[ Back ] [ Home ] [ Next ]
A Fascist European Superpower
EUROPEAN SOCIAL EMPIRE IS EMERGING TO COUNTER THE PERCEIVED ANGLO-SAXON
FASCIST EMPIRE WILL USE BRUTALITY TO PRESERVE THEIR RACE, CULTURE AND RELIGION
IN THE FACE OF GLOBALISATION, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND LIBERALISM.
GAME?: THE DECIMATION, CONQUEST AND ENSLAVEMENT OF THE ANGLO-SAXON-KELTIC
NATIONS. THIS IS THE ESSENCE OF THE EZEKIEL WARNING MESSAGE.
We are only now beginning to see glimpses of it as left
and right anti-Americanism merge into a new European philosophy. Currently
liberals hold sway within the EU. The day will come when fascists will gain
control of the EU and turn its immense wealth and technology against America.
I recommend reading:
from the liberal-internationalist-capitalist Bildergberger group promoting an
anti-Communist - capitalist US of Europe - is a must read.
article on Nazi plans for
their version of a US of Europe - how they planned a Fourth Reich - I have
written about this previously over the years. The current EU's social,
immigration, economic and military policies are completely at odds to what the
Nazis wanted. Nevertheless, it is an interesting read.
NB: there have been many people advocating a US of
Europe of some sort. For example:
- Napoleon who called Europe an 'old whore'
- the Marxist Lenin who wanted a Communist Europe
- the Nazi version which was based on an oppressive
- various European royalty and what is left of the
aristocracy advocating a union that was more-or-less the heritage of the Holy
- Winston Churchill who wanted only an economic US of
Europe to try and tie down Germany as he said. He was very much against
Britain being in such a union and spoke out against political or military
- liberals who want to unite Europe and impose very
liberal social and immigration policies. These are very much in control at the
moment. Some day, some way, they will be dislodged and a rightwing
neo-Fascist/RCC combine will take over - initially to protect the Caucasian
race from extinction and to restore Europe's 'Christian heritage.' Currently
the conservatives and 'Christians' are struggling for survival but will
triumph over the liberals in the near future.
So, from the above, we can see that there are various
rival and radically different ideas about a US of Europe. Some want a complete
union; some a federation (which it is slowly becoming); and some want a loose
confederation (like it is now).
We know from the prophecies that the future US of Europe
will be fascistic, militaristic and very anti-Anglo-Saxon. Initially it will
have Russia as its ally. And so the story goes ...
The videos below (in Windows Media format) throw further
light on this coming European superpower - especially the first one.
Click here for
more videos. These
additional videos are not in Windows Media format. To
view most of them you will need to download and install
this little program
For articles explaining just what the
Ezekiel Message is click
here and also
here for a sequel article. Further information on this subject is
available here. And
an article on how this coming fascist juggernaut will make war with the
Anglo-Saxon-Keltic peoples - and win this time!
Check out our other website
What El Ingles is predicting is what
the Church of God has said all along for decades: there will come a fascistic
backlash to immigration into Europe. A German-led US of Europe will strike
back at the Islamics with incredible technology and tremendous military force.
Note: Europeans often use 'Islam' as a euphemism for all
non-White immigration. They blame the USA, UK and a small leftist-clique
within the EU for pushing Europe into a One Race-One World scenario - and
they are sick to death of it.
When the backlash finally comes from a militaristic
National European Social Empire, it will be dreadful. See the extracts from
the article by Ingles below.
Surrender, Genocide… or
by Baron Bodissey
Regular readers will remember our guest-essayist El
Inglés, who has contributed several thoughtful pieces to Gates of Vienna
in the past.
The essay below presents a stark view of the West’s most likely future.
It’s difficult to read such a pessimistic scenario, but El Inglés’
analysis rewards close scrutiny.
Remember: the article below is descriptive, not normative.
Surrender, Genocide… or What?
by El Inglés
A few months ago, I wrote
“The Danish Civil War”, a fictional
scenario which served to structure a consideration of various issues
relating to the rise of Islam in Europe and the likely consequences
thereof. The essay finished with the conclusion that Islam constituted an
existential threat to the survival of European civilization, and that
Islam’s influence on Europe therefore needed to be eliminated. It further
concluded that, logically speaking, the various ways of achieving this
goal could be broadly subdivided into three categories:
||inducing Muslims to leave of
their own free will,
||mass deportations, and
(Hereinafter referred to as options one, two and three, respectively)
Anyone masochistic to enough re-read my earlier
10,000-word essay will find ample explanation of why I believe that
accommodation of, indeed coexistence with, Islam is impossible, and I do
not propose to revisit those arguments here. Instead, I will claim that
the pathetic and dispiriting abandonment of pride and principle in the
face of Islam described so far has attained a momentum that renders it
impossible to reverse by any gradual process.
This leaves only the question of deportations. I am aware
of no examples of large-scale deportations being carried out by aircraft,
which they would have to be in this case. Apart from the faintly surreal
notion of hundreds of thousands of Pakistanis being flown out of the UK and
being served hundreds of thousands of halal meal options while fiddling around
with hundreds of thousands of aggravating airline headsets on the way back to
the homeland, it must be observed that air travel is the most
infrastructurally fragile of all modes of transportation, and completely
reliant on the goodwill and cooperation of people at the destination. A
functioning government might be able to organize and carry out mass
deportations via airline, but would surely be forced to preemptively intern
the target population, and the notion that such populations in Europe would
allow themselves to be peacefully interned strains credulity to breaking point
and beyond. If this is true now, how much truer would it be in five or ten
years time? Even the merest suggestion of implementing such a plan would
surely collapse an electoral discontinuity into a non-electoral discontinuity
for reasons already discussed. It is on the basis of
this reasoning that I argue that deportations and mass expulsions, though the
most difficult types of violence to read in this context, will not play a key
role in post-discontinuity violence apart from perhaps being used to
repatriate the survivors once the conflict has been won.
It is worth noting that the notion that some sort of Nazi-style genocide is in
the cards for Europe’s Muslims would seem to be missing the point for related
reasons. The Holocaust, like the Armenian Genocide that provided the
inspiration for it, was conducted with as much deception and misdirection as
was possible given the vast numbers of people involved. Both genocides were
heavily reliant on the relocation of vast numbers of victims to
sparsely-inhabited areas to be dispatched, whether in recently conquered
territories as in the case of Germany, or the wilder reaches of empire, as in
the case of the Ottoman Empire. There is no conceivable way that this would be
viable in any European case, especially given the massive qualitative gulf
between communication and surveillance technologies of the early/middle
20th-century and the first decades of the 21st. Whatever type of violence we
end up seeing between Muslims and their host societies (and I do believe it
will be appropriately described by the word genocidal), the Holocaust will not
be much of a reference point. I suspect that the recent conflicts in the
Balkans are much more likely to overlap structurally with what we will see in
Europe in the near future.
for the whole article.
Europe or Eurabia?
by Daniel Pipes
April 15, 2008
The future of Europe is in play. Will it turn into "Eurabia,"
a part of the Muslim world? Will it remain the distinct cultural unit it has
been over the last millennium? Or might there be some creative synthesis of the
The answer has vast importance. Europe may constitute a mere 7 percent of the
world's landmass but for five hundred years, 1450-1950, for good and ill, it was
the global engine of change. How it develops in the future will affect all
humanity, and especially daughter countries such as Australia which still retain
close and important ties to the old continent.
I foresee potentially one of three paths for Europe: Muslims dominating,
Muslims rejected, or harmonious
(2) But the first path is not inevitable. Indigenous
Europeans could resist it and as they make up 95 percent of the continent's
population, they can at any time reassert control, should they see Muslims
posing a threat to a valued way of life.
This impulse can already be seen at work in the French anti-hijab legislation or
in Geert Wilders' film, Fitna. Anti-immigrant parties gain in strength; a
potential nativist movement is taking shape across Europe, as political parties
opposed to immigration focus increasingly on Islam and Muslims. These parties
include the British National Party, Belgium's Vlaamse Belang, France's Front
National, the Austrian Freedom Party, the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands,
the Danish People's Party, and the Swedish Democrats.
They will likely continue to grow as immigration surges ever higher, with
mainstream parties paying and expropriating their anti-Islamic message.
Should nationalist parties gain power, they will likely
seek to reject multiculturalism, cut back on immigration, encourage repatriation
of immigrants, support Christian institutions, increase indigenous European
birthrates, and broadly attempt to re-establish traditional ways.
Muslim alarm will likely
follow. American author Ralph Peters sketches a scenario in which "U.S. Navy
ships are at anchor and U.S. Marines have gone ashore at Brest, Bremerhaven or
Bari to guarantee the safe evacuation of Europe's Muslims." Peters concludes
that because of European's "ineradicable viciousness," its Muslims "are living
on borrowed time" As Europeans have "perfected genocide and ethnic cleansing,"
Muslims, he predicts, "will be lucky just to be deported,"
rather than killed. Indeed, Muslims
worry about just such a fate; since the 1980s, they have spoken overtly about
Muslims being sent to gas chambers.
Violence by indigenous Europeans cannot be precluded but nationalist efforts
will more likely take place less violently; if any one is likely to initiate
violence, it is the Muslims. They have already engaged in many acts of violence
and seem to be spoiling for more. Surveys indicate, for instance, that about 5
percent of British Muslims endorse the 7/7 transport bombings.
In brief, a European reassertion will likely lead to on-going civil strife,
perhaps a more lethal version of the fall 2005 riots in France.
The unprecedented nature of Europe's situation also
renders a forecast exceedingly difficult. Never in history has a major
civilization peaceably dissolved, nor has a people ever risen to reclaim its
patrimony. Europe's unique circumstances make them difficult to comprehend,
tempting to overlook, and virtually impossible to predict.
With Europe, we all enter into terra incognita.
For the rest of the article go to
Rising Euro-Muslim Tensions
By Tony Blankley
Forty years ago last weekend, British classicist and politician Enoch Powell
warned that if immigrants bringing alien values and customs into Britain are
allowed to continue their immigration, a sense of alarm and resentment would
develop in the indigenous British population. He was ejected from British
politics for giving that warning.
But this week, the BBC published a poll taken
precisely to measure public attitudes 40 years after Powell's famous warning
(and after 40 years of the British ruling class ignoring the growing danger).
Seventy percent think there is high tension between the races; 63 percent expect
those tensions to result in violence between the races in Britain; and 60
percent think there are too many "immigrants" in Britain.
In a similar poll taken for the Davos World Economic
Forum, stunning numbers of Europeans fear a "threat" from Muslims with whom they
"interact": 79 percent of Danes, 67 percent of Italians, 68 percent of
Spaniards, 65 percent of Swedes and 59 percent of Belgians.
In my book "The West's Last Chance," published in 2005, I warned that the
European people would not be passive in the face of their culture being
undercut. Unlike others who wrote on the subject, I did not think Europeans
would fail to defend their nations and their cultures. I warned that broad
European street violence could be avoided only if their governments took the
These disturbing polls from BBC and Davos should constitute another undeniable
warning to the gutless, defeatist European leaders. Take action to protect your
people and their cherished Western values, or the people will take matters into
their own hands. And for us in America, impending European unrest should be seen
as a cautionary tale.
See the entire article at
The Politics of the Improbable
STRATFOR GEOPOLITICAL INTELLIGENCE
April 23, 2008
By Peter Zeihan
Fear is a powerful motivator, even getting results when the
threat is exceedingly remote. It makes us cross at crosswalks even when
traffic is thin, pay more over time for fire insurance than our homes are
worth, and shy away from snakes even when signs clearly inform us they are
not poisonous. Humans instinctively take steps to prevent negative outcomes,
oftentimes regardless of how likely — or more to the point, unlikely — those
unpleasant outcomes are.
Worrying about continental
European countries sublimating their national differences, uniting into a
federated superstate and invading the United Kingdom may seem to flirt with
lunacy, but within that lingering concern lies the root of the
Anglo-American alliance. Similarly, worrying about China
using the archipelagos of Southeast Asia as a staging point for an invasion
of Australia may seem ludicrous, but that fear dominates military planning
The entire article is available at
One could similarly could ask: "will Britain
colourisation?" or "will America resist Hispanicisation?"
Seems unlikely as the Left control all our institutions and believe in the
inter-breeding of the races.
While the Left control much of the EU and other institutions, there is a
huge groundswell against colourisation that will burst through one of these
days in Europe. The signs are there and many of their politicians are awake
to the Left (especially in eastern Europe) and their aweful plans for
Europe. This will lead to a Fascistic backlash in Europe (Daniel 11:40-45)
See the article below.
Will Europe Resist Islamization?
by Daniel Pipes
April 3, 2008
Some analysts of
Islam in Western Europe argue that the continent cannot escape its Eurabian
fate; that the trend lines of the past half-century will continue until
Muslims become a majority population and Islamic law (the
I disagree, arguing that there is another route the continent might take,
one of resistance to Islamification and a reassertion of traditional ways.
Indigenous Europeans – who make up 95 percent of the population – can insist
on their historic customs and mores. Were they
to do so, nothing would be in their way and no one could stop them.
Indeed, Europeans are visibly showing signs of impatience with creeping
Shari‘a. The legislation in France that prohibits hijabs from public school
classrooms signals the reluctance to accept Islamic ways, as are related
efforts to ban burqas, mosques, and minarets.
Throughout Western Europe, anti-immigrant parties are generally increasing
That resistance took a new turn last week, with two dramatic events. First,
on March 22, Pope Benedict XVI himself baptized, confirmed, and gave the
Eucharist to Magdi Allam, 56, a prominent Egyptian-born Muslim long living
in Italy, where he is a top editor at the Corriere della Sera newspaper and
a well-known author. Allam took the middle name Cristiano. The ceremony
converting him to the Catholic religion could not have been higher profile,
occurring at a nighttime service at St. Peter's Basilica on the eve of
Easter Sunday, with exhaustive coverage from the Vatican and many other
Allam followed up his conversion with a stinging statement in which he
argued that beyond "the phenomenon of Islamic extremism and terrorism that
has appeared on a global level, the root of
evil is inherent in an Islam that is physiologically violent and
historically conflictive." In other words, the problem is
not just Islamism but Islam itself. One commentator, "Spengler" of Asia
Times, goes so far as to say that Allam "presents an existential threat to
Muslim life" because he "agrees with his former co-religionists in
repudiating the degraded culture of the modern West, and offers them
something quite different: a religion founded upon love."
Second, on March 27, Geert Wilders, 44, released his long-awaited, 15-minute
film, Fitna, which consists of some of the most bellicose verses of the
Koran, followed by actions in accord with those verses carried out by
Islamists in recent years. The obvious implication is that Islamists are
simply acting in accord with their scriptures. In Allam's words, Wilders
also argues that "the root of evil is inherent" in Islam.
Unlike Allam and Wilders, I do distinguish between Islam and Islamism, but I
believe it imperative that their ideas get a fair hearing, without
vituperation or punishment. An honest debate over Islam must take place.
If Allam's conversion was a surprise and Wilders' film had a three-month
run-up, in both cases, the aggressive, violent reactions that met prior
criticisms of Islam did not take place. According to the Los Angeles Times,
the Dutch police contacted imams to gauge reactions at the city's mosques
and found, according to police spokesman Arnold Aben, "it's quieter than
usual here today. Sort of like a holiday." In Pakistan, a rally against the
film attracted only some dozens of protestors.
This relatively constrained reaction points to the fact that Muslim threats
sufficed to enforce censorship. Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende
denounced Fitna and, after 3.6 million visitors had viewed it on the British
website LiveLeak.com, the company announced that "Following threats to our
staff of a very serious nature, … Liveleak has been left with no other
choice but to remove Fitna from our servers." (Two days later, however,
LiveLeak again posted the film.)
Three similarities bear noting: both Allam (author of a book titled Viva
Israele) and Wilders (whose film emphasizes Muslim violence against
Jews) stand up for Israel and the Jews; Muslim threats against their lives
have forced both for years to live under state-provided round-the-clock
police protection; and, more profoundly, the two share a passion for
Indeed, Allam and Wilders may represent the
vanguard of a Christian/liberal reassertion of European values. It is too
soon to predict, but these staunch individuals could provide a crucial boost
for those intent on maintaining the continent's historic identity.
Europe is starting to set global rules
Adam Daniel Rotfeld
With its Reform Treaty, the European Union becomes
a new animal, more than an organisation but less than a state, says
Adam Daniel Rotfeld, a former
foreign minister of Poland. He argues that its soft power strategy has
helped to make Europe secure and prosperous, but asks how it should
But it is an open question whether the values shared by NATO and the
EU, along with the concept of soft power, are compatible with the
ambitions of the United States. In his book The European Dream, American
author Jeremy Rifkin praises Europe for offering "diversity, quality of
life … sustainability, universal human rights, the rights of nature, and
peace on Earth." He concluded, "We Americans used to say that the
American Dream is worth dying for. The new European Dream is worth
following for the complete article