April 8th prediction/possible fulfillment soon?

[Timothy]

Adstar,

Could you give us a demonstration of the system(s) you use?

[Adstar]

Hello Timothy

I use 2 systems but I

[Lorie Eikenbary]

Adstar,

I think his full name is:  Javier Madragia Solana.  You probably figured that out by now but, just in case!!

@ His feet~  Lorie :thumb:

[Adstar]

Thanks Lorie r-Thunder helped me there  

All Praise The Ancient Of Days

[rollinTHUNDER]

As I suggested a few months back, Romano Prodi is a wanna be. He appears to be getting desperate now, and is slowly fading away. Herb seems to think so as well, and he has kept a much closer watch than I have, so let's give him his say. He is majoring in Solana, but Solana to me is justy a side order, but a very tasty one though. Here's Herbs commentary:

http://fulfilledprophecy.com/fight_over_solana.html

Is The Real Fight Over Solana?

As I've been reporting, there is a power struggle occurring between two powers for control of the new, super European Union. This struggle is basically between certain right-leaning nations who want the Council to be the seat of power in the EU, and the left-leaning federalists who want the Commission to be the seat of power.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair is among those on the right who wish to strengthen the Council. And, in his recent speech, he finally revealed his vision for the new EU. And, as I said in previous commentaries, Blair's vision appears to be almost identical to that of the EU's first High Representative, Javier Solana.

Here's why I say this: Both Blair and Solana have publicly stated that they believe the EU will become a superstate, but not a superpower. This being the case, it follows that they believe the EU Council -- where their 10-nation military alliance has its headquarters -- should be the seat of government in the new EU. They also believe the EU's current six-month rotating presidency should be replaced by a longer term team presidency. And, they believe this longer term presidency should be kept within the Council.

Now, it's being reported the EU Commission will soon be responding to Blair's proposals with its own. And, naturally, the left-leaning Commission's proposals will be in direct opposition to the right-leaning proposals made by Blair.

According to the report, the Commission will be recommending that the six-month rotating presidency be preserved in the new EU. It will also be recommending that EU's presidency -- now within the Council -- be moved to within the Commission.

However, the recommendation that most caught my attention was the part about the EU's foreign policy. The Commission will be recommending that the office of High Representative, currently held by Solana, be also moved to within the Commission.

I couldn't help but think how Romano Prodi, the current president of the Commission, has been struggling to stay afloat politically ever since Solana was appointed as the EU's first High Representative back in 1999. Now, Prodi is trying his best to bring Solana and the 10-nation military alliance under the control of his Commission.

As I thought about the Commission's recent move in its power struggle with the Council, I began to see something I hadn't noticed before. Not only was this a struggle for control of the new, super EU, it was also a struggle for control of the EU's new 10-nation military.

In other words, the real fight going on between the Council and the Commission isn't just over who will control the new EU.

It's over Javier Solana.

 

 

12-01-2002

[rollinTHUNDER]

Time is winding down folks, and by the looks of this article, Solana will be the one in charge. Of course it's still premature, but in the event of a crisis, which we know there will be one coming, Javier Solana will take the bull by the horns. He will be given emergency powers should a crisis arise, even now. He was already given these powers. This article shows that he will retain them. Here's the story:

http://www.euobserver.com/index.phtml?sid=9&aid=8586

02.12.2002 - 15:58 CET

Barnier working group proposes EU defence-zone

MICHEL BARNIER - the French Commissioner and chair of the Convention's working group on defence did not manage to move defence competencies to within the Commission's powers (Photo: EU Commission)

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - The European Convention working group on defence has presented its preliminary draft report. The group, chaired by Commissioner Michel Barnier, presents the idea of a new hybrid of EU and national institutions to run European defence in the future. As some EU member states are non-aligned or neutral it is proposed to establish a new Euro defence-zone, similar to that of the Eurozone set up by the Maastricht Treaty where not all member states participate.

EU Commission without influence in defence

The Council, where EU ministers meet, would hold the power in relation to defence, according to the working group's draft report, seen by the EUobserver. The "High Representative", a post currently held by Javier Solana, would have the "right of initiative in crisis management matters." Practically this means the Convention group sided with those who are determined to keep defence member state issue

[rollinTHUNDER]

Very interesting! Very interesting indeed!!

If this article is the true design of the future of Europe, then it is clear that the six month rotating pawns will be coming to a halt soon as expected. This was my original idea for posting this thread to begin with, because the Bible clearly says that the AC will think to change times and laws (Dan.7:25). It may appear that it is Giscards idea, but the idea was originally thought of by Javier Solana. It is also interesting that they want to remove some of Solana's responsibilities, that of Foreign Affairs. The article also suggests that the new President Elect of Europe will be "co-ordinator", instead of "commander". This doesn't sound like the AC will be much of a dictator. Wait a minute here folks, not so fast. We must not forget who will be given the power in case of a national emergency. It just might be possible that the election for the EU Presidency may never happen, meaning that it is very possible to have that emergency before the election takes place. Are you thinking what I'm thinking?? Hmmmm?? Here's the story:

http://euobserver.com/index.phtml?sid=9&aid=8622

04.12.2002 - 07:58 CET

Giscard outlines Europe vision to French National Assembly

VAL

[rollinTHUNDER]

EU Defense-Zone

Why am I surprised?

After all, I've been saying I thought the battle for control of the European Union had already been won by the Council. So, why should it surprise me to hear that the European Convention -- the forum where the battle for control of the EU is to be decided -- has offically sided with the Council.

Yet, I am surprised. And, it's being reported some are even more surprised than I am - most notably, external relations Commissioner Chris Patten. Patten, of course, wants the EU's foreign policy placed under his control in the Commission.

But, it now appears this will never happen. The Convention is recommending that the foreign policy be kept with the Council. And, the Council is where the EU's 10-nation military alliance has its headquarters under the leadership of Javier Solana.

Not only that, it's also recommending the creation of a Euro-defense-zone. This means, it's recommending that only a select group of EU nations -- probably the 10-nation alliance -- be given leadership over all of the EU's security. If you've been following my commentaries, you know that I've been expecting something like this to happen.

In other words, it's beginning to look more and more that my book, Recommendation 666, may have documented an amazing fulfillment of prophecy. Starting with the implementation of the 10-nation WEU's Recommendation 666 back in 2000 by France and Solana, we've been watching a 10-nation, military takeover of the EU.

Now here's something for us to consider: Will the three Benelux nations -- Belgium, Luxembourg and Netherlands -- be removed from the group of nations that will make up this new Euro-defense-zone? If you recall, these three nations have officially sided with the Commission and not the Council.

Interesting question, isn't it?

 

12-02-2002

http://fulfilledprophecy.com/defense_zone.htm

[angels4u]

Nations who block change may be banished from EU

By Stephen Castle in Brussels

05 December 2002

A country could be ejected from the European Union if it failed to ratify a proposed constitution for Europe, under plans launched today by the European Commission's president, Romano Prodi.

According to a document obtained by The Independent, any EU nation that tries to block the constitution could be thrown out of the Union if it is in a clear minority. Officials are concerned that, with the EU enlarging to 25 member states, a single country could block the entire constitution, in the same way as Ireland almost halted the Nice Treaty.

No sovereign nation has ever left the EU, voluntarily or otherwise, although Greenland, a sparsely populated Danish dependency, negotiated its withdrawal 16 years ago.

But the forward to the Prodi text states that "each member state could choose between continued participation in the Union, now based on a constitution, and withdrawal from the Union to take on the status of associated country". That could happen if at least five-sixths of the members backed the constitution.

Mr Prodi's blueprint, drafted amid secrecy, also calls for an end to national vetoes on all issues except that of admitting new member states. It proposes majority voting by EU governments on foreign policy, the election of the Commission's president by MEPs, an increase in the powers of the Commission on foreign policy and for the EU to adopt a Nato-like mutual defence guarantee for its members.

The draft treaty would also incorporate a charter of fundamental rights into law, and specifically rules out Tony Blair's ideas for a new president of the EU, drawn from current or past EU leaders.

Mr Prodi's text will be submitted to an inquiry into the future of the EU headed by the former French president Valery Giscard d'Estaing, whose job is to prepare a draft constitution. That will have to be approved by the leaders of all 15 EU member states, each of whom has a veto. But senior figures involved in the drafting of the convention are known to be sympathetic to Mr Prodi's ideas, which means national governments might come under pressure to accept the change.

Last night, British officials argued privately that the Commission was putting forward a "negotiating position" and had "bid too high". One said: "Some of these ideas will be dead on arrival." The British Government does not like the idea of nations being evicted.

Mr Prodi's blueprint argues that any ejected country would

[rollinTHUNDER]

Romano Prodi is getting more desperate all the time. As I said before, he is a wanna be. He just tried to slip a fast one in on 'em. This is gonna cause him much more damage than good. Here's the story:

06.12.2002 - 09:55 CET

Prodi causes confusion with secret draft constitution

ROMANO PRODI - the Commission president has angered fellow commissioners by writing up a draft constitution in secret. (Photo: EU Commission)

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - Thursday saw some confusion among journalists, commission officials and interested onlookers in Brussels. Were there one or two Commission documents on the future of Europe? The answer was one "official document" and one "penelope." The latter of which no-one wanted to take any responsibility for.

Forced to show his hand through media leaks which got the two papers tangled up with one another, Commission President Romano Prodi finally admitted on Thursday that he and some of his commissioners (Antonio Vitorino and Michel Barnier) were conducting a "feasibility study" to give a "first idea of how a treaty could be organised on the basis of the preliminary draft constitution treaty presented to the Convention by the presidium." Mr Prodi submitted the 'unofficial' document to the presidium on Wednesday along with the 'official' document endorsed by 20 commissioners. This led presidium member Guiliano Amato to remark: "We did not quite understand the relation between the two."

The secret document, known as Penelope, has infuriated other commissioners who were not part of the super-trio (Prodi-Barnier-Vitorino) working on the future of Europe debate and was strongly opposed within the college say insiders.

Ratify or else...

In the end, the 177-page document was reduced to a "working document" and is introduced with the words "this feasibility study does not necessarily represent the views of the European Commission." Whether it represents the views of many commissioners or otherwise it contains some big proposals - not least on how to ratify a future treaty.

Mr Prodi's draft constitution suggests that member states make "a declaration confirming the resolve of its people to continue to belong to the Union". Failure to do this means the state "leaves the Union." If 5/6 of member states approve the new treaty, then it will enter into force anyway. Such a ratification clause could cause problems for countries such as Ireland, where referenda on new EU treaties have become the norm. This country's delay in ratifying the Nice Treaty gave rise to the current debate on ratification.

Broad mutual assistance for defence and "serious difficulties"

Another very controversial point is a suggested mutual defence clause - much like article five in the NATO treaty - whereby there would be an "obligation of mutual assistance in the event of an attack." The paper does not stop there, it suggests that such an assitance clause should be extended so that "if one of the member states experiences serious difficulties by reason of exceptional events, the other member states shall provide it with the requisite assistance." The paper proposes defence policy be an "integral part of the Union's external relation policy."

Another part of the draft set to annoy member states is the policies that the Union would count among its own. A "principle policy" would include justice and home affairs where the Union would ensure "a high degree of security, the prevention and combatting of crime and judicial cooperation." "Flanking policies" would include social policy and employment and health.

PDF Document