Just WHO Does He Think He Is!?!

Preface: This article is about Javier Solana. To learn why I think he is probably the Antichrist, go to the "Overview" page and see the powerpoint. Two more powerpoints are forthcoming.

*******

I've been begging God for more wisdom. Some piece of...incontrovertible evidence...that Solana is our guy.

Emotions are very bad things to rely on when seeking answers to prayer. Nevertheless, I was getting this feeling (and heard some very wise words from those in the comments) that though we wait, it's on God's timetable and he will bring it all together beautifully, when the time is right. I thank you for those words of insight. In that time, and even still today, those are the words I need to hear.

However, I kept begging God. I kept getting vague feeling that it wasn't my place to be asking for such a thing. After all, as if I am the one to be educating him on when things should be happening? How preposterous. But I also got these subtle inklings, that I should take a look at that Solana report again, like something might be in there.

And what I found in there really shocked me. It was hidden in plain site.  But before I go into that that, I'm going to get off-topic for a minute, so I can make my primary argument. I am going to explain the concept of "vocational self-understanding."

Vocational Self-Understanding 

Liberal historical scholars like to pretend Jesus didn't claim to be God. They cut out all of the obvious sayings and the less obvious examples they explain away. Even if we view the gospels as mere ancient literature, these scholars still use some extremely inconsistent standards when defining "what Jesus really said" or "what Jesus really did." When I see the backflips, twists, and turns they do, it actually enhances my faith.

But a popular thing in apologetics these days is "minimal facts." You take what the atheist historians usually concede, and then work a very strong case from there. One example of this is "vocational Christology." How do we know Jesus believed himself to be God? Well, did he play the part? Did he do God's "job?" Did the human man, Jesus of Nazareth, "try to do and be for Israel, that which only God can do and be for Israel?" (paraphrase of an N.T. Wright quote) The answer of course, is a resounding yes.

The Second Coming (link to source)

I mean if you wanted to know if Obama thinks he's President, asking "if he claimed it" would only be a part of your case. You would ask if he rides in a heavily guarded motorcade, attempts to negotiate international treaties, gives speeches like he's the leader of the U.S., proposes legislation, etc. It would be silly to limit yourself to the times he calls himself "President" in no uncertain terms. An equally (and perhaps more important) question is, does he play the part?

In that same vein, look at Jesus. I mean, who is this guy, who thinks that he can inaugurate God's kingdom with his own arrival? Who is this, that seems to edit and tweak Old Testament laws whenever he wants? Who casts out demons in his own name?!? Who is this guy, who tells stories and proph, where he is the main character who is the judge of all humanity in the end times? Who is this man, who forgives sins and heals paralysis all in one swoop, like its no big deal? How outrageous! Who does he think he is!?!? God or something!?!?

Yes.

This and related concepts have been termed Christ's "vocational" self-understanding by theologian N.T. Wright.

The comparison I am about to make is somewhat perverse. However, historical Jesus studies is the best way I know to explain the concept of "vocational self-understanding."  But it is somewhat clear from the Solana CEPS Task Force report, on the basis of past events in European history, that Javier Solana has a rather grandiose understanding of himself and the role he plays within European history.

What does Solana think his job is? The evidence may surprise you.

Make an EDU...Just Like the EMU

In that report, hidden in plain site all along, was something I had read twice before but had missed the significance of. It sounds like nothing at all. But in the context of EU history, it is truly astonishing.

****** 

The CEPS Task Force aims to provide the incumbents at the helm of the EU institutions, in particular the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy / Vice-President of the Commission (HR/VP), with the narrative and the proposals to strengthen defence cooperation in the EU. Ultimately, the necessary defence integration should amount to a ‘European Defence Union’ (EDU). This report defines the shape of such a
Union as the cornerstone of a comprehensive, civil-military security architecture in Europe. Having examined the current and potential conditions in the relevant sectors, the CEPS Task Force recommends an array of policy actions for further cooperation and integration as the natural steps to join all the dots of the defence debate – strategic,
institutional, capabilities, and resources.

****** 

We brand this new framework the ‘European Defence Union’ (EDU). In much the same way as the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) and the proposed Energy Union are the end goals of full European integration in their respective fields, the EDU proclaims the finalité of EU integration in the area of defence.

****** 

In order to move from the blueprint to the launch of the EDU, the European Council, acting upon the proposal of an independent committee appointed by it and supported by the European EEAS and the relevant branches of the European Commission under the authority of the HR/VP, should define a roadmap with practical and realistic steps and implement the plan in stages, similar to the approach to the creation of the EMU.

****** 

The European Council should define a roadmap with practical and realistic steps to move, by stages, from the blueprint to the launch of the EDU. To that end, EU leaders should appoint an independent committee, supported by the EEAS and the relevant branches of the European Commission acting under the authority of the HR/VP, to propose such a roadmap, similar to the approach to create the EMU and involving the attainment of harmonisation criteria and mandatory milestones for upgrades in each basket of reform. Although the process of bringing European armies to a more structured cooperation and, where appropriate, closer integration will certainly be a complex one, the numerous crises facing Europe have made change possible. These crises also offer an opportunity to secure a more peaceful and prosperous future for the EU.

The task force repeatedly emphasizes that it wants to build a European Defence Union (EDU) in the same way that the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) was created.

So it behooves us to find out, from European history, how the EMU was created. Because Solana and crew apparently want to build an EDU in the same way that the EMU was built. This is an essential point.

Eurozone (EMU) Members

The Delors Report

The EMU, more or less, was the EU's long term plan to build the Eurozone: monetary and economic integration. So I googled the process associated with EMU. And guess what? The EMU was also launched with a group of experts called the "Delors Report." The Delors Committee was a group of experts, chaired by the European Commission President Delors, who were instructed by the 1988 European Council to come up with a plan for how to build an Economic and Monetary Union. After 9 months of deliberations, they issued their report in April 1989.  The Delors report recommended the EU form an EMU in three stages. At the June 1989 European Council, on the basis of the report, the Council of Central Bank Governors and Monetary Committee were charged with determining the timetables and criteria for forming an EMU. Eventually, this Delors Committee's recommendations were inserted into the Treaty of Maastricht, without many changes. This Delors Report, is what some analysts refer to as the "blueprint" for the EMU. (1) (2)

An Actual EMU

Analysts have long been puzzled as to how the European nations could come to such a sweeping agreement in a relatively short time frame (1989-1991). The Treaty of Maastricht went into effect in 1993. One article I read emphasizes the special importance that influential groups of experts have on the European policy making process: (1) (2)

I strongly recommend you read a bit of this page on the European Commission website. Read from "The Delors Report Recommended EMU in Three Stages" to "And to Maastricht."

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/euro/emu/road/delors_report_en.htm

Jacques Delors

From wikipedia: 

(Click link for attribution)

The "Solana" Report

If your read Solana's CEPS Task Force report, it is almost obvious that they intend to be the "Delors Report" for a European Defence Union. They harp on the fact that the EDU is to be built the same way the EMU was, making many recommendations for EDU that are analogous to EMU. The EMU was built off of a report by a group of influential experts, chaired by the European Commission President.  They proposed the blueprint and recommended timetables for implementation, and a committee was later set up at the European Council to set deadlines for implementation. It also recommended that the EU start with those countries that are already interested in the project, and work from there. This is exactly what the CEPS Task Force recommends, except in a European Defence Union (EDU), as opposed to an Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). 

Solana's Task Force is a group of influential experts who spent months deliberating on a report, only to release it in time for the June 2015 European Council. The recommendations of the report are explicitly meant to be enacted at the June 2015 European Council. Furthermore, the CEPS Task Force recommends the creation of an independent committee at the EU level, which would set the concrete timetables for implementation among all the interested parties. This is almost exactly how it happened with the EMU. The Delors Report did not set time frames, but implied stages. Later, an EU level committee was set up who actually set the criteria and negotiated the deadlines. This is exactly what the CEPS Task Force recommends, and they explicitly mention this because this is how the EMU was created. A report was made. And then a committee was set up at the June 1989 European council to recommend the concrete timeline.

In order to move from the blueprint to the launch of  the EDU, the European Council, acting upon the proposal of an independent committee appointed by it and supported by the European EEAS and the relevant branches of the European Commission under the authority of the HR/VP, should define a roadmap with practical and realistic steps and implement the plan in stages, similar to the approach to the creation of the EMU.

It even calls itself the "blueprint" of the EDU's creation. The Delors Report, according to one scholarly article, was the "blueprint" for the EMU.

The Delors Report which set out the blueprint for EMU which was incorporated with only minor changes in the Maastricht Treaty (2) 

The similarities surrounding both situations are so obvious that I have to make a table to document them all. The more I read about this "Delors Report" the more it reminds me of what Solana's aims are with the CEPS Task Force Report:

Delors Report (EMU)	CEPS Task Force Report (EDU)
Chair: Eu Commission President 16 members 2 rapporteurs 38 pages	Chair: Former EU High Representative 16 members 2 rapporteurs 35 pages
Delors Report came in response to a specific request from the 1988 European Council	Though not requested by the 2013 European Council, the CEPS Report implied the inadequacies of the 2013 European Council as part of the reason for their own report
Delors Report led to charging the “Monetary Committee” and “Council of European Central Bank Governors” at the June 1989 European Council with implementing an EMU in temporal stages, setting “convergence” criteria for participants	Suggested setting up a committee at June 2015 European Council to recommend creating an EDU in stages, reaching “convergence,” specifically, in a manner “similar to the approach in creating EMU”
Suggested starting off by only working with those states who were ready to move forward, adding others later (i.e. today’s Eurozone).	Suggested starting off by only working with those states who were ready to move forward, adding others later. (i.e. PESCO in defence)
According to one analyst, wrote the “blueprint” for the future EMU	Wrote the “blueprint” for the future EDU
Was an influential group of experts which made the policy proposals for the creation of an EMU	Was an influential group of experts which made the policy proposals for the creation of an EDU
The Delors Report hinted at a timetable, but it wasn’t until June 1989 European Council that the committee was set up who haggled over the criteria and deadlines	Suggests an “independent committee” set up at June 2015 European Council to propose the actual time table, specifically recommending to do this in the same way EMU was created.
Delors Report proposes three stages of integration, with the Monetary Committee setting up the actual time tables and convergence criteria	Solana report proposes “mandatory upgrades” and “milestones” in three “baskets of reform, calling on a future independent committee to build the actual timeline
Report was the result of unanimous agreement of the experts after months of deliberations, in order to present at the June European Council	Report was the result of consensus of agreement of the experts after months of deliberations, in order to present at the June European Council
Other Interesting Facts	Other Interesting Facts
“Aware of this fact, the then president of the Commission Jacques Delors proposed to the German Chancellor Helmut Kohl – then in charge of the EC presidency - to seize the opportunity to push for EMU.” (3)	@javiersolana: "with geopolitical changes around the #EU, the time has come to push, have to find political will to implement" #CEPSDefence.

My First Thesis

First Thesis: The CEPS Task Force Report is deliberately and intentionally supposed to be for the EDU, what the Delors Report was for the EMU. The CEPS Report is deliberately meant to be the "Delors Report" of European Defence. The similarities are obvious and deliberate, and almost explicit.

Likelihood: Extremely probable, almost a "fact." 

This is somewhat easy to prove, probably because the CEPS Task Force sets itself up that way, and almost implicitly admits it.

EU Navfor : Blowing Up a Pirate Ship

My Second Thesis

Second Thesis: Javier Solana sees himself as the "Jacques Delors" of European defence integration, and thus the founding father of the future EDU. He purposely plays the part that the EU Commission President played for EU economic integration, except in the corresponding area of EU defence integration.

Likelihood:  Quite likely

The EU Commission President Jacques Delors chaired the Delors Report/ Delors Committee. This makes sense, because the EU Commission is in charge of the EU in all its finance and budget aspects.

But who is Jacques Delors? He was the longest officeholder in the EU, overseeing 3 commission colleges. He and his commission are considered by some to be the founding fathers of the Euro. He is considered the "architect of the single currency."  The daily Telegraph states that he is "credited as the architect of the modern EU and the euro."  To this day, when the EU has got euro troubles, newspapers get his opinion. According to Encyclopedia Brittanica:

Delors left government to become the president of the European Commission in 1985. He revitalized the long-stalled EC, pushing through reforms and overseeing the entry into force of both the Single European Act (1987) and the Maastricht Treaty (1993), the latter of which created the EU.

But...The CEPS Report is deliberately meant to be the "Delors Report" of European Defence. Javier Solana chaired this Report, in the same way that Delors chaired the EMU report. Apparently, Javier Solana thinks he has the same role to play in the EDU's creation that EU Commission President Delors did in the EMU's creation. But who does he think he is!?! Leader of EU defence integration or something!?!?

Let's allow the man to speak for himself. Solana gave the keynote of this presentation in Brussels on March 09, 2015. The CEPS Twitter page quotes him as saying this:

"I will put all of the energies that I have left to push forward this process" of European defence integration.

This isn't some random outburst of passion from an academic who likes writing reports about international policy. It reinforces what we already should have assumed, based on the role he is deliberately trying to play on the stage of EU history. If EU history about the EMU's creation was a play, then Solana is clearly acting as if he is the lead part in the sequel.

Solana spent 10 years building the EU's ESDP/CSDP. He developed the EU's civilian-military crisis management structures. It seems he wants to finish the job. He likely wants to leave a legacy, instead of 10 years as a frustrated and worn out EU High Representative.

His "vocational self-understanding," his mission, is to be the founding father of the future EU Defence Union. He is not just an influential helper in the EU defence integration project. He is the one at the front, leading the charge, with everything that is left in him.

My Third Thesis

Third Thesis: Theses 1-2 almost certainly entail EU-level career ambitions for Solana. If Solana puts together an EDU by 2019, whose going to say no to him being High Representative again?!? Delors was a very long-serving Commission President. Is it a stretch to say that Javier Solana, the "Jacques Delors" of European defence, wants political power as well?

Likelihood: More probable than not

These career ambitions will manifest sooner rather than later. If he's going to become High Representative again, one commenter wisely noted that speculation would be useless, because a very short time frame until things started to heat up. I used to be skeptical, but now I somewhat agree. If Solana intends to be in charge of the EU's military, he's not going to do it overnight after writing a bunch of articles and giving speeches about global governance. He's been out of the game for a while, so he needs some kind of stepping stone...like for example....working for the HR in a CSDP related capacity.

The Task Force recommends setting up two groups: 

The European Council should appoint an independent committee, supported by the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the relevant branches of the European Commission acting under the authority of the HR/VP, to propose a roadmap of practical and realistic steps for the implementation of these recommendations in stages, involving the attainment of harmonisation criteria and mandatory milestones for upgrades in each basket of reform.

The analogous committee in the EMU's formation is likely the Monetary Committee, who set the actual criteria and was an "independent" group of experts, who were nonetheless connected to politics. They ultimately negotiated the criteria for the EMU's creation at the Treaty of Maastricht. They existed at the time the Delors Report came out, and were not led directly by Delors.

However, the CEPS Task Force Report proposes a committee which does not exist yet. Granted, it kind of does, in the CEPS Task Force. These are a group of politically decorated experts, who aren't technically politicians, but now are more along the lines of "experts."  Perhaps this committee that Mogherini will likely appoint will have continuity with the CEPS Task Force.

And...

A Steering Board of Defence Ministers of participating member states in this Permanent Structured Cooperation will be established. Much like the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), defence ministers will elect among peers a permanent chairman to co-preside the Steering Board together with the High Representative.

establish a permanent forum for consultation and decisionmaking between defence ministers of member states committed to the creation of the EDU (a ‘Defence Group’), gradually leading to the formation of a dedicated Council of Defence Ministers;

President of the Eurogroup

Jeroen Dijsselbloem

 It is no surprise that the informal meeting of Defence Ministers in Riga has a lot of ideas that are easily cross-referenced to the CEPS Task Force report.

This "Defence Group" proposed by Solana and crew is analogous to the "Euro Group" that is the set of ministers that runs the eurozone. It has a permanent chairperson from one of its members, just like this report recommends.

Statement by EU Defence Ministers in Riga

And states this:

Strengthen institutional coherence and consistency by better integrating the CSDP bodies in the EEAS structures by, inter alia, i) linking them up to the geographical divisions; ii) facilitating the flow of information (at headquarters and between Brussels and the field); iii) and assigning full-time responsibility for CSDP to a Deputy Secretary General.

Mogherini, at her Parliament hearing, has already said she wants to integrate and streamline the crisis management stuff into EEAS. It is no surprise Solana advocates this kind of power consolidation into the relatively independent EEAS. Furthermore, it recommends a Deputy Secretary General of the High Representative have full time charge of CSDP. Well, the entire CEPS Task Force is about CSDP, and Solana admittedly has a passion for it.

Here is the org chart for the EEAS. There are two Deputy Secretary Generals, one of which oversees CSDP. Evidently, one does not do this "full time" so they are going to need a third deputy secretary general to do that.

It is speculation that Solana wants these jobs. But I don't think it's at all irrational speculatioin, given what he has said and the role he is playing in the CEPS Task Force. The idea that he has some kind of career ambitions in the EU isn't implausible at all.

This is Insane...

If Solana sees himself as the leader of EU defence integration, then the implications are radical. This Task Force Report is insane, especially if these are the personal ambitions of Javier Solana!*  Give it a read.

1) Proposes that a European Empire militarily occupy the countries around it, in the Mediterreanean and East. Where have we seen this before? Oh yeah. Rome (in the Mediterranean). The picture from the Bible is of a Roman ruler (Daniel 9:26: Daniel 7) who rides out in conquest (Revelation 6:1-2) The fact that Solana and team propose to "project security" in the Mediterranean and middle East using rapid response military force is a stark picture of what that could look like.. And its every easy to see how this could start somewhat peaceful, but ultimately start a war. 

2) The report proposes linking military rapid response with the ENP itself, which is confirmed for seven years. The ability to conduct military operations in the Mediterranean and Middle East should be part of the "ENP toolbox." The report recommends giving the ENP an "upgrade" in this way. Maybe those who thought the 7 year treaty would be a covenant of military protection for Israel weren't so wrong after all. The CEPS Task Force sees the EU as a "security provider" in the neighborhood, fostering stability there with a wide variety of military mechanisms.

3) Report proposes massive increases in defence spending, even beyond NATO levels. In Daniel 11, the Antichrist financially serves the "god of fortresses." He is very keen on military and defence spending, which this report strongly emphasizes, hoping that member states go even farther than the 2% GDP commitment to NATO, which they aren't meeting.

4) A military command HQ in Brussels. In Daniel 11, the Antichrist is defined by the fact that he is a military leader. In Revelation 13, people are in awe, and ask "Who is like the beast? Who can wage war against it?" Furthermore, when the ten nation WEU gave its power to the EU, and formed a "common purpose" (i.e. common security and defence policy), that was an act of defence integration that was a long time in the making, and pushed by Solana himself. (see Revelation 17). The ten kings have a military common purpose, by which they ultimately destroy end times "Babylon." The fact that Solana wants to push the military common purpose (CSDP) forward, with all the energy left in him, has the potential to be very prophetically significant.

In Summary 

1) The CEPS Task Force on European Defence, chaired by Javier Solana, is meant to be the equivalent of the "Delors Report" except for European defence integration. It is for the "EDU" what the Delors report was for the "EMU" back in 1989.

2) Solana sees himself as the "Jacques Delors" of European Defence integration. He purposely plays the part that the EU Commission President played for EU economic integration, except in the corresponding area of EU defence integration. His statement that he will pour all his remaining energy into EU defence integration is further proof of this. He believes himself to be the founding father and architect of the future European Defence Union

3) Solana aims to be the founding father of the EU's defence project, and perhaps ultimately lead this project. 

Action Items

Several important action items:

1. Watch the June 2015 European Council on Defence issues. The CEPS Task Force report makes all its recommendations for the June European Council.
2. As one commenter wisely noted, prepare and disseminate materials surrounding this theory in the event Solana makes a sudden or imminent return to leadership. 
3. "People get ready because Jesus is coming." So we should pursue our sanctification more intensely, and step up evangelistic efforts where appropriate. 

We did not...I repeat...did not realize the full implications of that report Javier Solana chaired. Solana was not just bored making homework for himself. In context of European history, chairing that report was a flagrant act of vocational self-understanding, that Javier is to lead the new European Defence Union.

Who does he think he is? The leader of EU military integration or something!?!?

I think we already know the answer.

We've been waiting for a Solana "comeback." I may be exagerrating, but I'm seriously wondering if we have just witnessed the very beginning of said "comeback."

References:

1) http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/1596/98_44t.htm?sequence=1
2) http://aei.pitt.edu/2747/1/002721_1.PDF
3) http://www.notre-europe.eu/media/25yearsdelorsreport-enderlein-rubio-ne-jdi-apr14.pdf?pdf=ok
4) http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/euro/emu/road/delors_report_en.htm
5) http://www.ceps.eu/publications/more-union-european-defence (free to download, hardcopy costs money)
6) http://aei.pitt.edu/1007/1/monetary_delors.pdf
7) CEPS Twitter page
8) https://books.google.com/books?id=v9MN4Jfajl4C&pg=PA40&dq=delors+%22monetary+committee%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=04cxVYL1HPP9sASixoCgAg&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=delors%20%22monetary%20committee%22&f=false
9) http://eucenter.scrippscollege.edu/wp-content/uploads/files/2011/06/99verdun-gove.pdf


*I generally attribute the ideas of this report to Solana, since he gave the keynote and chaired it, and knowing some about his background. The report reached a relative consensus, though the report states the report can only be attributed to the rapporteurs.

Quick Update: Solana to Meet with Iran FM

Quick update on a few things:

First things first:

1) Javier Solana is meeting with the Iranian Foreign minister tomorrow over breakfast in Madrid. He met with Zarif back in 2013 as well. I don't know if its the sign of something more or not.  But....just so you know. ESADE business school has been tweeting about it. Most of the articles detailing this are in Spanish. 

Tweet from ESADE:

Tomorrow we will be tweeting live the debate between @JZarif @javiersolana & J.Manuel Soria in @casamerica http://www.casamerica.es/politica/el-ministro-de-relaciones-exteriores-de-iran-en-el-foro-red-de-casas … #IranTalks

2) You can now access this website at "www.euprophecynews.com." There is no need to put the ".blogspot" in there anymore.

3) If you speak Dutch (or even if you don't speak Dutch), go to Mathieu's website www.eindtijdactueel.nl He is very kind and often translates the articles here. Great website. Check it out. 

666: EU Defence Ministers Meeting and Solana's Article

666: EU Defence Ministers Meeting

The Latvian EU Presidency released an article back in February 
https://eu2015.lv/news/media-releases/666-eu-defence-ministers-in-riga-call-for-unity-in-addressing-european-security-threats

Yesterday, I found an article (with a big fat 666 in it), that was on the Latvian EU Presidency website. This article summarized a meeting that took place on February 18-19 between EU Defence ministers.

Javier Solana's Task Force and Articles

These are the two articles Javier Solana recently coauthored with Steven Blockmans. They vary to a small degree, but are meant to summarize the proceedings of the Task Force Javier Solana chaired the past few months. These were written around March 11, and the Task Force Report came out on February 26. Solana was at a Brussels thinktank on March 9, to give the keynote speech about this report.

https://euobserver.com/opinion/127958

http://www.wsj.com/articles/javier-solana-and-steven-blockmans-europe-needs-more-union-to-defend-itself-1426016839

Here is the task force report. You don't have to pay if you download it electronic.

http://www.ceps.eu/publications/more-union-european-defence

Striking Similarities

The textual and ideological similarities are rather striking. Clearly there is some serious groupthink going on or they are taking advice from all the same people. I summarize these below.

Article about EU Defence Ministers	Javier Solana Wall Street Journal & EUObserver Articles
February 18-19	March 9 (Summary of Task Force that he had chaired for months prior. Report released Feb. 26.
“face of a series of crises affecting European security.”	“the numerous crises facing Europe have made change possible.”
“revision of the European Security Strategy”	“new European Security Strategy in the context of the ongoing strategic review of EU foreign policy”
“should be one of the main topics on the agenda for the June 2015 European Council”	“At its June summit, the European Council should define a roadmap”
“In the current security environment in which we are faced with new and complex threats, unity is required more than ever”	“Multiple emergencies and rapidly evolving global trends have undermined the European Union’s role as a security actor in recent years”
“have a strong commitment to the EU as a provider of security”	“live up to security responsibilities in the strategic neighbourhood”
“we need strong defence capabilities backed by a strong defence industry”	“re-galvanizing the European defense technological and industrial base.”
“as enhancement of the EU's rapid response capabilities.”	“through the use of military force and rapid response as needed.”
“the need for closer EU-NATO cooperation, thus ensuring that both organisations complement one another”	“This EDU should support Nato in its task to provide territorial defence.”
“pointing out the need to strengthen the field of research and development.”	“It should also stimulate investment in innovative research programmes”
Article about EU Defence Ministers	Javier Solana CEPS Task Force Report
“EU's fight with hybrid threats”	“hybrid security threats,”
“The informal meeting of the EU Ministers for Defence is devoted to such issues as the European Council discussion on defence”	“establish a permanent forum for consultation and decisionmaking between defence ministers of member states committed to the creation of the EDU (a ‘Defence Group’), gradually leading to the formation of a dedicated Council of Defence Ministers;’

Why So Similar!?!?

I'm not a fan of conspiracy explanations. By "conspiracy" I mean that groups are "cosnpiring" behind closed doors, to do something that they don't want others to know. People often have less than transparent intentions. However, to explain an event by saying they are plotting something evil behind the scenes is an often unnecessary theory, when such goings-on can be explained more simply. 

With this reservation in mind, I propose three possibilities as to why the content of these writings are so strikingly similar:

1) The EU is suffering from very serious groupthink. This isn't at all uncommon when people are working towards the same objectives. Perhaps its not unlikely here. 

2) The EU is taking advice from a core group of people who talk a lot (and thus, this talking foments groupthink).

3) Javier Solana (or Federica Mogherini) is having a much more deliberate impact on the thoughts of the EU officials on defense than we previously realized. To try and guess who is influencing who in this mess, when they make very simultaneous and similar statements, is a very difficult endeavor. (EU HR Mogherini and Solana's report often use very similar language, at similar times.)

4) And now, I am going to propose the most radical reason why they are all thinking the same. It may rattle a bit but I think it has Scriptural support. The reason is that it is God's will that they think the same. Recall:

For God has put it in their hearts to execute His purpose by having a common purpose, and by giving their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God will be fulfilled. (Revelation 17:17 NASB emphasis added)

How could God possibly benefit from a unified beast kingdom? It seems this unity is used to accomplish his purpose in judgment, by which the ten kings militarily destroy the end times city named "Babylon." (For more about how I think this prophecy has been fulfilled, specifically in the ten WEU nations, click here.)

I was talking to my brother recently and told him that I use the hashtag #CSDP (Common Security and Defence Policy), even though I don't support it. Then I hesitated...and realized God, at least in some sense, supports it. In fact, in some sense, CSDP is God's idea. How weird is that!?!? (To learn more about CSDP and the ten king WEU in prophecy, click here).

In Israel's history, God often used wicked kingdoms to exact judgment on the people of Israel. I think we have a similar case here, except the purpose is to exact judgment on Babylon. 

But Why Are the Two Articles So Similar?

It's difficult to speculate why the articles are so similar. I am wary of unsubstantiated and ad hoc conspiracy theories. However, it does seem that the whole upper echelons of EU officials are getting the same idea in their heads about having a unified defense. These ideas are coming from somewhere. The most knowledgeable and experienced source (if we postulate one source, is Javier Solana). Or it could be just a groupthinky amalgam of thinktank articles who have influenced them. Either way, very interesting indeed. 

666: Still Hanging Around

1) Javier Solana's Linkedin page:

Ok, I admit I cheated on this one. I did google the number. I don't know why it says "United States." (It's probably just the default setting.) But I think it's his actual account.

https://www.linkedin.com/pub/javier-solana/66/676/982

2) An article Solana wrote this week on global governance. Yesterday, I sinned. Then I prayed to God. "God I know I don't deserve it, but please give me wisdom about Javier." And within one minute or two this article popped up in the search results. (I DID NOT google for the number 666!). I had seen the article before on other sites, but I saw that number pop up.

http://www.newvision.co.ug/news/666535-china-and-global-governance.html

3) A Book I found. Between pages 66-67 (see where my mouse hovers), it recommends "Streamline Decision Making Give Mr CFSP More Resources" namely, Solana. Again, I cheated with this one.

Click to enlarge

4) Another book I found. 

"Dr. Solana also became, together with the Big Three states of France, the United Kingdom, and Germany, a major mediator in Europe's relations with Iran since 2004. He presented the following three advantages. Internally to the EU, he represented all EU states, and not just the Big Three. This was a major issue for small states, which asked for the inclusion of the High Representative in the negotiations (Sauer 2007,10). In Iran itself, he was seen as a neutral actor as opposed to a negative actor such as the United States (Chubin, 2006, 66)." (emphasis added)

Found this one totally by accident when I was researching Solana and prophecy stuff a few weeks ago.

Analysis

I cheated on two of these (by googling the number). However, one of them almost immediately followed a prayer for wisdom. Be advised that simply Googling for 666 connections to Solana doesn't usually yield impressive results. You'll land on an index to a book with a ton of numbers on it, or you will find some phone number on the bottom of the page with his name on it. Nothing too exciting. It's weird, because many of these experiences have historically followed prayer for wisdom within the the ENP watching community.

This Is Only the Icing on the Cake

This isn't even why he's the best candidate out there. However, it is possible that they represent trail markers from God, telling us where to look and notifying us we are on the right track. The reason we have been so interested in him is because of fulfilled prophecy. Not speculation. But likely fulfillments.

All other Antichrist theories are basically looking for Nicolae Carpathia to come along. A young and dashing European, with a secretly diabolical side, swoops in to solve the worlds problems and save the day. These theories all rely entirely on speculation, and not cold, hard, historical events in recent history.

Attached is my powerpoint on why Javier Solana has fulfilled prophecies about the Antichrist in the past tense. Everybody else is speculation. But he has some actual very specific prophecies fulfilled about him.

This is the first half of the new powerpoint I'm working on. I still have to release the final version. Also, it still needs the references cited. However, it stands alone just fine.

Some of the content of this powerpoint is the same as the other several iterations and updates I have done to this powerpoint. But the content is largely revamped to focus on Solana.

The Antichrist and His Ten Kings? from Eschologizer

One of the claims that I make in the powerpoint is that Solana actually did subdue the EU Big Three. (Evidently, Herb Peters believed this too). For a nuanced explanation on why I believe that, go here. But I will quickly note that the word "subdue" in Aramaic is not necessarily a violent word, and it means to put down, abase, subdue or humble.* Though the little horn is said to uproot three of the ten (seemingly leaving seven), I will also note that all ten kings are present when they hand their power and authority over to the beast. So all ten remain in existence, up until the day they surrender their power to the beast in a very voluntary fashion. It seems the subduing of the three would precede the consolidation event. After all, theologically speaking, what is there to subdue if they already gave their sovereignty to the beast? I believe the historical events of the last 10 years reconcile these two seemingly contradictory passages.

Noticeably absent from this powerpoint is a discussion about the EU's 7-year ENPI/ENI instrument with Israel and other countries. I am still working on how to fit that in and how to present it to someone who hasn't heard of it before. Maybe I will make that a separate powerpoint, instead of one unbearably long powerpoint. If Solana makes his return, he will confirm a seven year treaty with Israel, simply by virtue of holding the office, because of Council Decision 2010/427/EU. This is in sharp contrast with his previous position, which wasn't legally connected to the 7 year covenant, but only the ENP.

Have I gone off the deep end by now posting 666 all over my website? I don't know. Being a fool for Jesus is something my pride will struggle with, but in the end I am more than willing to be. However, much less appealing is becoming a person who has wrongly interpreted the prophecies, and made a fool of myself. God is the judge.

 However, I still have a hunch that we are really onto something with Solana. If ENP Theory is still viable, then interpreting him as the little horn (Solana specifically, not the high representative) seems to strain the text the least. If the WEU represent the ten kings of Bible prophecy, then Solana becomes the "only game in town." But it seems we have multiple evidences that we have the right ten nation alliance. So for an easy reading of Scripture, we are stuck with Javier Solana.

I don't know how Javier Solana's career change fits into all of this, and why that was part of the plan, though the prophecies didn't seem to hint at it. It's as if the little horn grows, uproots three...completely goes away, then is the big horn again. Confusing to say the least. One hint might be found here:

 I watched as the Lamb opened the first of the seven seals. Then I heard one of the four living creatures say in a voice like thunder, “Come!” 2 I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest. Revelation 6:1-2 NIV (emphasis added)

This is a future event from the standpoint of 2015. This event I have covered in other posts, and is often associated with the launch of the 70th week by theologians. Now, he was given a crown "stephanos." This is not a royal crown for authority, but more like a garland or wreath type crown, that is a reward for victory. (If it was the other type of crown, I would have a much more convincing case.) Nevertheless, the riding out of the white horse is a very conspicuous event that is coordinated by the sovereign direction of Jesus Christ, at the opening of the 7 seals. So it seems this riding out to conquer and victory coronation of sorts refers to a future event where we could have a grand re-entry of someone who was previously out of office? I am speculating. But I'd love to hear other thoughts on this.

Until/if he is revealed as the Antichrist, we are to consider Javier Solana as yet another lost person in need of Jesus Christ. Pray for him.

Dark Days Ahead

This week, in the United States, the serious and imminent threat of actual (not perceived) persecution is present. The world turns a blind and approving eye to death and arson threats against Christians, who can be swept out of business overnight, without mercy, for holding to their convictions. And the media applauds. Pray for Memories Pizza parlor. My European readers are probably already all too familiar with this painful experience, which has been going on longer for them than for us in the U.S.

We have to hang in there and hang on to God in tough times. In 2 Thessalonians, Scripture says God is righteous in his judgment and will pay back retribution to these persecutors when he returns. But that is not our wish (nor his!). This week, I have learned that God is a much more merciful and patient person than I could ever hope to be. That is the glory of the cross, that God would die for such wicked and hateful people such as us. That is what Good Friday is all about. The immense love of God poured out for all of us.

You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Romans 5:6-8

Pastor Brian always has good posts about staying strong in dark times. 

When the Antichrist comes (whoever he is), he will make Adolf Hitler look like a mere schoolyard bully by comparison. 666 won't be a creepy and fascinating number, it will be the new swastika, the darkest symbol of the murderous depths humanity can sink to. It will get worse before it gets better. But all of us here long for the appearing of Jesus. And as a result, we will get a crown of righteousness.

Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day—and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing. 2 Timothy 4:8 NIV

Come Lord Jesus!


*I'm no scholar, so I'm not sure about its connotations in different tenses and cases.