Saturday, October 17, 2015

Largest EU Parliament Party Wants to Green Light EU Army

Quick update here. Sorry I have not posted in so long.

http://www.euractiv.com/sections/global-europe/epp-leaders-bang-drum-european-army-318571
EXCLUSIVE / Centre-right leaders will greenlight a plan to move towards an EU defence union at the European People's Party congress in Madrid next week, EurActiv.com has learned.
In a strategic paper which will be adopted at the Congress, and obtained by EurActiv.com, EPP leaders will say that the various crises in Europe’s neighbourhood have taken the bloc to a moment of truth.
“We are going to move towards an EU army much faster than people believe,” said EPP president Joseph Daul to a small group of journalists on Thursday (15 October). The EPP is the largest European-level political party, and currently includes 10 EU and 6 non-EU heads of state and government.

The largest political party in the European Parliament is the EPP group. They want to move forward with a "European Defence Union"
EPP leaders are determined to respond to rising threats by pushing the European Council to support three new steps, laying the ground for a full-fledged EU Security and Defence Union, and ultimately a European army.

Solana lives in Madrid. So I wonder if he will be part of this plan proposal, even though he is not EPP, but socialist.

Also, there are rumors that Merkel will ask Cameron not to block an EU army, in exchange for his treaty renegotiation plans.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11861247/Merkel-expects-Cameron-to-back-EU-army-in-exchange-for-renegotiation.html


Time will tell. Stay tuned!

Saturday, July 18, 2015

Is a Eurozone Federation Inevitable?


France Calls for "Eurozone Government"


This week, the President of France has called for a "Eurozone government," at least twice. He plans to push forward specific proposals in the coming months. This Eurozone parliament would include a "specific budget" a "parliament" for democratic control, and a full time President. It will also include proposals for tax harmonization. Hollande said that the lack of unity was harming the Euro project, and they need to push forward to more unity.



He reiterated his call today (July 19) during the birthday commemoration of Jacques Delors, who founded the Euro. Unsurprisingly, Delors agrees with this plan. Hollande is interested in working with Germany, as well as forming a "vanguard" of countries who are ready to move forward with the plan. Surprisingly, David Cameron likely supports further Eurozone integration, because it sets a precedent for a "two speed" Europe, where he can opt to be on the second tier. 

Germany is the biggest road block to this plan. Ironically, Wolfgang Schauble, who lobbied hard against Greece on the July 13 EUCO, himself wants a Eurozone finance minister and Eurozone parliament. He is also an old school federalist.. Federalism inevitably involves financial transfers from the strong nations to the weak ones. So this could get interesting.

Schauble

We must not neglect the "economic pole" of European integration. It is also very important for prophecy. To explain why, I will swing right back to the subject of Javier Solana:

Solana's Vision: An EDU & an EMU

In Solana's report, he states that he wants to build a "European Defence Union" in the same way a "Economic and Monetary Union" was built. After all...he claims....the Euro crisis is getting better*. So we must work on other priorities, such as defence integration, due to the threats surrounding Europe.

So Solana's vision seems to be a military pole to the EU, and an economic pole to the EU.

Funny thing is, the Bible seems to agree.


Revelation 13: Two Beasts

Revelation 13 talks about two beasts, one from the sea and one from the earth. The sea beast in Revelation 13 is extraordinarily similar to the sea beast of Daniel 7, who many commentators agree is talking about the same dictator/and his corresponding political structure. Later on in Revelation, it talks of the "beast" and the "false prophet" as if they are individuals who are thrown into the Lake of Fire. But of course, these two are heads of different aspects of the same political system.

The Antichrist: A Military/Political Power

Since the Revelation 13 beast is the revived Roman Empire/its leader, we know that this revived Roman Empire eventually expands its tentacles to the entire world, at least at the height of its power. However, the Antichrist will have trouble holding his empire together, as it will be very prone to fragmentation.

The Antichrist in Daniel, as well as in Revelation, is depicted as a military ruler.
People worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, “Who is like the beast? Who can wage war against it?”
5 The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise its authority for forty-two months. 6 It opened its mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven. 7 It was given power to wage war against God’s holy people and to conquer them. And it was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. (Revelation 13:4-7 NIV emphasis added)
Revelation mostly describes his political power, but hints at the beasts previous military victories. The book of Daniel provides more details of the Antichrist's military conquests and personality.
37 He will show no regard for the gods of his ancestors or for the one desired by women, nor will he regard any god, but will exalt himself above them all.38 Instead of them, he will honor a god of fortresses; a god unknown to his ancestors he will honor with gold and silver, with precious stones and costly gifts. 39 He will attack the mightiest fortresses with the help of a foreign god and will greatly honor those who acknowledge him. He will make them rulers over many people and will distribute the land at a price. (Daniel 11:37-39 NIV emphasis added)
(The passage then goes on to describe the Antichrist's specific military campaigns.)



The False Prophet: An Economic/Religious Power

The beast from the earth (the False Prophet) heads a political system that controls the religious and economic aspects of the Antichrist's empire on his behalf. Hence this:
16 It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, 17 so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name. (Revelation 13:16-17 NIV)
 Notice, this is a giant, global monetary union. Its very intriguing that the Bible focuses on the monetary aspect, and not necessarily fiscal (though surely, the False Prophet will control that as well). Which is weird in and of itself, because that is how the EU operates today.

In summary, it is fair to say that the Bible describes the Antichrist (among other things) as a military ruler. And the False Prophet (among other things) as a monetary/economic ruler.

These two poles of European integration, military and economic, should be watched very closely.


Is the Antichrist Already Active?

This website promulgates a theory that many of the prophecies associated with the Antichrist have actually already been fulfilled in Javier Solana. These prophecies relate to a ten nation military alliance in Europe, a man with a weak political position rising up among those ten, those ten giving their political authority to him, and finally his subduing of a triumvirate of three of those ten leaders. (See Daniel 7) On top of all this, this same man is one of the primary architects of a contract between the EU and Israel which is now specifically confirmed for 7 years through the European Neighborhood Policy.





Despite a long absence from politics, and his relative old age, the Solana Antichrist theory looked like a bust. But he is kind of in the process of making a come back, promising to devote all of his remaining energy to "European defence integration." He did this by making specific policy recommendations to the European Council via a reputable think tank. He suggested making an integrated military force under a common command structure for the EU. This has been referred to as the "EU army" by others. He has been going on tour advocating this throughout Europe, and a few more presentations are due to be presented.

These fulfilled prophecies of course represent the basis of the general theory many have been following for some time now. As far as "evidence" we are in the end times, I would say this does the best anyone has ever seen. After all, many pastors and Bible teachers already thought the EU was the revived Roman Empire. So these are rather incredible developments.

However, we mustn't forget the other pole of European integration, which corresponds to the other beast.


Eurozone

The Eurozone Empire

The Bible is clear that the revived Roman Empire will be a very "divided" kingdom.
40 Finally, there will be a fourth kingdom, strong as iron—for iron breaks and smashes everything—and as iron breaks things to pieces, so it will crush and break all the others.41 Just as you saw that the feet and toes were partly of baked clay and partly of iron, so this will be a divided kingdom; yet it will have some of the strength of iron in it, even as you saw iron mixed with clay. 42 As the toes were partly iron and partly clay, so this kingdom will be partly strong and partly brittle. 43 And just as you saw the iron mixed with baked clay, so the people will be a mixture and will not remain united, any more than iron mixes with clay. (Daniel 2:40-43 NIV emphasis added)
This exactly describes the Eurozone troubles of the last 5 years. The EU is a heterogenous mixture of different ethnic groups and countries. Some of those countries are stronger than others. However, the kingdom is very divided. As we can see now, even back in 2012, investors were actually concerned the entire thing could break up. Even now, a lack of unity characterizes the EU's activities, as many analysts and articles will readily admit.

Ironically, this division and weakness is becoming fairly oppressive in nature. The Eurozone crisis is somewhat difficult to understand, and I have not understood it for some time now (I still don't fully understand it). But this article below is the best explanation I have seen so far. It is biased against the Euro, but is interestingly edited by a liberal American writer. If you are interested, have a look below. But if you don't want to wade through it, I will briefly summarize it and add other information as well.







Eurozone Crisis


After the financial crisis of 2008, the U.S. and European nations tried to spend their way out of recession. For better or for worse, this is the standard economic advice given on how to escape a recession. However, the U.S. got a little better after a while, whereas the Eurozone started getting worse again.

Investors were initially excited about the Euro, and lent money to all EU nations at really cheap rates, since they were all on the Euro. However, this bubble eventually burst. This causes lots of economic pain and debt. Normally, when a country starts to have a crisis like this, they can devalue the currency, which encourages exports and tourism. However, this is where the Eurozone is different. Once recession or financial trouble hits, people lose jobs. However, Spain, Italy, Greece, etc. do not have the option of devaluing their currency. So when all of the foreign money leaves and people lose their jobs...they just stay unemployed. Their is no boost in exports or tourism to fill in the pain to help recover, because the currency remains too expensive. Not to mention...they are still in debt and have to pay it all back.

Usually in a federal system, some money is shuffled around from the stronger states to the weaker ones, to even things out. Furthermore, the whole area is mutually in debt, not the individual states. Also, people in the weak economies can just get up and move to a better state. I did not know this until recently, but this is how the U.S. works (and evidently, also Canada). After all, the states don't have different currencies they can devalue to encourage tourism. As a result, the federation has to just give them the money.

However, the Eurozone is not a federal state. As a result, the fiscal transfers are politically charged bailouts that require intense negotiations and really harsh terms. Furthermore, in the Eurozone, some of the austerity measures are so harsh that they are counterproductive in getting the country to pay back its debt, since the economy shrinks so much. This results in losses of sovereignty for smaller nations, who cannot pay back their debt and cannot recover because they are on a really expensive currency. And moving out of the bad areas is hard, because they may not know the language of a new place they move to.


Three Options, But Only Two Solutions

There are three options for how to handle the Eurozone recession:
  1. Everyone gets off of the euro, especially the weaker economies
  2. The EU creates a "United States of Europe
  3. The EU does the same old same old, which either leads to collapse, or harsher and harsher bailout terms on weaker countries, leading to a loss of sovereignty
However, one solution is off of the table. It is clear the leaders of the Eurozone countries are determined that it never breaks up. So we are left with only two alternatives.
  1. The EU creates a "United States of Europe"
  2. The EU does the same old same old, which either leads to collapse, or harsher and harsher bailout terms on weaker countries, leading to a loss of sovereignty
"United States of Europe" might leave more fiscal autonomy for the member countries. But the "same old same old" would eventually become a very oppressive system where Brussels could control every detail of the nations budget in the weaker economies.

The point is, either one of these options is going to gradually move towards a loss of sovereignty for the member nations. 

The Eurozone crisis is something that in a sense, can force unity. However, it will force a marriage that "isn't meant to be." (Well...it is meant to be...from a prophecy standpoint. But not from a governmental standpoint.)

The EU founding fathers knew that it would have problems, but hoped those problems would cause the European countries to form a federation. An influential European think tank even admits this in one of the articles:
The euro’s founding fathers foresaw this problem, but they believed that the necessity for political cooperation generated by the euro would be used by member states to move gradually towards political union. This was Helmut Kohl’s dream. Instead, these pressures were ignored by nations clinging to illusions of sovereignty until they broke free in the euro crisis, unleashing their full destructive potential.
Germany recently declassified some documents that admitted to knowing the Euro had flaws (especially because of Italy), but they went ahead with it anyway

So what to do about this?


Franco-German Motor

It is clear that the French President, and major political parties in France, are ready for federation. However, the EU has long had the "Franco-German" motor. After all, Recommendation 666 was based on a Franco-German proposal itself. One person on Twitter said "can you remember anytime a Franco-German proposal failed?" So if the French can get the Germans to cooperate, it will only be a matter of time until we have a eurozone federation on our hands. But getting cooperation will be tough.

Which brings us back to defence integration. If the EU controls the budget, its going to be a lot easier to provide incentives/budgetary controls based on defence spending and defence integration. Unfortunately, this is what the U.S. does. Theoretically, the individual states control their own education systems. But the federal government rewards states with money when they follow their recommendations. So in reality, the US federal government controls education, even though it is outside the area they are supposed to control. The EU could do something similar in defence, if it became a Eurozone federation. I think they are even already talking about small financial incentives for certain types of defence integration, even under the current system.


The Mark of the Beast

At some point, this is going to get so insane that the whole world will be forced to be on the same currency, through the mark of the beast. It is anyone's guess why it will seem like a good idea at the time. But most likely, it will be a bad economic idea that is politically motivated, just like the Euro is. This will be led by a person who acts on behalf of the Antichrist, controlling the religious and economic aspects.

We should keep a very close eye on Javier Solana. But we should also keep a very close eye on "economic integration." They already have the technology for the mark of the beast. The Verichip company formerly implanted chips into peoples  arms so they can use them like a credit card. If the battery were to leak, it would cause a painful sore. Manufacturing is now discontinued, but the tech is still there. Needless to say, the chip generated a ton of controversy.

All of this sounds terribly familiar from the book of Revelation.

Stay Tuned.


Tuesday, July 7, 2015

EU Prophecy News X-Files

Hello everyone.

I first want to say thank you all very much for your comments. If I haven't replied to yours yet, I will do so soon. I really like to hear what everyone has to say.

There is some information I would like to to share with my audience. But I don't want it Google searchable or discoverable without the link. Why is this? Some of you may recall that I emailed the WEU five years ago, requesting information. Once they discovered that I was sharing the emails with a prophecy site, they stopped being willing to cooperate.

I am in a vaguely similar (though not exactly the same) situation. I have no plans to do anything unethical or illegal. But I really would like to share some things I know that I'm sure many of you would like to know, without needlessly ruffling someone's feathers about it. I still want all of my readers to be able to access the information.

I have mulled over what to do about this. I tried to make a new blog, and password protect that blog. But that would require you all getting the password. It is unlikely that any one will discover the posts, so I have opted away from the password protected site, but only having a sister site, called "EU prophecy news X files" (silly name I know). I have made the settings so the posts are not indexed by Google. If there is something I would post that I really really don't want anyone to find, I'll type the text of it, then post an image of it.

This website you are on right now, will absolutely remain the main website. But I plan to hyperlink over to the non-indexed site whenever there is a semi-sensitive post. I will post the link in a blog post without much fanfare or description. And potentially, I will remove the link to it after a few days. So perhaps bookmark the link. I will bury the link in this website as well, but not in a terribly obvious location. And of course, if you want the link back, you can always comment, and I'll make it live again.

Sorry this is such a hassle, but there is some stuff I would just like to share. I think it would also be fine to retweet on Twitter (if you desire), especially if the live link goes down after while. But of course, no obligation to retweet. Just no reason to hold back.

This will certainly not deter a determined visitor from finding the other site, nor will it stop the NSA, the government, hackers, etc. I just don't want to cause needless annoyance or unnecessary explaining to do to secular audiences.

So without further ado, I introduce to you the first hyperlink, Memo 001. 

This particular hyperlink will be deactivated in a few days. I still want you all to be able to access it, so I will archive it somewhere on this site that is kind of counterintuitive.

Saturday, June 27, 2015

EUCO Debrief

Impetus Towards EU Army

As you know, I have been tracking the "ramp up" and proceedings of the EU's June 2015 Council on "Security and Defence." There has been a huge push for the integration of EU armed forces, into something the EU Commission president calls an "European army." Some think tanks were making some pushes for some rather large decisions to be made at the June European Council on Security and Defence. The European Parliament, the interparliamentary council, talked big. On many fronts, there was a big push for defence cooperation. 

And of course, Dr. Javier Solana chaired a task force recommending the EU create a "European Defence Union." Solana's group of eminent person's have had a few meetings since a year and a half ago. Solana's plan was to strongly encourage the creation of a European Defence Union, at the 2015 security and defence meeting. It seems the EU is devoting a European Council (EUCO) meeting to security and defence every two years, starting in 2013. This was the next meeting after that. So Solana and his crew published his Wall Street Journal op-ed, and released his report. Furthermore, Solana has admitted to going on a "roadshow" to many capitals of EU member states to push for a European Defence Union. He even came to the United States. After all, at his original presentation of the report in Brussels in March, he pledged that he will put all of the energies that he has left into defence integration. He has clearly been hard at work.

Even right before the June EUCO on defence and security, he was interviewed by Euractiv on a "Wake up call for a European Defence Union." Germany seemed on board with the "European Defence Union" and so did ALDE group in European parliament, who plagiarized the term, issuing their own report, which almost had the same recommendations as the Solana paper. 

This whole time, Jean Claude Juncker, EU Commission president, has more than once called for a "European army" to stand up to Putin. Even secular bloggers think the Solana report was coordinated with the Juncker announcement. He called for an EU army at least twice, and one of his spokespersons reiterated support. Finally, the night before the EUCO, the Commission VP, Timmermans, said that the EU regarded an EU army as a long term objective, as well as the preservation of the Euro. So it's certainly not just Solana who wants an EU army of sorts.

I have been putting a lot of emotional energy into anticipating the EUCO on Defence and Security, due to Solana's apparent interest in influencing policy. Maybe...just maybe this time...we would not feel so lost in the dark as far as prophecy is concerned. Especially since the 666 was floating around again...

So what was the outcome of the huge meeting on defence and security?

The Meeting that Never Was

The meeting was so catastrophically lackluster I won't even bother to post their conclusions here. I won't give the EU the credibility by acknowledging them, the conclusions were so absolutely pitiful. In their big meeting on "defence and security" one item they touched on relatively little was "defence and security." Much what they said/aspired to was largely already public information for months prior to the meeting.

 I am not a huge fan of an EU army concept, especially if its not accountable to the electorate. But if they are gonna hype it like that, they had at least better follow through with something. If they are going to talk big, they have to back it up. It reminds me of that old "The Office" episode, where the boss hypes a big "surprise" for all his colleagues, but the big surprise ends up being ice cream sandwiches. Except in this case, there was no ice cream sandwich.

If you want some mildly interesting EU conclusions on defence, here are the May 18 defence ministers conclusions on CSDP

The meeting agenda, in the weeks before, was gradually upstaged by migration, and the word "defence" was scrubbed from the agenda. Talks covered Greece, then migrant quotas.

And don't get me started on the "new European Security Strategy." It will be presented....a year from now. Mogherini called for the revision of the European Security Strategy. She implied that Solana's '03 strategy was good for its time, but outdated. She acted like some of the details of the new ESS would be at this June meeting. Everyone started calling for its revision. But gradually (at least in my opinion), it went from "will present some initial ideas on ESS" to "Mogherini will be tasked with the creation of the new ESS."

How long does it take to write the European Security Strategy!?!?!? I want to say that Solana wrote his in the amount of time Mogherini called for a new one. Granted, his was simple and formatted somewhat like a college essay, but it was widely celebrated. 

Don't I sound frustrated? 

BUT....the fact I am mad has an important point to show for prophecy.

Who else do you think is royally infuriated the EU did absolutely nothing at all!??!?!?


Solana Must Be Furious!

I can't imagine how mad Solana must be! After all, I may be annoyed for other reasons, but then again I didn't put a year and a half of working and traveling to prepare for it, only for them not to discuss my ideas. This is exactly what happened to Solana, who has dedicated 14 years of his life to European defence (both in NATO and the EU). Very few of his ideas got any air time at all, and most of them were so generic that they weren't exclusively his idea (i.e. increase defence spending in Europe).

In one of his meetings before the June EUCO, he called for a debate on European defence, and said his new favorite phrase "If not now, then when?" If they aren't going to build an integrated military now, then will they ever? Solana is not getting any younger, he will be having a birthday soon. 

Emotionally speaking, if a human is put into the situation Solana is put in, they have three choices:
  1. Get mad and just give up
  2. Wait around for another opportune time, then try again
  3. Get mad, and try even harder.
#2 even Solana admits is not an option. After all, he has said "if not now, then when?" He is also not getting any younger. He has also pledged to give his remaining energies to pushing forward defence integration, going on a big road show to push his ideas. I don't think he's going to take a big break because they didn't do what he wanted. If anything, he'll do the opposite. 

#1 is unlike him, or unlike anyone at his level of personal achievement. He seems pretty invested in the project. He doesn't talk like a person who is just going to stop and give up.

So that leaves us with #3. Get frustrated and try even harder. If you were him, you would be mad too. So it's not slanderous to assume he's frustrated and going to try all the harder.

Conclusion

Hopefully, I didn't show too much anger or frustration in this post. But as you all know, prophecy watching has the capacity to be very hard on the emotions. It's an emotional roller coaster, that instead of lasting a few minutes, lasts several years. For some of you, it has been a much longer wait than I have waited.

Watching gay marriage get ratified in all 50 states, the exact same day the EU had their non-meeting on "security and defence" was admittedly somewhat demoralizing. 

I go to a verse:
19 “Again, truly I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything they ask for, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20 For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.” Matthew 18:19-20
I realize this was said in context of church discipline, but it seems to apply generally to prayer as a whole. In some sense, we have already done this, since we all have prayed for wisdom on prophecy. 

But we have really been sitting in a dark room 5 years now. The best prophecy theory of all time ever seems to be foiled in its original form, and went to a watered down form. But against all odds, gives glimmers of hope 5 years later, only to fizzle slightly for the moment. I admit I have had some sinful thoughts in the past days, as if God owes me/us something. So I don't want to do this in a spirit of that. 

But...if you all agree...I think we should in some sense, corporately pray that God give us clarity on prophecy and what is happening around us. We seemed to have had clarity before, only to be shot down. 

That is..... if you all agree we should pray this. (If it's an inappropriate request, then you readers should object). I know we have prayed for wisdom before, but I am personally pray for clarity on this subject, as to why it seemed to fail back then, showing glimmers of hope again. May God grant us mercy and clarity on matters of prophecy, that used to seem so clear, but seem so dark now.

Dear God, please give us clarity, because we feel like we have been crawling around in the dark, with feelings of disappointment, for years as far as prophecy is concerned. Please take away the darkness from our eyes, give us insight to see. And may you be honored in the process. Amen.



Friday, June 19, 2015

Liveblog: Tailgate the EUCO on Defence


This week, I will have a running blog post, monitoring the activities leading up to the European Council meeting Thurs./Fri, which is supposed to emphasize defence and security. I will post items I believe are relevant for end time prophecy. I will pay very special attention to Javier Solana's role in EU defence integration process, as well as any proposed losses of sovereignty of the EU member states.

For more information on why I believe Javier Solana is very significant for end time prophecy, go to this link and see these two powerpoints.

As always, and in all matters we should never forget to pray for wisdom, peace, and pray that God's will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

Friday, June 5, 2015

Recommendation 666 Turns 15: What Really Happened?

This article is about Javier Solana. To see why I think there is strong evidence that he might be the antichrist, click here.

*****

Today, exactly 15 years ago, the Western European Union Assembly proposed the infamous Recommendation 666. The Western European Union was a 10-nation military alliance in Europe, that existed for 15 years, before finally integrating into the EU. 

It is relatively well known that the WEU Assembly recommended new powers to Javier Solana, former High Representative of the EU, with this recommendation. But I want to further explore Recommendation 666, and the major events surrounding it. Oddly enough, I don't think I fully realized it's prophetic significance, other than the fact that Javier Solana was receiving more power.


Here's a link to the Wayback Machine archive of Recommendation 666. Point #12 is most significant:
12. Support proposals for the WEU Secretary-General and CFSP High Representative to preside over the PSC and civilian crisis-management machinery and give him powers to convene the Council of the European Union in the event of an emergency;
Contrary to what I believed before, this recommendation was implemented very quickly after the recommendation was given. In January 22, 2001 decision setting up the Political and Security Committee installed this power for the high representative. 
After consulting the Presidency and without prejudice to Article 18 of the TEU, the Secretary-General/High Representative for the CFSP may chair the PSC, especially in the event of a crisis.


Though the WEU assembly was only a "consultative" body, it was part of the WEU organization, specifically put in place to give defence advice to the WEU Council. 

I didn't realize this, but Recommendation 666 came at a time of very rapid transition for the WEU. This came at a time when the WEU transferred almost all of its functions to the EU and its new Political and Security Committee. The only thing left after this was the "residual" Article V defence committment, which the WEU retained. On the day Recommendation 666 was implemented, Solana gave a speech and answered questions by those members of the Assembly who were upset that some people were going to lose their jobs! This was because of the transfer of the WEU functions to the EU.


The WEU conducted military operations as the "military arm" of the EU, though technically being a separate organization. The missions they performed were not that impressive, but the range of allowable missions included the "Petersberg" crisis management tasks, which included military tasks. 

It seems big prophecy developments are followed by a very obvious 666 symbol. For an overview of the viewpoint of this website, and the prophetic fulfillments associated with Javier Solana, see this powerpoint presentation

So where does Recommendation 666 fall in? It's one of the most "obvious" 666 connections. I suggest a possibility here, and I will make my case. 
The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they receive authority as kings with the beast for one hour. 13 These have one purpose, and they give their power and authority to the beast. Revelation 17:12-13 NASB
I formerly believed this took place at the WEU's dissolution. But bear with me. Notice how it says that the ten kings have "one purpose." This is the same phrase in Greek as "common purpose" in verse 17 later on. Literally, it is "one mind," which is how the ESV renders it. Both verse 13 and verse 17 say the same Greek phrase.

I would like to point out some very interesting EU quotes to make my case.

An article from 1999 makes note of this transition:
The WEU, the organisational bridge between the EU and NATO, is undertaking an audit of what assets it can pass to the EU as the latter expands its Petersberg capabilities. By the time the EU has asset-stripped the WEU the latter will be largely moribund.
From the document announcing the WEU dissolution:
Building on the achievements of the WEU and the principle of European solidarity, the EU has taken on crisis management tasks since 2000 and has now developed a Common Security and Defence Policy.  
There's that "common purpose" that Revelation 17:17 seems to mention: the Common Security and Defence Policy. The EU is pursuing "common policies" on many subjects (agriculture, fisheries, etc), as well as defence.

The title of Recommendation 666 is:
on the consequences of including certain functions of WEU in the European Union - reply to the annual report of the Council
Interestingly, Recommendation 666 came around the time WEU Crisis management functions were integrated into the EU.

And at the Cologne European Council, they yet again borrow similar language from the Bible, albeit unknowingly:
The Council declaration states that in the event of the EU fulfilling its responsibility in the area of the Petersberg tasks, ‘the WEU as an organisation would have completed its purpose’. At the Cologne meeting, Member States also appointed Javier Solana, from Spain, as High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), a post that had been created by the Treaty of Amsterdam.



Remember? The ten kings have "one purpose" and give their power and authority to the beast.

Which is exactly what happened. At the Cologne European Council in 1999, a lot of big integration events happened.
  1. High Representative Solana appointed.
  2. Led to creation of Political and Security Committee 
  3. EU decides to take on autonomous crisis management tasks
  4. Decision to set up EU Military Committee
  5. Decision to set up EU military staff
The Bible says that the ten kings have authority with the beast for "one hour." I have always interpreted this to mean a short time. In Revelation 18 it says that Babylon's judgment comes in "one hour." Which is quite interesting, because almost as soon as Solana was appointed, they started transferring all of their functions to the EU, putting the military crisis management tasks under the PSC instead of the WEU Permanent Council. This is indeed, a very short time. 

And who is the leader of the PSC? Javier Solana and/or his deputies. Here is part of the explanatory memorandum on Recommendation 666. 

33. A more technical aspect, but one with political implications for the decision-making process, is who should in future preside over the forums that have to take the necessary decisions on the Common European Security and Defence Policy (CESDP), specifically the General Affairs Council expanded to include defence ministers and the Political and Security Committee (PSC). A Franco-German initiative proposes that the latter should be chaired by the High Representative for the CFSP and WEU Secretary-General, Mr Solana. Some member countries are still against this solution but in order to make the PSC more coherent and effective, strong pressure should be applied for the latter to be run by the High Representative. To this end the Assembly supports the position taken by the European Parliament in its resolution containing proposals to the Intergovernmental Conference

 And also:

     74. There is a need, should this prove too difficult, to retain the possibility of using the WEU framework to develop closer cooperation, as provided under Article 17.4 of the TEU. In order to strengthen coherence and continuity of action within the European Union, it is necessary to provide either:
    • for the WEU Secretary-General and CFSP High Representative to preside over the General Affairs Council, expanded to include the defence ministers; or
    • for the former at least to have the power to ask for a meeting of the Council to be convened, and
    • for him to chair the PSC and coordination machinery for civilian crisis management. In contrast, the Military Committee should be chaired by a military officer.

    Interestingly, the WEU Permanent Council held a luncheon on June 28, 2001. Because it would no longer meet as the WEU Permanent Council. It would meet as the expanded PSC, because the 10 reps on the WEU Permanent Council were the same ambassadors as those on the PSC.

    On 28 June 2001, the Netherlands presidency gave a luncheon to mark the last session of the permanent WEU Council. Three days later the crisis management functions of the WEU were taken over by the European Union and its Political and Security Committee (PSC), as envisaged at Amsterdam and confirmed in Nice. On the insistence of the Netherlands, the new institutions of the Union, the PSC, the EU Military Committee (EUMC) and the EU Military Staff (EUMS) had been formalised in Art. 25 of the Nice Treaty. The transfer was not complete, however, and a rump of the WEU secretariat was maintained to deal with the Art. V automatic military assistance commitment, relations with the WEU Assembly and armaments cooperation
    Long story short, the WEU, very quickly, transferred almost all of its functions to Javier Solana. This is confirmed by the Luxembourg Declaration of November 22, 1999.
    to authorise the transmission of all WEU"s work and analyses, particularly those of the military Staff, to the High Representative for the CSFP and the other appropriate bodies of the Council of the European Union taking into account the relevant security arrangements
    The WEU was quickly on the road to becoming dormant and defunct once again. Later on the WEAG (Western European Armanents Group) closed down in 2005. It's functions were transferred to the European Defence Agency (which relates to military arms procurement) in 2005. Same with the WEU Centre for Security Studies became the EU Centre for Security Studies in 2002, as well as the WEU Satellite Centre became the EU Satellite Center that same year.

    To summarize the ten kings have "one purpose" and they give their "power and authority" to the beast. Now, if Solana is the AC, then he is the beast. The WEU had "one purpose" which was to get the EU to fulfill military crisis management tasks (Petersberg tasks). Furthermore, they performed the transfers to the EU, and to Solana's leadership, very quickly, in "one hour" as it were.

    Here is a chart of WEU/EU integration:
    December 11-12, 1998
    Document 666: Vienna European Council proposes creating the post of the EU High Representative “as soon as possible.”
    June 3-4, 1999
    Javier Solana nominated to be first High Representative of the CFSP
    June 3-4, 1999
    Cologne European Council leads to creation of the Political and Security Committee, EU Military Committee, EU Military Staff
    Nov. 22, 1999
    Luxembourg Declaration transfers functions of WEU to the EU High Representative Solana
    Nov. 25, 1999
    Solana appointed new WEU Secretary General
    Feb 21, 2000
    Interim Political and Security Committee set up
    June 5, 2000
    Recommendation 666: Proposes Solana preside over the new body (PSC) that determines the “political control and strategic direction” of military crisis management operations
    January 22, 2001
    Decision establishing the Political and Security Committee
    June 28, 2001
    WEU Permanent Council holds last meeting
    July 1, 2001
    Political and Security Committee takes over crisis management? (see article above)
    2002
    WEU Institute for Security Studies becomes EU Institute for Security Studies
    2002
    WEU Satellite Center becomes EU Satellite Center
    2004
    WEAG (Western European Armaments Group) dissolved
    2005
    European Defence Agency (arms procurement organization) comes in and fulfills former role of WEAG
    March 30, 2010
    WEU dissolves itself, in light of the new Treaty of Lisbon, and the Common Security and Defence Policy. Mutual assistance pact in Treaty of Lisbon, similar to Article V of WEU Treaty, causes members to dissolve organization.


    Now I think we can safely say that the WEU gave its "power and authority" to Solana. Granted, the WEU didn't have much "power and authority" to begin with, but I think this prophecy has been fulfilled. It relinquished all of its decision making capabilities to the EU, with Solana at the head.

    Now, take a look at the passage again:
    The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they receive authority as kings with the beast for one hour. 13 These have one purpose, and they give their power and authority to the beast. 
    14 These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful.” 
    15 And he *said to me, “The waters which you saw where the harlot sits, arepeoples and multitudes and nations and tongues. 16 And the ten horns which you saw, and the beast, these will hate the harlot and will make her desolate and naked, and will eat her flesh and will burn her up with fire. 17 For God has put it in their hearts to execute His [i]purpose by having a common purpose, and by giving their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God will be fulfilled. 18 The woman whom you saw is the great city, which reigns over the kings of the earth.” Revelation 17:12-18 NASB
    So here it seems that the beast (Antichrist) and his ten kings hate end times Babylon, whoever that is. They apparently violently destroy this city and "burn her up with fire." So it seems this is a military activity to say the least. Since the harlot rides the back of the beast (see Revelation 17), it seems the Antichrist and Babylon are initially allies. But this apparently doesn't last. The ten kings and beast have a "common purpose" by which they destroy end times Babylon. So it makes sense this common purpose is in the military domain (hence, a common purpose on defence issues: Common Security and Defence Policy).

    The EU has a common policy on defence, but its not very impressive, and exists mostly on paper. They do conduct some military missions, not the least of which is the new EUNAVFOR Med operation about to be launched, which is supposedly the most ambitious one they have ever done. However, national capitals dictate their own defence policies for the most part. If the EU launches an operation, they don't necessarily provide all of the resources needed for the mission! Even Solana back in the day had to resort to phoning each of the countries, asking for a field surgeon or transport plane. 

    So the part about the ten kings giving their kingdom to the beast does not seem like a past event. Verse 12-13 and verse 17 use very similar language, and almost sound like the same event. But notice the repetition, and the slightly different wording. Theoretically, these could be separate events. Furthermore, after verse 12-13, it seems to "fast forward" to Babylon's destruction. But why do the ten kings destroy Babylon? The text seems to tell us:
     For God has put it in their hearts to execute His [i]purpose by having a common purposeand by giving their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God will be fulfilled.
    God puts it in their hearts to do his purpose by them having a "common purpose" and ceding their sovereignty to the beast. Since it fast forwards to Babylon's destruction, it might not be the same moment as Revelation 17:12-13, though it sounds similar. Both the repetition and the "fast forward" to an event definitely future, I think, allow for this.

    So using our Solana/WEU lens, its extraordinarily interesting that he issued some proposals to the European Council for their meeting in June, on how to build a European Defence Union. This would entail a loss of sovereignty to the member states. Germany apparently backs the plan for a "European Defence Union." Solana has been out of politics for five years. So its rather remarkable he may be in the process of making a comeback. Not only did he chair this think tank, he also said that he will put all of his energies left into EU defence integration. "Defence integration" is what was happening when the WEU was merging with the EU. "Defence integration" is what happens when sovereignty is ceded to the EU in defence matters.

    The dissolution of the WEU in March 2010 was just the nail in the coffin, and the start of the ceding of sovereignty to the EU. At the Treaty of Lisbon, more sovereignty was ceded to Brussels. The only remaining vestige of the WEU was the Article V self-defence clause. After the Lisbon treaty, they saw no more need for this.

    However, though sovereignty was ceded at Lisbon, defence remains one of the most "intergovernmental" aspects of the EU, as opposed to "supranational." In short, sovereignty over defence remains with the member states. However, at the June 2015 European Council, they want to increase defence cooperation. Despite vocal opposition from some, many EU officials are fully ready to become on board for the integration of EU armies.

    Solana Needs A Job

    Solana needs a job if he's the AC. Preferrably, not a terribly demanding job. After all, he is almost 73. (He has a ton of energy at his age, but still). Will he be High Representative in the future? Maybe. Will he be some other job? Maybe. Hard to say.

    If he is going to make a powerful comeback before the next High Representative is nominated, what are some options for positions he could hold? Go back to recommendation 666 explanatory memorandum. What else did it propose, even more than once, in addition to the powers granted in Recommendation 666?

     74. There is a need, should this prove too difficult, to retain the possibility of using the WEU framework to develop closer cooperation, as provided under Article 17.4 of the TEU. In order to strengthen coherence and continuity of action within the European Union, it is necessary to provide either:
    • for the WEU Secretary-General and CFSP High Representative to preside over the General Affairs Council, expanded to include the defence ministers; or
    • for the former at least to have the power to ask for a meeting of the Council to be convened, and
    • for him to chair the PSC and coordination machinery for civilian crisis management. In contrast, the Military Committee should be chaired by a military officer.

    And also:

    33. A more technical aspect, but one with political implications for the decision-making process, is who should in future preside over the forums that have to take the necessary decisions on the Common European Security and Defence Policy (CESDP), specifically the General Affairs Council expanded to include defence ministers and the Political and Security Committee (PSC).

    There is no "Council of Defence Ministers" that meets formally and has voting rights. It is not a new recommendation, but Solana and crew propose the creation of such a group. They propose a Eurogroup of Defence Ministers, that includes the willing and able within the field of defence. Much like the Eurogroup for finance, it leaves behind those who don't wish to participate.

    Which is interesting, because of this article's address and contents. It contains many similar wordings as in Solana's proposal. (Learn more about that here).

    https://eu2015.lv/news/media-releases/666-eu-defence-ministers-in-riga-call-for-unity-in-addressing-european-security-threats



    In the Solana document, he proposes a second chair to a newly created Eurogroup of Defence ministers, in addition to the high representative. He also proposes a deputy to the HR be put in full time charge of the Common Security and Defence Policy (again, not a new idea).

    In the past, at the European Convention for the European Constitution, proposals were tabled for a "Mr ESDP" who would be a deputy for Solana. This person would: Chair the PSC, and chair the new Council of Defence ministers. However, it didn't make it into the final proposals.

    Interestingly enough, Solana was actually against the "double hatted" HR/VP position that exists today! He opposed the "double hatted" job which would merge the Commission and the EEAS. Despite being happy he was going to be the next foreign minister, he did oppose this move. Perhaps (pure speculation) he will find a way to bifurcate the defence component of the EU into his own future position.

    What else does Solana propose? A group of 'like-minded" member states to come to deeper cooperation in defence, through the Permanent Structured Cooperation mechanism.

    Remember. The ten kings, they have "one mind" (ESV) and give their royal power to the beast.

    Use the treaty basis for permanent structured cooperation (PESCO) to move European defence integration forward with a group of likeminded states. (More Union in European Defence, emphasis added)

    I don't know what is going to happen at the end of June, if Solana will make a dramatic comeback, or if they will create a new position, and only later (like in December) install him into it. Or maybe nothing will happen. I'm not sure. But I do know the suspense is killing me.

    Come Lord Jesus! He can't come soon enough! Though we (and especially me) are undeserving, yet we wait for him.





    Saturday, May 9, 2015

    What Do the Germans Think? Solana's New ESS


    It's quite interesting what you can find out if you search for keywords in other languages. One language I have been doing this with is German. A couple interesting things popped up.


    http://www.hans-peter-bartels.de/solana-papier-fuer-mogherinis-neue-eu-sicherheitsstrategie/

    Hans Peter Bartels Giving Solana Paper to Mogherini
    at Interparliamentary Conference


    Here, one of the Task Force members is giving the "Solana Paper" to Mogherini, at the Interpaliamentary conference in Riga on defence. The title of the page says: 

    Solana-Papier für Mogherinis neue EU-Sicherheitsstrategie

    Translation: Solana Paper for Mogherinis new EU security strategy 

    The interparliementary conference is a meeting of lots of officials from various countries on the matters of defence. 

    One of the "side events" at this conference was a presentation by Hans Peter Bartels of Solana's plan for a European Defence Union. Here is the text of that speech. 



    Some interesting things in there. First, he is quite blunt. Second, he proposes something the Solana paper does not: an EU defence commissioner. In addition, he very forcefully advocates for an EU military headquarters and a Council of Defence Ministers configuration. 

    He says the following at the end of his speech (which he gave in English):
    Sixthly: We need a new European Security Strategy, which will have to address all these issues. In restrained diplomatic language, of course. The ESS of 2003 was a milestone because it established Europe’s commitment to multilateralism against the Bush-doctrine of that time and America’s commitment to unilateralism
    So lets make a new EU security strategy, addressing all the issues in Solana's plan. And lets make sure its in "restrained diplomatic language" so the public doesn't get too worried about it. Concerning....and not very transparent.

    Go here and see the conclusions of the Interparliamentary Conference in Riga. The conclusions involve many of the same ideas that Solana agrees with 

    What do the newspapers say? Here is what Euractiv.de says:


    The former EU High Representative and NATO Secretary General Javier Solana will present the results of an international expert group in Brussels on Monday. Recommended therefore is a new European security strategy, a "political and military ability to conduct autonomous intervention operations outside the borders of Europe" and the establishment of a military EU headquarters in Brussels. (Google Translate)

    The German newspaper Die Welt agrees with this characterization:

    Must feel vindicated Juncker also by former EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana and NATO Secretary General. The Spaniard is on Monday in Brussels the results of an international group of experts. The developed in six months paper ("More Union in European Defence") recommends a new European security strategy, a "political and military ability to conduct autonomous intervention operations outside the borders of Europe" and the establishment of a military EU headquarters in Brussels. (Google translate)
    Newspapers sometimes borrow articles and wording from each other, as it seems to be the case here. But its interesting they say that Solana is proposing a "new European security strategy" since he was the one who made the original, and now they are calling for a revision. This could be a mere matter of semantics, since that is, in fact, what the Solana Report really is. It is a strategy about security, hence a "security strategy." But it seems Hans Peter Bartels, who was on the Solana task force, views it as a recommendation to Mogherini for her new European Security strategy. This new ESS is supposed to be in the works, but has not been unveiled yet.

    Germany is backing the plan for an integrated armed forces, apparently the Solana plan. They will begin integrating some of their own troops under Dutch command, to show their commitment to armed forces integration. This is not something that must be unanimously agreed upon. The Solana plan recommends the use of "Permanent Structured Cooperation," which is kind of like the Eurozone, in that only those who agree to it move forward with it. In fact the paper proposes a "defence group" (i.e. like the "Eurogroup"). But instead of finance ministers, it proposes it be a Council of Defence Ministers , which can meet in PESCO format (i.e. only the willing participants).

    In another article by Blockmans, who technically authored the Solana report, he spells it out and proposes a "Eurogroup of Defence Ministers." (Careful going to that article (i have not linked to it). It might have a virus, perhaps unbeknownst to the website owners. If you go searching for it, use the wayback machine to get an image of the site.)

    The Eurogroup has very little accountability in its activities. Nor does one have to already be a finance minister to become its president. (The last president was not even finance minister when the previous one, Jean Claude Juncker, stepped down). He was only finance minister for a month when nominated. They are considering alternatives, some of whom aren't even currently finance minister.

    Which makes it very interesting that Solana doesn't propose one chair for this new PESCO Steering Group, but two chairs, one of whom is the High Representative:

    Who will fill the other chair?

    This paper, by two PSC members in 2008, propose a very similar strategy that the Solana plan does. In this academic work, they state this interesting fact:

    One could argue that the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty codify, in some ways, the current practice. In theory, the CFSP High Representative presently has no right of initiative and he/she can only speak “on behalf of the Council at the request of the Presidency”. In practice, however, Javier Solana often leads the Troika at international meetings and conferences; he meets or speaks daily with foreign officials; he regularly issues statements, which are perceived by the outside world as reflecting the Union’s position, even when he has not been thus requested by the Presidency; he submits to the Council, either on his own or in cooperation with the Commission, several papers containing ideas and recommendations on the course of action that the Union could follow on specific issues; and he sits at the negotiating table with third parties on highly sensitive issues, mandated by the Council (actually, in the case of the Iranian nuclear program, not just by the EU, but also the US, China and Russia).
    The ENP was launched with a letter from Solana and Patten. The European Security Strategy (2003) was a paper by Solana called "A Secure Europe in a Better World." Granted, both of these came at the request of the European council. The Solana paper (2015) is meant to have a policy impact on the European Council, similar to the Delors Report did for monetary integration. While not specifically requested by the European Council, it is clearly a response to the 2013 European Council, with view to the June 2015 European Council, which reviews the progress of defence activities.

    In reality, I should stop blogging and speculating and just wait until the June Summit, which everything seems to be pointing too. But I don't want us to wait that long and be disappointed. We have been disappointed by too many EU summits. Pray God gives us wisdom on prophecy.

    Come Lord Jesus!!!!! He can't come soon enough.




    Tuesday, May 5, 2015

    German Defence Minister Apparently Pushes for Solana Plan

    This article is related to Solana. To see why I think Solana is possibly the Antichrist, CLICK HERE.


    This is just a quick update. But I wanted you all to know.

    The German defence minister yet again publicly announced her support of the European army. However, it goes farther. Excerpt from the Daily Mail:

    ‘The European Army is our long-term goal’ she said ‘but first we have to strengthen the European Defence Union.
     The United States also wants us Europeans as a powerful force within NATO.’
    ‘To achieve this, some nations with concrete military cooperation must come to the fore - and the Germans and the Dutch are doing this.’ 
    ‘The Ebola crisis alone, or the attack of ISIS on the Yazidi has shown that Europe must be more flexible and have faster access anywhere in the world in the event of a crisis.
    ‘Well-rehearsed structures within a European Defence Union could help to shorten coordination processes and speed up the help that is needed.’ 
    She added: ‘All over Europe we will need to invest more if our alliances can reliably take responsibility.’ 
    She insisted such a project remained a long-term goal and would ‘probably only be something that my children would experience.’

    "European Defence Union" is not a massively common term to be using. It's been used before, back in articles from like 1998 (and a handful recently). But that exact phrase isn't thrown about very often.

    ....but...if you Google "European Defence Union," this leads you straight to several results about Javier Solana's recent call for a "European Defence Union." The front page is full of results from his report. His report calls for a "European Defence Union" (EDU).

    It is reasonably clear that Solana's plan is what Ursula von der Leyen is endorsing here, based on the other things she said. Solana's crew themselves say that the European Defence Union is not a European army.* So it makes sense that she would promote the European Defence Union that would lead to an EU army.

    This is the second time she has pushed for a pan European armed forces. She also pushed it right after Juncker called for one, a day before Solana presented his plan. So we have hints here that Germany is going to back an integrated armed forces. This is why UKIP supporters on Twitter have been sharing this article today with great concern.

    Initially, all of the frowns from the Europeans would make one think that they won't jump on board. But if you look into the tendencies of the relevant countries, it seems almost all of them could be cajoled into getting involved with that, at least some day. The only blatantly resistant one is the UK. ...And they are having elections this week.

    To see why I think Solana is possibly the Antichrist, CLICK HERE.

    Sorry I have not replied to all of the comments yet I will do that very soon. Please keep them coming! I enjoy hearing what you have to say and I enjoy discussing this with you all as well!

    Come Lord Jesus!

    *(Though very similar to an EU army, it is technically the "integration" of national armed forces under European command, with associated pooling and sharing of resources, communication, intelligence, etc).