Javier Solana 2007
Javier SOLANA, EU High Representative for the CFSP, welcomes the completion of the procedures for the accreditation of EUPOL COPPS Europa Document (December 28, 2008) - Javier Solana, EU High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), today welcomed the completion of the procedures for the accreditation of EUPOL COPPS and made the following statement: "I welcome the completion of the procedure that paves the way for the accreditation of the European Union police mission for the Palestinian Territories (EUPOL COPPS) by the Government of Israel. I wish to thank Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Mrs Tzipi Livni for her support. This agreement will facilitate the implementation of the mandate of the mission." The aim of the EUPOL COPPS mission is to work with the Palestinian civilian police to support the Palestinian Authority in taking responsibility for law and order, and improving its civilian police and law enforcement capacity. EUPOL COPPS helps to establish sustainable and effective policing arrangements under Palestinian ownership in accordance with the best international standards. This mission is a central pillar of the EU Action Strategy in support of renewed peace efforts between Israel and the Palestinians launched in Annapolis last November.| Israel | Islam | Dividing the Land | EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | Solana | 1st Seal |
Big Brother on Stage: What Kind of Actor is the EU? A
Time, Times, and Half a Time (December
25, 2007) -
Rafael Dochao Moreno,
principal administrator of the Euro-Med Partnership, when asked the
question why Spain chose to launch the Alliance of Civilizations
initiative at the United Nations rather than the European Union
responded that the “Barcelona process is already an AoC…why
do we need an AoC?” Moreno’s response reminded those of us
who have been following the Barcelona Process what we’ve already
known--that the Alliance of Civilizations is a
key aspect for the European foreign policy.
The Barcelona Process, introduced in 1995 by Spain’s Javier Solana,
contained a social cohesion strategy which had a goal to combat
religious fundamentalism worldwide. The Alliance of Civilizations is
merely a vehicle for such activity. Right from the start, the AoC
was intended to form the
core of the global counter-terrorism strategy.
Before the cartoon crisis (in which Spain’s Zapatero, Moratinos,
Federico Mayor, and Solana so authoritatively rose to the occasion
to turn
crisis into opportunity),
Spain’s foreign minister had
introduced the idea of the AoC as a tool to combat terrorism.
Incidentally, although no group has ever stepped forward to claim
responsibility or offer rationale for inciting the cartoon crisis,
blame was assigned to “religious extremists” along with the claim
that they seek to provoke a clash of civilizations. There is only
one group that has reaped tremendous political benefit from the
cartoon crisis--it almost reminds me of the Reichstag fire. In a
previous blog post we examined the
Club of Madrid’s 2005
counter-terrorism strategy. As I reviewed the conference pictures
and
list of participants, I
noticed linkages to those who put forth the EU Social Cohesion
Policy and the Alliance of Civilisations initiative. It is not
surprising then that the Madrid Agenda contains identical objectives
to those of the
European Union’s Counter-Terrorism Strategy.
Europe’s counter-terrorism strategy was presented to the
June 2003 Thessalonika European Council
by Javier Solana. Solana’s counter-terrorism strategy, which was
incorporated into the security strategy
A Secure Europe for a Better World,
addresses combating strategic terrorism as its primary objective.
Recall in
Part I of my
counter-terrorism article that strategic terrorism has been
attributed to religious beliefs in which one accepts an
“exclusivist” truth claim. An examination of the EU
counter-terrorism documents yields the same definition. But here we
see the lion’s teeth of militarization. There is an interesting
paragraph in the Thessalonika document which reads: “…the Danish Presidency decided to commission a group of Ministers' personal representatives to submit an analysis of the phenomenon of extreme fundamentalism and terrorism…The final report has been submitted and will be further discussed within the Council with a view to taking forward its recommendations.” “In most fundamentalist transnational terrorist violence, the perpetrators tend to view the front line to be between Israel and the United States, on the one hand, and the Islamic world on the other. It involves the dispute about the US occupation of holy areas either itself or through proxies such as the authoritarian regimes of Saudi Arabia and Persia, or Israel. According to the report of the Extreme Fundamentalism and Terrorism Group (EFTG) the settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would have a very important positive impact on the struggle against extreme fundamentalism and terrorism.”This is consistent with the Alliance of Civilizations’ statements as during the Doha debates Israel’s government was named an extremist regime. Regarding fundamentalism, the EFTG says: "Fundamentalism has been defined as an attitude where non-negotiable principles are introduced to politics from a transcendental source, holy texts or a divine discourse. “From the point of view of fundamentalism, religion expresses a divine order, which ideally embraces all life spheres. Although this may simply lead fundamentalists to encapsulate their own existence around their religious beliefs (“Quietism”), they will most often actively pursue the goal of seeking other life spheres, including political one, dominated by religious rather than secular principles.” Often fundamentalism has also meant a tendency to impose these principles indiscriminately on believers and non-believers alike.”The European Commission’s social cohesion research report further demonstrates that religious fundamentalism will not be tolerated within the European neighborhood. "This third school of thought is referred to as 'civil society as the public sphere'. "Theories of the public sphere demand a return to the practice of politics. Not as an elite occupation in which the public takes part once every four or five years through elections, but as an ongoing process through which 'active citizens' can help to shape both the ends and means of the good society…Essential to the functioning of democracy, according to the line of thinking of this school, is that all sets of voices are heard. Inequality and discrimination are therefore seen as the enemies of the public sphere. Fundamentalism is seen as its most dangerous enemy, since fundamentalism does not acknowledge the existence of different truths nor does it respect other values, which makes it impossible to reach a consensus with other groups... The only similarity between European policy and this third school of thought is its aversion to fundamentalism."As part of the 2007-2013 Cohesion Policy, member states are bound by agreement to implement European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) guidelines. As mentioned earlier, the European Defense Strategy’s focus is primarily on combating strategic terrorism. To do so, Solana has created a military-industrial complex having the following characteristics (to name only a few):
| EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | Solana | 1st Seal | NewWorldOrder | America |
Brussels names first 'EU ambassador' Telegraph.co.uk (December
17, 2007) - Brussels has appointed the European Union's first
"ambassador" more than a year before the EU Reform Treaty comes into
force, The Sunday Telegraph has learned. The powerful dual role will
involve Belgium's Koen Vervaeke representing both the European
Commission and the EU's 27 member states in Africa. The position is part
of a diplomatic corps created under the treaty signed by Gordon Brown in
Lisbon last week amid claims by Eurosceptics of a betrayal of Britain's
national interests. Brussels chiefs have pressed ahead with Mr
Vervaeke's appointment before any countries have begun ratifying the
treaty, which is scheduled to come into effect in 2009. Critics
have accused the commission of riding roughshod over the ratification
process, which in Britain will see the treaty subject to parliamentary
scrutiny and votes over more than 20 days next year. Dr Charles Tannock,
a Conservative Euro-MP and the party's foreign affairs spokesman at the
European Parliament, said: "By appointing this man to Africa they are
obviously testing the waters. This is the way things will work in the
future. But until the treaty is ratified they have no mandate to set up
anything like an EU diplomatic corps." The official Brussels line is
that Mr Vervaeke's role is "an exception". Under the treaty, there
will be a powerful EU foreign minister, or "high representative",
who will also service member states and the commission, deriving his
power from what Brussels officials call a "double hat" arrangement. Javier
Solana, the Spaniard who heads the EU's fledgling foreign office, is
tipped for the job, which will involve taking on more than
100 existing commission delegations around the world and turning them
into a corps of diplomats. Mr Vervaeke, 47, who will be based in Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia, is essentially a regional foreign minister with a
mandate to talk on behalf of the entire EU.
The EU's Treaty Treachery Human
Events (December 17, 2007) - To
millions of Britons, December 13, 2007 is a date which will live in
infamy. In the Labor Party’s 2006 Election Manifesto, the British people
were given a devout promise that there would be a referendum on whether
to sign on to the proposed EU Constitution. Gordon Brown reaffirmed this
vow when he succeeded Tony Blair as Prime Minister in July of this year.
The promise was an empty one. The proposed EU Constitution --
meant to replace all previous treaties -- was already legally dead
thanks to ”no” votes by both the
French
and the Dutch in 2005. But behind the scenes, there has
been treachery afoot these past 30 months. Bureaucrats never
take your “no” for the answer to what they want. Slowly, the Euro forces
began cosmetic surgery. The Constitution underwent a political makeover
and re-emerged as the new EU Reform Treaty, a document which is not only
the same as the failed EU Constitution, but has added even more
bureaucracy to it. On Thursday morning, December 13 in Lisbon,
Portugal, the Presidents and Prime Ministers from the 27 member nations
were to gather to sign this new Treaty. All were present except for
Gordon Brown. He sent his Foreign Minister. David Milliband signed this
historical document on behalf of the UK when the cameras were flashing.
Brown explained his absence as a “conflict of scheduling.” Then
events took a turn toward treachery worthy of a Shakespearian play.
Three hours later, Brown surreptitiously arrived. Cowering in a back
room off the main hall - where he had hoped in vain to avoid the cameras
-- the pusillanimous Prime Minister signed the document. One
EU insider dryly remarked that Brown acted like someone who was trying
to keep a dirty little secret. Brown seems to have imagined that
this out-of-sight out-of-mind tactic would fool the British public.
Hardly. The Shadow (Conservative) Foreign Minister, William Hague, asked
what the members of the EU would think of a man who “dithers for a week
about whether or not he wants to be photographed putting pen to paper.”
To others it was more a case of Brown proving to be as handy with a
knife as Brutus. So just what are the most important points of
the so-called “Reform Treaty” as they impact minor details like, for
instance, British sovereignty? The EU is designed to be a
superstructure entity that creates a single foreign policy and one-stop
overarching decision-making powers which will be directed downwards to
all its member states. Until now, the heads of the 27 member nations
served six month rotations as nominal EU President. That egalitarian
practice is now dead. There is to be a
new all-powerful unelected President of Europe, appointed by the 27
heads of state - not elected by the 350 million people of new Europe.
(Frustrated Democrats who have never gotten over the US 2000 election,
please note). Tony Blair, former Prime Minister of the UK, has been
heavily tipped to take over this coveted post. Although the initial idea
of a single EU Foreign Minister was abandoned in this round of “ever
closer union”, the new Treaty calls for a Foreign Policy Chief
-- who will hold diplomatic status and head up the new EU Foreign
Service bureaucracy. What’s in a name? Perhaps
everything. Great Britain and Poland asked to opt out of signing on to
the 50-article Charter of Fundamental Rights -- for the time being. This
charter promises life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and religions
freedom. It then goes on to promise universal collective bargaining,
fair working conditions and shelter. Yes, shelter. No one in the New
Europe will be allowed to be homeless. The UK continues to demure on
joining the Euro. But this Treaty puts yet more pressure on Great
Britain to ditch the Pound in favor of New Europe’s collective currency.
The most sinister part of the Treaty is contained in another rule. This
one gives the EU rights to overturn decisions made by Britain’s
Immigration and Asylum Tribunal. Those who have sought -- and have been
rejected -- as asylum seekers in the UK now have the right to take their
cases over the head of Great Britain’s highest court and appeal to the
unelected European Court of Justice in Luxembourg whose EU bureaucrats
will have the final say. Giving the EU authorities power to trump
immigration and border issues inside the UK is seen as the end of their
democracy by many a Brit. When the EU Court of Justice can overrule any
member nation’s own judiciary, another piece of national sovereignty has
been signed away. The output of venom directed against the Prime
Minister since Wednesday’s dirty deed has been stunning. The most
vociferous critics of Brown’s stealth execution of the treaty are
calling for his severed head to be skewered on a pike and set above the
Thames. This was often the fate of traitors in earlier times. The
British have such colorful traditions. Others have suggested that the
Tower of London be re-commissioned to serve as a prison for Brown and
his minions. Calls have been raised for a million people to surround the
Houses of Parliament in a massive protest where this Treaty must be
ratified in the House of Commons. Two full weeks of debate have been
promised the public -- but then promises come cheap in politics. Brown
himself has been compared to Neville Chamberlain, who returned to
England from Germany in 1938 waving a paper which Adolph Hitler had
written promising that there would be no future war. British veterans
and their heirs must surely wonder why two world wars were fought and
millions of lives lost if the British sovereignty would eventually be
surrendered -- by their own government -- to their former continental
enemies. Brown is also now being parodied in cartoons and editorials
which compare him to that bumbling silent English loner, Mr. Bean. After
all, the wags point out, Brown doesn’t like to even mingle with his EU
counterparts. Brown bungles about like Mr. Bean, although Mr. Bean’s
awkwardness and its consequences are inadvertent. And like the bumbling
Mr. Bean, since Brown went slinking off to Portugal to sign away his
country’s autonomy, Brown has mumbled to the English press that the new
EU treaty "would provide a lasting framwork for the EU" yet at the same
time create "a circle of reflection" on the EU's long term future. Of
course, there is a technical flaw in that observation. Gordon Brown
isn’t English. He’s a sly and canny Scot. Come to that, so is Tony
Blair. Many a wary English eye is now being cast north of Hadrian’s
Wall. Just a few months ago, the ever more powerful Scottish Parliament
voted to give every one of its citizens free health care, the costs for
which will be taken out of English pockets. Is the new Europe Reform
Treaty part of the Great Scottish Plot? Is this Braveheart’s Revenge? nonymouse from FulfilledProphecy shared this USA Today story pointing out that the President of Europe "will have few formal powers but will chair leaders' summits and meetings and help the EU's foreign policy chief represent the bloc on the world stage." The initial story points out what I think may be the 3 horns from Daniel 7:7,8 that are plucked with the little horn (man of sin) arising from the 10 since the French, Dutch and British rejection of the Constitution has been circumvented in the Treaty of Lisbon.
EU to agree Kosovo talks over Reuters (December
9, 2007) - EU leaders are expected to agree this week that
efforts to reach a negotiated solution to the Kosovo problem are
exhausted, and offer to take responsibility for security and justice
in the breakaway Serbian province. But Russian Foreign Minister
Sergei Lavrov said on Sunday "artificial deadlines" for finding a
solution to Kosovo's status were not binding and could raise risks
to stability. EU negotiator Wolfgang Ischinger will brief
European Union foreign ministers on Monday on the results of four
months of mediation efforts and urge them to help stabilize the
Balkan territory by sending in police and justice officials
soon. Leaders of the 27-nation bloc are expected to declare
in a statement at a summit on Friday that negotiations are at an end
and that the future of both Serbia and Kosovo lies in the
European Union, diplomats said. They are also likely to
confirm they are willing to dispatch police and justice missions and
appoint a high representative to oversee Kosovo if asked by the
Kosovo Albanian government and the United Nations Secretary-General.
"It is clear that the future of Serbia and Kosovo lies in
the European Union. That's something that both sides agree on,"
EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said in an
interview with Germany's Welt am Sonntag newspaper. A troika of
EU, U.S. and Russian mediators told U.N. Secretary-General Ban
Ki-moon in a report on Friday that their mission failed because
neither side was willing to give way on the fundamental question of
sovereignty over Kosovo. The troika had been given a December 10
deadline to complete its report. "We were given 120 days but if we
had been given 1,200 days the outcome would have been the same," an
aide quoted Ischinger as telling Solana. more... Dictator at the Door A Time, Times, and Half a Time (December 8, 2007) - During Kofi Annan's presentation to the General Assembly of the United Nation's Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, he applauded the Club of Madrid for its related efforts in countering terrorism. In 2005, the Club of Madrid conducted a democracy, terrorism and security conference which is said to have been the largest gathering of security and terrorism experts that has ever taken place. Annan delivered the keynote address to the closing plenary where he conveyed that he would form an implementation task force dedicated to fighting terrorism and that all the UN system would play a role. We know that the role of setting the "global conscience" is being fulfilled by the Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group. One need not look too far on the list of conference participants to find individuals connected to the Alliance of Civilizations. Noteworthy participants include John Esposito, Giandomenico Picco, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, Javier Solana, etc. Here, I provide a summation of the conference outcome documents. In Addressing the Causes of Terrorism, identification of the problematic individuals are found on pages 27-33. The core of the experts’ argument is that religion can contribute to a ‘culture of violence’, a condition which must be addressed to stop the spread of terrorism. “…religion is often ‘centered around themes that can be inherently polarizing—concepts of truth, notions of good, of absolutes and ultimate realities’. For this reason, religion can contribute to a culture of violence where violence becomes ‘a defining issue’ in the identity of activist groups.”In Part I of this series, we see that Alliance of Civilisation’s High Level Group member John Esposito equates monotheistic religions’ exclusive truth claims with terrorism. In light of Esposito’s contribution to this counter-terrorism strategy, it’s no surprise that the question “Is violence more frequently linked with monotheistic traditions?” resulted in the following answer: “Samuel Peleg pointed out that the monotheistic religions (Christianity, Judaism and Islam) have a tendency to authoritarianism and intolerance due to ‘their centrist emphasis on a single deity’. Esposito said that the ‘three Abrahamic traditions’ have been ‘more prone to exclusivist theologies/worldviews which can be used by political and religious leaders to legitimate imperialist expansion, violence, and terror’. Elorza gave explanations of why – in his view – Islam and Judaism had a propensity towards violence and Buddhism did not. Other members of the group stressed that some strands of Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism have also been capable of hideous acts of terror, and that these acts have been justified by violent images and themes within these Eastern traditions. Moreover, the distinction between ‘monotheism’ and ‘polytheism’ is much debated by scholars of comparative religion who point out that a supposedly polytheistic religion such as Hinduism has a strong sense of unity behind its diversity, and that notions such as the Christian Trinity and concepts of sainthood introduce a complexity into the idea of God in the supposed monotheisms of Western religions.” Maybe the monotheistic faiths are too complex for these individuals. So they concluded: therefore, responding to terrorism: “Multi-track approaches (involving political, social and economic in parallel with security and military measures) should be employed.” The Confronting Terrorism working papers lay out these multi track approaches. I subtitled my copy “Directives for a Police State”. There is a common thread running through the three main counter-terrorism strategies which I focus on —one which migrates the military from battlefield situations and embeds it into the populations. This is referred to as peace-keeping. (I will address this further in my next blog article.) This approach is intended for global implementation. Among the Club of Madrid's plans of action are:
Travel documents for a world without borders? Hmmm. But, of course, all of this is intended to be conducted within the framework of and with sensitivity to democracy—that is “safe democracy”. The Alliance of Civilizations Giandomenico Picco has provided us with direction on what form of democracy we may expect under this weltanschauung. I noticed after I published my first article in this series that the Club of Madrid had removed Picco’s article from their website. I have attached it to the top of this piece for educational purposes. It can also be found on safe democracy foundation’s website. Simply click on each document to expand it so it becomes readable. According to Picco:
Well this is one weltanschauung that amounts to nothing more than old
fashioned fascism--a relic of extremist ideology has been tested before.
Ultimately, it will become known as the most terroristic regime the
world has ever known. Treaty amending the treaty on European Union and the treaty establishing the European community The "Lisbon Treaty" WEU Assembly Documents (December 3, 2007) - The following are excerpts from the document linked above. The purpose is to show in the documentation how power consolidation is being made such that all resources will be available to the High Representative over the military and civilian forces of the EU and UN: Article 9e page 9Article 13 page 9 Article 19 page 11 - With the LISBON TREATY Solana has a foot in the UN security Council and has the EU countries there work for his interests: "Member States which are also members of the United Nations Security Council will concert and keep the other Member States, and the High Representative, fully informed. Member States which are members of the Security Council will, in the execution of their functions, defend the positions and the interests of the Union, without prejudice to their responsibilities under the provisions of the United Nations Charter. When the Union has defined a position on a subject which is on the United Nations Security Council agenda, those Member States which sit on the Security Council shall request that the High Representative be asked to present the Union's position "[…]Article 9e page 12 2. Furthermore, the Conference recalls that, as regards the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy whose term of office will start in November 2009 at the same time and for the same duration as the next Commission, he or she will be appointed in accordance with the provision of Articles 9d and 9e of the Treaty on European Union.from A/WEU [2007] DG 7 3 December 2007 FIFTY-THIRD SESSION _______ TREATY AMENDING THE TREATY ON EUROPEAN UNION AND THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY THE “LISBON TREATY” Provisions concerning the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), including the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) more... | EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | Solana | 1st Seal | NewWorldOrder |
The Coming War on the Saints
Watchman Wordpress
(December 7, 2007) - This collection
of information regarding the building war on religious fundamentalism
and the military and civilian resources built into law to deal with it
and power over them shifting toward Javier Solana. Read
Constance Cumbey,
Bjorn
(farmer),
Richard Peterson and
Fulfilled
Prophecy for more detailed, focused and up-to-date information on
these developments. On the political end, this is confirming the
conclusions of the
HIStory, Our Future timeline of events leading to an
abomination of desolation in 2009.
EU embassy mergers 'are step closer to a superstate' Daily
Mail (December
6, 2007) - Europe yesterday took another big step towards
becoming a superstate by proposing joint EU embassies throughout the
world. The suggestion comes only days before the signing of the
controversial EU treaty, which will create a European diplomatic service
and a new post of EU foreign minister. The European Commission unveiled
plans yesterday for travellers to be able to use the consular services
of any EU country and suggested members could merge their embassies. It
also proposed standard rules on the type of help that should be given to
European citizens when abroad. EU foreign relations commissioner Benita
Ferrero-Waldner said: 'We need to step up co-operation at EU level and
work with member states to protect our citizens.' Under the proposals,
travellers who run into problems abroad would be able to use the
consular services of any of the EU's 27 members. There would also be
standardised rules on the difficult problem of repatriation of corpses
from abroad. Any of the EU's 490million citizens are already supposed to
be able to use another member state's consulate if their country is not
represented abroad. But co-operation between countries' embassies and
consulates is patchy. The commission said it wanted to make consulates
more aware of their duties regarding EU travellers who lose a passport
or get arrested. Last night a commission official who helped draft the
proposal said: 'When a family member dies abroad, it is a nightmare. I
could imagine a common stance for the repatriation of corpses.' He said
consulates could pool resources by, for example, allowing a small EU
country to use a consulate belonging to a larger member. The commission
said EU citizens make 80million trips a year outside Europe and up to
50million EU citizens live outside Europe. There are only three
countries outside the EU where all 27 members are represented - China,
Russia and the U.S. The proposals come days before the signing of the
European Reform Treaty, formerly the European Constitution, in Lisbon.
Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague said: 'It is a good thing for EU
countries to help each others' citizens abroad where they don't have
embassies. 'But the EU Commission's proposals go far further than that.
This is a clear step towards an EU takeover of British consulates.' Recommendation 666 Emergency Powers Incorporated Into EU Treaty Fulfilled Prophecy (December 6, 2007) - Here's big news for students of end-times prophecy. The Assembly of the Western European Union has just released a consolidated version of the provisions of the "Lisbon Treaty" (the European Union's new Reform Treaty) that relate to the EU's common foreign and security policy. The document shows how the Lisbon Treaty incorporates the emergency powers from the Western European Union's Assembly Recommendation 666. This means that, in the event of a crisis, the new High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy will have the same extraordinary powers to step in and take control of the EU's military that the old High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy did. This appears to, in effect, enshrine Recommendation 666 into the new treaty. Compare the clause from the Lisbon Treaty with the correlating clause from Recommendation 666. The Lisbon Treaty says (see Article 16, page 10): 2. In cases requiring a rapid decision, the High Representative, of his or her own motion, or at the request of a Member State, shall convene an extraordinary Council meeting within 48 hours or, in an emergency, within a shorter period. The WEU's Assembly Recommendation 666 says (see No. 12):
Bjorn Freiberg,
of Europe, a long-time contributor on the FP discussion board, talks
about this in depth at
his blog. To learn more about the prophetic implications of WEU
Assembly Recommendation 666, read about it
here. Staying tuned!
Killing with a Clear Conscience A Time, Times, and Half A Time (December 2, 2007) - Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy Part I: In my early writings on this blog space, I warned of the Militarization of the Alliance of Civilizations. A militarized Alliance of Civilisations is necessary for the High Level Group (HLG) to successfully conduct a war on extremism and terrorism. Most people consider those objectives to be positive. I may have too had I not read the AoC’s definitions of terrorism. When Kofi Annan first introduced the AoC, he said that the problem (civilizational tensions) is not with the faiths, but with the faithful. The AoC has since expanded on this statement. Accordingly, if you read a religious text and apply an interpretation that becomes an “exclusive” truth claim, you have thereby entered a theology of hatred and have terrorist leanings. That, they say, is a root cause of terrorism. During the Doha Debates HLG member John Esposito said:
This poses a significant problem for most monotheists
as our religious texts make exclusive truth claims. What escapes
Esposito’s attention is that most of us enjoy freedom—we can choose our
faiths and worship as we please. We respect and defend others’ rights to
do likewise. This is called respect, not hatred. Perhaps Esposito’s
vision of democracy is entirely different than mine.
Nearly a year ago I had archived a counter-terrorism piece from the Office on Drugs and Crime’s website which says:
(This link is no longer on the website, but the same
material can be found
here.)
This prompted me to check and see if the Interregional Crime and Justice
Research Institute shared the same wisdom. Sure enough, I found
counter-terrorism material by Giandomenico Picco. Picco was Kofi Annan’s
personal representative who worked on the Dialogue Among Civilizations
project and later was instrumental in
the startup
of the Alliance of Civilizations initiative. Picco’s contribution to
the AoC is certain to have a significant impact world’s religious
populations as he has most disturbingly defined terrorism which can be
found in UN publication
International Terrorism and Governmental Structures.
Here Picco explains that there are two types of terrorism, those being
tactical and strategic. Tactical terrorist are associated with groups
such as Hezbollah. Hezbollah, Picco explains, has a both a political and
military branch whereby negotiations are possible. Strategic terrorism
is based on religious belief. It is altogether different--more
radical—of which there can be no negotiation. more...
EU embassy mergers 'are step closer to a superstate' Daily
Mail (December
6, 2007) - Europe yesterday took another big step towards
becoming a superstate by proposing joint EU embassies throughout the
world. The suggestion comes only days before the signing of the
controversial EU treaty, which will create a European diplomatic service
and a new post of EU foreign minister. The European Commission unveiled
plans yesterday for travellers to be able to use the consular services
of any EU country and suggested members could merge their embassies. It
also proposed standard rules on the type of help that should be given to
European citizens when abroad. EU foreign relations commissioner Benita
Ferrero-Waldner said: 'We need to step up co-operation at EU level and
work with member states to protect our citizens.' Under the proposals,
travellers who run into problems abroad would be able to use the
consular services of any of the EU's 27 members. There would also be
standardised rules on the difficult problem of repatriation of corpses
from abroad. Any of the EU's 490million citizens are already supposed to
be able to use another member state's consulate if their country is not
represented abroad. But co-operation between countries' embassies and
consulates is patchy. The commission said it wanted to make consulates
more aware of their duties regarding EU travellers who lose a passport
or get arrested. Last night a commission official who helped draft the
proposal said: 'When a family member dies abroad, it is a nightmare. I
could imagine a common stance for the repatriation of corpses.' He said
consulates could pool resources by, for example, allowing a small EU
country to use a consulate belonging to a larger member. The commission
said EU citizens make 80million trips a year outside Europe and up to
50million EU citizens live outside Europe. There are only three
countries outside the EU where all 27 members are represented - China,
Russia and the U.S. The proposals come days before the signing of the
European Reform Treaty, formerly the European Constitution, in Lisbon.
Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague said: 'It is a good thing for EU
countries to help each others' citizens abroad where they don't have
embassies. 'But the EU Commission's proposals go far further than that.
This is a clear step towards an EU takeover of British consulates.'
Unclear EU treaty troubles leaders Web
India 123 (December 1, 2007) -
European leaders who have agreed to a new treaty for the European Union
are trying to figure out what the document means. The Reform Treaty
gives the president of the European Commission, the president of the
European Council and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs
and Security Policy responsibilities that overlap,
The EU Observer reported. That could mean the division of labor depends
on who has the stronger personality at any given time. Slovenia holds
the EU presidency for the first half of 2008. Igor Sencar, the Slovenian
ambassador to the union, said at least 40 items in the treaty need to be
clarified before it takes effect in
2009. EU officials are already displaying
nervousness about the treaty, Sencar said.
Annapolis: A Day for the Prophetic History Books Fulfilled
Prophecy (November 29, 2007) - Organizers
and attendees appear to agree: the Annapolis Conference, Tuesday,
was a success. But more than that, I think it was prophetically
significant. For the first time, the
entire international community -- including the United States,
Israel and even the Arab nations -- gathered to declare their joint
support for the creation of a Palestinian state. Israeli Prime
Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas
committed to working for a peace treaty by the end of 2008. (Read
their statement of Joint Understanding
here.) They're now creating a steering committee that will start
continuous negotiations on Dec. 12. Olmert and Abbas will meet every
two weeks to advance the negotiations.
Olmert and Abbas also agreed to begin immediate implementation of
their nation's obligations under the
Road Map for Peace, created in 2003 by the Quartet on the Middle
East (the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United
Nations). They even agreed to let the United States monitor the
implementation of the Road Map and judge whether both parties are
fulfilling their obligations. And, today, the United States
appointed a Special Envoy for Middle East Security -- General James
Jones, an ex-NATO commander -- to help Abbas' government bring
security to Palestine. Read about it
here. Despite the naysayers, I
think we may see a peace deal within the next year. Of course,
that's what we'd expect if we've entered the 70th week of Daniel.
That's not to say there won't be bumps in the road and times when
negotiations look like they've stalled. But we may look back to this
conference as the breakthrough. In my
father, Herb Peters', book, Recommendation 666 (available to
read free
here), he cited the 1992 Israeli election as the first time
Israelis began saying "Peace and safety!" -- when they voted for
Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin who ran on the platform of trading land
for peace. According to 1 Thessalonians 5:3, when they are saying
"peace and safety!" (in other words, when Israel is willing to give
up its God-given land and turn to its enemies for protection) then
destruction will come on Israel suddenly. Note two very similar words in the statement
of Joint Understanding read by Bush at the conference:
This is a formal
declaration made by Israel -- and witnessed by the nations of the world
-- that Israel has chosen to give up its land for peace. And it was a
U.S. president -- sad for me to say -- that pushed for it.
Yes, I think we'll look back on
this day as prophetically significant. Unclear EU treaty provisions causing 'nervousness' EU Observer (November 28, 2007) - Although the ink has barely dried on the EU's new treaty, analysts are already scratching their heads as to how the document, with its unclear division of power between the EU's top politicians, is going to work in practice. Come 2009, when the Reform Treaty is supposed to click into place, there will be three big jobs to be had in Brussels - the president of the European Commission; the president of the European Council and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. The three have overlapping job descriptions that are set to be defined only by the strength of the personalities involved, meaning that the treaty, agreed in October after years of wrangling, could be laying the ground for a political hornet's nest. Igor Sencar, Slovenia's EU ambassador, says there are "at least 40 elements" in the treaty that have to "considered and understood" during the course of next year. Speaking at the European Policy Centre think tank in Brussels on Wednesday, Mr Sencar – whose country will run the EU during the first half of next year – says he already feels the "nervousness" in Brussels about the lack of clarity in the document. The questions run from pinning down the exact powers of the EU president; agreeing who the president will be; to sorting out the funding, personnel and scope of the diplomatic service as well as looking at issues such as whether the EU's police body, Europol, needs to be adjusted and how national ministers will fit into the EU decision-making process. Mr Sencar indicated that the issues will have to be dealt with by EU leaders and that a "common view" should be drawn up by the end of next year. Meanwhile academics and commentators in Brussels are already picking holes in the proposed political set-up contained in the new treaty. Dr Andreas Maurer from the German thinktank Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik in a recently published paper notes that the future EU president, who can hold office for up to five years risks becoming EU leaders' "play ball" because the office lacks its own ministry. "Does the new president have sufficient personnel, administrative and financial resources at his disposal" to carry out duties such as leading, preparing and giving a sense of continuity to leading EU projects, such as on climate change and energy, asks the paper. It also questions whether EU leaders will really stand behind the president on major issues and points out that there could be a "legitimacy" problem because the president is not actually accountable to anyone – neither MEPs or MPs. The foreign minister post creates its own set of problems partly because it is not completely clear where his or her duties begin and that of the council president and commission president end. Dr Maurer's paper notes that the new foreign minister, who will be both vice-president of the commission as well as chairing the regular EU foreign minister meetings, will have an "unusually large range of duties." A crucial point will be whether the foreign minister assumes the trade and development aspects of EU foreign policy when chairing the foreign ministers' meeting. If the minister does, "it will put into question" the "autonomy and the political profile of the commission" – which traditionally has strong powers in this area. more...| EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | Solana | NewWorldOrder | According to Bible prophecy, a little horn will rise up among 10. Daniel 7:7,8 What is happening according to this article is an orginization of power centered around the foreign minister position. Commissioners responsible for trade and development will answer to the foreign minister, and these three positions are overlapping. We know that 10 kings are going to give their power and authority to the antichrist. Revelation 17:12-14 The world will worship the beast and feel powerless against him. Revelation 13:1-5 What this all leads to is the creation of a position that fits with Bible prophecy in centering power over trade and foreign policy through the WEU, the 10 member-state military arm of the EU. Is this all coincidence or are we closer to great tribulation than most realize. Read the HIStory, Our Future Bible studies for more Biblical reasoning. Summary of remarks by Javier SOLANA on the occasion of the Annapolis Conference Europa (November 27, 2007) - NEW MOMENTUM IN THE PEACE PROCESS: Recent developments have created a sense of cautious optimism for progress towards resolution of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert are engaged in a substantive and wide-ranging bilateral dialogue. The United States Government is actively supporting their efforts, including by calling for an international meeting before the end of the year, in order to launch a bilateral negotiation process that would lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state. The new momentum in the peace process benefits from the full backing and active involvement of the Quartet. Arab support has been expressed through the voice of the Arab League follow-up Committee. Comprehensive peace in the Middle East is a strategic objective for the European Union. Any lasting and just settlement to the conflict should be based on the principle of land for peace, relevant UNSC resolutions, the Arab Peace Initiative, the Roadmap and previous agreements reached between the parties. The EU considers that the present opportunity should not be missed and is ready to take its responsibilities, in accordance with the vital European interests involved. The EU is therefore committed to supporting current efforts in a serious and substantive way, offering a comprehensive and coherent contribution to the process, including during the crucial implementation period. The European Union calls on all other interested parties to support the current process, bearing in mind the high cost of failure for everyone involved. The forthcoming international meeting in Annapolis should launch a bilateral negotiation between Israel and the Palestinians on final status issues, as a first step towards a comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It should establish a robust follow-up process under the auspices of the Quartet and with the involvement of the international community. The EU calls on its Quartet, Arab League and other international partners to contribute to the success of the upcoming donors conference in Paris, which will constitute an indispensable complement to the political process launched at Annapolis. more...| Israel | Islam | Dividing the Land | EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | Solana | 1st Seal | America | EU expected to follow Middle East peace conference with major aid push International Herald Tribune (November 21, 2007) - The European Union goes to next week's Middle East peace conference ready to back up an agreement with financial aid, recognizing that without giving Palestinians hope for improved living standards, a political settlement will remain out of reach. The EU, which will be represented by its key Mideast envoys and a number of foreign ministers, is expected, however, to take a back seat to the United States in the diplomatic drive to restart a peace process between Israeli and the Palestinians. The conference takes place Monday through Wednesday in Annapolis, Maryland, and Washington. "The European Union is a bit on the sidelines for this process. The idea is for the United States to get the two key players together," said Alfred Pijpers, a senior researcher at the Clingendael Netherlands Institute for International Relations. "The European Union will be of great help for financing, and technical assistance and investments and so on, but as far as the direct, so-called peace process is concerned, at this moment I don't see a very immediate and direct activity from the EU side," he said by telephone from Amsterdam on Wednesday. The EU is the Palestinians' largest aid donor. In 2007, the EU and its 27 member nations gave close to €1 billion (US$1.48 billion), most of it in humanitarian assistance for Palestinians who now live under rival governments in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. This week, the EU foreign ministers endorsed steps to support any peace moves emerging from the Annapolis conference, which will also be attended by delegations from Arab nations. The steps were outlined in a report written by Benita Ferrero-Waldner, the EU's external relations commissioner, and Javier Solana, the EU security affairs chief. The report makes clear EU aid will be made available for practical purposes: money and technical assistance to boost the Palestinian police force and to reform the Palestinians' health, education and judiciary departments. more...| Israel | Islam | Dividing the Land | EU/UN / 4th Kingdom | Solana | 1st Seal |
Solana claims credit for “Roadmap to Peace” Unsealed Prophecy (November 15, 2007) - Javier Solana, the High Representative for the European Common, Foreign and Security Policy, has pledged that the EU will play a very important role at the international peace conference to be held in Annapolis, Maryland later this month. He made the comments during a press conference in Israel yesterday, convened by the head of the Israeli negotiating team, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. Solana said that he had discussed a number of issues with Tzipi Livni during his tour of the region, namely Israel’s desire to upgrade its relations with the European Union, increasing co-operation in fields such as science and technology, and they also discussed the need for a third round of sanctions against Iran in relation to its nuclear programme. He was also asked questions in relation to Europe’s involvement in the Middle East peace process. To that, Solana replied that the EU would have an important presence at the Annapolis gathering, and that the bloc would continue to play a very prominent role in the region after the event, taking on the responsibility of a monitoring mechanism, ensuring that both sides abide by any agreement that is reached. Solana reiterated his earlier statement, that a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority was “doable” by the end of 2008.
In regards to the American-backed “Roadmap to Peace” document, both Solana and Livni agreed that it was not necessary for the process to intricately follow the steps written in this document. The Palestinian Authority has not disarmed or disbanded terrorist organizations operating in its territory, as detailed in the first stage of the document. As a result, Israel has not felt obligated to halt all settlement activity in Judea and Samaria. Instead, the Roadmap to Peace would be used as a final check, pending the future implementation of any agreement. For his part, Solana said it was doubtful that the Israelis or Palestinians could reach an agreement that did not follow along the lines of the Roadmap to Peace. The US takes much of the credit for initiating the Roadmap to Peace, following President Bush’s speech of June 2002. But from that time America has not played much of a peace-making role in the Middle East. During yesterday’s press conference, Javier Solana stated that he believed the Roadmap to Peace would be accepted by both sides, and based this claim on his working knowledge of the document, having actually written part of the document himself.
|
This page may take some time to load. For
size reasons I have archived topics by year: |2007|