who watched Solana in 2009 are scattered and inattentive on the whole.
Suicides now outnumber car deaths according to New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/03/health/suicide-rate-rises-sharply-in-us.html?_r=1&
military pension cuts just the beginning
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gOJEQBiJIo
if you really want to understand what's been going on in this country
http://www.amazon.com/Presidential-Puppetry-Obama-Romney-Masters-ebook/dp/B00DRQEE7O/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1387743406&sr=1-1&keywords=presidential+puppetry
Presidential Puppetry: Obama, Romney and Their Masters by Andrew Krieg
Hereś Javierś blog:
http://javiersolana.esadeblogs.com/
I would not be in the slightest surprised if Obama and Romney are puppets of shadowy others, but if that book talks about 'unnecessary austerity measures' imposed by 'them' then it is economically illiterate. The USA is living beyond its means or, as economists put it, government is spending more than it takes in. Nobody can do that without consequence although because, unlike you or me, the government can print money, it need not run out of money as an individual would. Printing money devalues existing money - ie it's a tax on prudent savers, the people who made America great. America is currently exporting its debt and its pain, but a great bank of dollars is accumulating in China and someday the Chinese are going to turn up with it and essentially buy the USA. The alternative is to inflate that debt away, but that inflates savings away too and profoundly demoralises.
Nobody wants to vote for prudent economic management any more, which would mean government austerity (not the same as personal austerity, unless you are sucking from the government ie taxpayer's teat) and absolutely no fall in taxes until the debt was under control.
as matter of fact, govt. austerity programs WILL impact the productive workers and taxpayers. To explain how I would have to hog the blog so I won't just look closer.
Yes of course government austerity programs have effects on all, if only indirectly, but if government is overspending then the overall effect, when you weigh up the plusses and minusses, is positive for the nation. The usual mistake - made in bad faith by politicians and good faith by people who do not understand economics properly - is to look at only some of the plusses and/or minusses.
that book hasn't dealt with this so far, and I am half way through it. it is about much more serious issues, like corruption as normative and endemic, for generations of American politics in high office, and material VERY relevant here and there to those who are worried about one worlder trends.
I would like to take this opportunity to wish Constance and everyone who posts here a very Merry and Blessed Christmas and a Happy, Healthy, Holy New Year.
Susanna
It's relevant info, because if THEY are imposing austerity then they are doing the right thing, not the wrong one (although if they are Keynesians then they might think they are doing the wrong thing deliberately...)
But actually the government austerity measures currently going on are negligible compared to what needs to be done. It is obvious that they are window dressing that will take in only the gullible.
anon 4:36 pm, you think the only austerity needed is to kick the needy off welfare. but right now a farm bill is being worked on, which would cut subsidies to grain and meat farmers. Guess what? YOUR food will cost more.
How about austerity for those corporations who get all kinds of breaks and subsidies and so forth? how about cutting the fat from the military budget with provisos that this be cut from specific unnecessary pork barrel things and NOT from the food rations and so forth (which reportedly are being impacted).
How about a 1% tax on Wall Street, re-illegalize the derivatives market, use that tax to pay off the debt, then get rid of the "Federal" Reserve and restore to Congress the job of minting money and defining its value like the Constitution says, issue currency that is debt free?
guess what. Two presidents started to do the latter part. Lincoln and Kennedy. Note what happened to them.
you yourself are indirectly sucking off the taxpayers, because of govt. subsidies and kickbacks and whatnot involving big business that make things you rely on, and the food you eat expensive as it is, it could become far more expensive.
Now, that is all I am going to say until tomorrow. But that book is cheaper than mine and more relevant to the issues.
And though I don't know if it gets into the one world govt. conspiracy, the people it discusses ARE A BIG PART OF THAT CONSPIRACY and have run this country for generations.
Christine, you are making assumptions - about what I believe austerity means - which are wrong. You suppose I mean welfare. I do. But I also mean defense, and farm subsidies. Yeah, my food might cost a bit more, but I won't have to pay the tax that goes toward the subsidy. See what I mean about joined-up thinking being needed in economics?
Get rid of the Fed? Great idea, it's a pleasure to agree with you there. Interest rates should be set in the markets, not by bankers to enrich their cronies inc politicians in cahoots. And let's put the dollar back onto gold so that it's worth something more than the word of politicians. But the 1% tax on bankers is a bad idea - it'll just get recycled.
Hey Christine,
Just checkin' in to say hey.
Thanks for jamming the beeswax out of this
blog with your incessant JAMMING.
As if you're not just jamming. In perfect
rhythm with Constance work schedule,
combined with the fact that she speed-reads
all this junk in reverse chronology as if you didn't know that.
Merry Christmas to all.
Wearin' my hip waders,
paul
Greetings from o'er the Pond: 'Merry Christmas to you
too
Paul
Susanna
and
all!
Anonymous Postman.
anon 5:35, " Yeah, my food might cost a bit more, but I won't have to pay the tax that goes toward the subsidy. See what I mean about joined-up thinking being needed in economics?"
Your so called joined up thinking is running on wrong assumptions.
YOU WILL STILL BE PAYING THE TAXES YOU ALWAYS PAY, they just won't be going in the same directions. subsidy removal is not about tax lowering. No connection whatsoever if not specified. you don't pay a single subsidy tax you pay TAX and it is distributed one way or another, that's all.
If you are making under that limit below which your taxes will be less thanks to Obama, if that part of his plan went through, that won't be because of subsidy reduction.
the 1% tax is NOT ON BANKERS, it would be on Stock Market transactions over a certain minimum. The term "Wall Street" never refers to bankers but to the stock market and its brokers.
Christine, you miss the point. That's easy to do in economics. If farmers cease to be subsidised then the money is available to be returned to the taxpayer. Whether it is, or whether it is wasted on some other special-interest scheme, or whether it goes to pay off government debt, is - obviously - a different issue. You say (in CAPITAL LETTERS, which makes it more true) that I "will still be paying the taxes [I} always pay". Nonsense. Taxes rise and fall with governments (although most often they rise).
That 1% tax is advocated to go to 3rd World dictators or the UN; don't think that the American people would get any benefit out of it.
SHE NEVER STOPS! I had hoped she'd finally stopped her incessant posts of streams of consciousness.
I totally agree with you Paul, Christine
has knocked the beeswax out of this
blog!
anon 4:32 caps are emphasis to get your attention so you don't miss it.
you admitted in your last post there is no automatic change in your taxes, so why bother make the last post?
you or whoever anon if you are not the same one SAID that you won't have to pay the taxes for the subsidy.
But it doesn't come out of a special tax.
It comes out of the whole body of collected taxes. So your argument for letting food prices rise for the poor fails.
Get back to the Bible NOT what someone says it says or deduces from a few verses out of context then applies crazy libertarian stuff (which appeals in its system to the sin of pride anyway).
Read what it SAYS.
1. nothing belongs to us. it is on loan from God. what He loaned to you is not to be taken by force or fraud by me, HOWEVER, a part of what you produce out of what He loaned you IS to be used to help the poor, not voluntarily but obedience to His laws, which are not the ritual holy day circumcision food laws which Paul says are rescinded, but those issues which Paul and Peter and John and James reiterate.
God when acting as King as well as deity decreed required, MANDATORY taking care of the poor. NOT VOLUNTARY as per your choice, but MANDATORY. Not just your choice.
Mandatory.
James spends a lot of time denouncing those who do no good when they can.
2. God created govt. to promote good and stifle evil. That it doesn't do so invariably even in the laws it has doesn't change the purpose.
govt. subsidy of the poor way predates "socialist" schemes of any kind. ditto govt. intervention. "welfare" is just a more systematized thing and excellent since the poor and the rich and the inbetween don't always live next to each other like in tribal days.
The CONSTITUTION in the Article and Clause about how tax moneys are to be used, incl. "the general welfare," that is not just in the preamble.
The money paid for the poor could be paid more adequately and less on overhead, yes. But that is NOT what is bankrupting the country.
3. the poor are not supposed to pay tithe btw.
The average person "sucking off the govt. teat" is not some scumbag but someone who is looking for work or partly crippled by health issues and can't find any.
That is, the ones sucking off the welfare teat.
The ones you need to worry about are the wealthy and their games and the military contractors and their overpricing games. THAT is what is causing the problem!
Raising food prices won't automatically result in less tax so more money for your to pay for food.
Merry Christmas, Scrooge.
Christine, you don't understand economics, you just think you do, exactly like with physics and archeology which you vainly think you understand better than physicists and archeologists. As for getting back to the Bible... yes it is my ultimate guidebook too but it is not an economics primer just as it is not a physics or archeology textbook.
"anon 4:32 caps are emphasis to get your attention so you don't miss it."
Sorry i've not even lerned to doo joined up riting yet.
"Merry Christmas, Scrooge."
The trouble with your view is that sooner or later you run out of other people's money.
Trampling on Constance's one-post-per-day request again?
"The trouble with your view is that sooner or later you run out of other people's money."
tell that to the military contractors and other such people. THEY are the ones draining the cash box.
God didn't take that view in what He ordered people to do, and once you have a more complex and populous society, what govt. in its Romans 12 role would naturally get involved with.
Yes, The Bible IS a textbook for archaeology, and the whole archaeology in the Middle East thing got going BECAUSE of The Bible and interest in digging up what it talked about.
check out http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ancient_chronology
for some eyeopening discussions on how archaeologists wildly disagree. numerous links in posts and files to scholarly sources.
Christine, if you want to see Scrooge, the Marley brothers and the wicked witch of the West all rolled into one then take a long hard look in the mirror (once you've got the dust off it) if you can unclamp your spindleys from the keyboard long enough and STOP being a SELFISH BLOG-HOG!
Post a Comment