The European Union has to be destroyed, so that the West can survive
Ladies and gentlemen,
I am glad to be here to speak on these very serious issues. I have to excuse myself for my speech will be very politically incorrect.
When we talk about geopolitics of the Central and Eastern Europe Region, we mustn´t omit demographic, cultural and civilisation conditions. We can see the Decline of the West. Our civilisation perishes. Maybe yet in our lives we will see the final Death of the West.
Where are we now and where are we going? The European population is dying out. Children are not being born. About a third of children is killed in the wombs of their mothers through abortions. Europe is growing old.
We deny our nationality, our culture, our civilisation’s self-confidence and our Christian faith. The Old order and old culture is replaced by neo-Marxism, oikofobia, postmodernism, multiculturalism, feminism, homosexualism, left liberalism and animosity against West.
In the Western Europe the population is substituted mainly by the Muslim immigration. Muslim immigrants can see our weak post-Western civilisation denying itself. They replace population of the states of EU 15. According to some predictions, in 40 years, there will be a Muslim majority in these states. By some figures the Netherlands will be a Muslim state in 15 years.
This demographic change will cause a radical modification of the political and legal system. Some politicians even now propose to embody the Islamic law - Sharia - into our present legal system. The Western Europe with states like Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and others is lost and will become Muslim. If we want to save our countries in our region, we have to separate ourselves off these decadent states.
40 years ago in the United Kingdom there was a great conservative politician and a great prophet who foresaw that the Western states will be overruled by alien immigrant population. His name was Enoch Powell. He was also a great critic of European Union and the attempt to create, by social engineering means, a socialistic, artificial post-modern European super-state. Enoch was right on both issues – on the EU and immigration.
The last peak of this undemocratic, centralist, bureaucratic plan of Brussels engineers is the so called Lisbon Treaty, which is only a renamed European Constitution. This treaty is a great deception, as well as the whole European Union idea, as was proofed in Christoper Booker´s and Richard North´s book The Great Deception.
Moreover, I have a proof of this scandalous project of the European centralists. It is Angela Merkel´s secret letter with 12 questions to the heads of governments of the EU states. I have acquired this letter from a former member of the European parliament Jens-Peter Bonde. In this letter, German Chancellor asks the leaders of the EU states whether they would mind not to change the content of EU Constitution. The essence of the European Constitution is preserved in the Lisbon Treaty simply by using a different terminology without changing the legal substance. The French and Dutch said NO to the European Constitution but they have been deceived.
The Lisbon Treaty is a way to constitute a socialist, bureaucratic Franco-German empire. Under the new treaty, about ninety percent of laws will come from Brussels and national parliaments will have to implement these regulations. It means the end of democracy and self-government in our countries. Moreover, the Lisbon treaty also affirms a common immigration policy of the EU.
If we want to protect our countries against the invasion of aliens, we have to secede from the European Union, keep our own immigration policy and protect our borders against invasion. The Central and Eastern Europe is not yet hit by the flood of immigrants, but Brussels also plans to send immigrants to our countries. This redistribution of immigrants is sanctified by the Lisbon Treaty.
What to do now? Our countries are situated between Germany and Russia, who have their imperial claims. We know that these two powers understand each other. German, France and Russia will always find a common interest and agreement as the history can proof.
I think that the best way to save our sovereignty, our democratic self-government and our western identity is to leave the EU and establish between Germany and Russia our own organisation of free sovereign nation states of the Central and Eastern Europe, where each state would act in its sovereign and independent character.
We should constitute a defence alliance, similar to NATO, and create a free trade area. This organisation should become a barrier against the hegemonic attempts of Franco-Germany tandem and against Russia. Later on, when France, Germany and other states will gain a Muslim character, our alliance could be a barrier against Islam from the Western Europe.
I don´t know whether the European Union will become in a few decades a Union of European Islamic Republics or if there will be sovereign states like New Pakistan (alias former Britain), New Turkey (alias former Germany) or New Arabia (alias former France), but these states will be a threat to our security.
New Pakistan alias former United Kingdom and New Arabia alias former France, will be countries with nuclear weapons. In that view, it is necessary to establish our own nuclear forces of the Central-Eastern Europe Alliance to deter this new nuclear threat.
What states should be in this new Alliance? Those states that are not yet flooded with Muslim immigration: Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Hungary. Possible candidates would be Ukraine, Belarus, Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria and Greece. This is open to discussion.
Maybe some states like Ireland, Portugal and Finland will keep their western character and we shall also cooperate with these islands in the Muslim Ocean.
What about the United States? Few years ago I believed that the USA could be a guarantee of our security. But now we can see the rule of neo-communist president Obama with his radical project of a cultural revolution. In few years, we will see whether America will still be One nation under God or will become American Soviet Union, or with the flow of Hispanic immigrants it will become so called Aztlan or Mexamerica. Maybe there will be a secession of the Christian central and southern states and a break-up of the American Union will become reality. But we can no longer rely on USA. The Day of Reckoning is coming to the United States, too.
To conclude: we should cooperate here and now to save our national sovereignty, self-government and constitutional democracy against the attempt to create a centralistic, socialist, bureaucratic Franco-German Empire, to face Russia and to rescue our countries from the common EU immigration policy. After a few decades, we will face the Western Europe ruled by Muslims with their own nuclear weapon system.
But geopolitics is not enough. To restore our population growth, we have to leave the radical neo-Marxist ideologies, renew the function of a traditional family as the basic economic and social unit independent off the state, abandon the welfare state and restore the moral values of our western, not post-western, civilisation.
But now I watch Europe busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre. You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children the Christian Western Civilisation, the last best hope of Man on the Earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.
Thank you for your attention.
PhDr. Lukáš Petřík
Editor in Chief of EUportal.cz
Speech at the CEVRO Conference THE FUTURE OF EUROPE – Czech and Polish Perspectives, Prague, Thursday 8 October 2009
Attachment
12 otázek Angely Merkelové k zástupcům členských zemí
12 questions of angela Merkel to the head of the states
Secret letter sent out by German Chancellor Angela Merkel to her 26 European counterparts.
1. Jak hodnotíte návrh předložený některými členskými zeměmi nerušit existující smlouvy, nýbrž se vrátit ke klasické metodě změn smluv při současném zachování jedné právnické osoby a překonání pilířové struktury EU?
How do you assess the proposal made by some Member States not to repeal the existing treaties but to return to the classical method of treaty changes while preserving the single legal personality and overcoming the pillar structure of the EU?
2. Jak v tomto případě hodnotíte návrh předložený některými členskými zeměmi, aby byl zachován konsolidovaný přístup části 1 Ústavní smlouvy s nutnými změnami prezentace navenek plynoucími z návratu ke klasické metodě změn smluv?
How do you assess in that case the proposal made by some Member States that the consolidated approach of part 1 of the Constitutional Treaty is preserved, with the necessary presentational changes resulting from the return to the classical method of treaty changes?
3. Jak v tomto případě hodnotíte návrh předložený některými členskými zeměmi používat odlišnou terminologii, aniž by se změnila právní substance, např. co se týče názvu smlouvy, označení právních aktů EU a unijního ministra pro zahraniční věci?
How do you assess in that case the proposal made by some Member States to use different terminology without changing the legal substance for example with regard to the title of the treaty, the denomination of EU legal acts and the Union’s Minister for Foreign Affairs?
4. Jak hodnotíte návrh předložený některými členskými zeměmi vypustit článek týkající se symbolů EU?
How do you assess the proposal made by some Member States to drop the article that refers to the symbols of the EU?
5. Jak hodnotíte návrh předložený některými členskými zeměmi vypustit článek stanovující nadřazenost práva EU?
How do you assess the proposal made by some Member States to drop the article which states the primacy of EU law?
6. Jak hodnotíte návrh předložený některými členskými zeměmi, aby členské země nahradily plné znění Charty základních práv krátkým odkazem se stejnou právní hodnotou?
How do you assess the proposal made by some Member States that Member States will replace the full text of the Charter of Fundamental Rights by a short cross reference having the same legal value?
7. Souhlasíte s tím, že institucionální ustanovení Ústavní smlouvy tvoří vyvážený balíček, který by neměl být znovu otevřen?
Do you agree that the institutional provisions of the Constitutional Treaty form a balanced package that should not be reopened?
8. Existují jiné prvky, které dle vašeho názoru tvoří nezbytnou součást celkového kompromisu, jež byl tehdy dosažen?
Are there other elements which in your view constitute indispensable parts of the overall compromise reached at the time?
9. Jak hodnotíte návrh předložený některými členskými zeměmi týkající se možných vylepšení/objasnění záležitostí vztahujících se k novým výzvám stojícím před EU, např. v oblasti energie/změny klimatu nebo ilegální imigrace?
How do you assess the proposal made by some Member States concerning possible improvements/clarifications on issues related to new challenges facing the EU, for instance in the fields of energy/climate change or illegal immigration?
10. Jak hodnotíte návrh předložený některými členskými zeměmi, aby byla zdůrazněna „kodaňská“ kritéria v článku o rozšíření?
How do you assess the proposal made by some Member States to highlight the Copenhagen criteria in the article on enlargement?
11. Jak hodnotíte návrh předložený některými členskými zeměmi, aby byla tím či oním způsobem oslovena sociální dimense EU?
How do you assess the proposal made by some Member States to address the social dimension of the EU in some way or the other?
12. Jak hodnotíte návrh předložený některými členskými zeměmi na použití ustanovení opt-in/outu v některých ustanoveních nové politiky vytčené v Ústavní smlouvě?
How do you assess the proposal made by some Member States applying opt-in/out provisions to some of the new policy provisions set out in the Constitutional Treaty?
