Now the BBC is coming right out with it – United States of Europe – and claiming it’s GERMANY’S idea! The aptly named Guido Westerwelle (the leader/guide of the western wave – a cruel irony in this name; he might just as well be called Mr Trojan Horse) and the others in the German transatlantic elite are happy to carry this can, so once again Germany’s elite will lead its people into disaster when the other peoples of Europe eventually come to damn Germany for the ultimate catastrophe that will result from this deceitful charade. See article below.

The real beans of the matter were spilled by another insider, Niall Ferguson in The Sunday Times on 20 May in his article titled “One Nation (Under Germany)”:

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article34798.html

“And what of those who dreamt up the single currency wheeze in the first place? Shouldn’t they now be feeling at the very least a trifle sheepish? Not at all, Ferguson reckons. If things play out the way he predicts, they will have achieved their ambition — albeit by somewhat devious means.

“I think it’s worth considering that the architects of the monetary union knew all along that it would lead to a crisis and the crisis would lead to a federal solution. I’m not quite sure how far that was articulated, but I think it was implicit. In fact, you could say it was actually designed to create a crisis,” he says.

In the late 1990s, an internal paper circulated in the Bank of England about a hypothetical break­up of the single currency. It floated the idea that “country I” — and the supposed identity of country I could be speculated upon but was never made explicit — would run an unsustainable deficit. Because there was no legal exit from the single currency, the costs of any exit would be sky high. “And,” Ferguson says, “it was designedly so. That point has held good.

“They [the euro enthusiasts] have achieved what they wanted in that the level of financial integration has gone so far, it’s almost impossible to undo. And it was always meant to be undoable, which is why there never was an exit clause. You were never going to get federalism by any other means.”

If the current crisis does indeed see the creation of a federal state of Europe, where does that leave Britain? Would it want to be part of that new superstate? “The answer is clearly no,” Ferguson says. And if— a big if — there were a referendum, Britain might vote to leave the EU altogether.”

Here Ferguson reveals the extent to which he is ‘in the know’. The whole scam of this current crisis, he says, was designed to bring about the fiscal and political integration of Europe. This means the creation, in effect, of the United States of Europe, the intended little sister of Big Brother USA. This is the final stone in the 63 year-long USE project  – to be completed by 2013 – that began with the founding of the European Coal and Steel Community which was cleverly steered into place by Jean Monnet in 1950 and disguised as the (Robert) Schumann Plan. Every 6 or 7 years since then, the project has taken a further step or lurch forward, sometimes accompanied by a convenient crisis, and now we have the biggest crisis yet, in order to facilitate the biggest and final step – the removal of independent national fiscal taxation and budgetary powers and their appropriation by a centralised authority, or de facto Ministry of Finance.

Responsibility for this latest authoritarian manoeuvre is already being placed on the German scapegoat, as we see below from the BBC. It is a total fabrication, because the idea and planning for a United States of Europe were conceived in the Anglosphere over 100 years ago by imperialist thinkers such as W.T.Stead (see his books The United States of Europe and The Americanisation of the World) and Cecil Rhodes and carried on by the Round Table group and their successors. Rightwingers and anti-German leftwingers either seek to hide this fact (if they are even aware of it) or else, in their ignorance of it, they claim that the USE is a plan devised by the Nazis (see, for example, John Laughland‘s well-known book, The Tainted Source – The Undemocratic Origins of the European Idea, 1997). Yes, there are of course those in the German elite, such as Westerwelle, who wish to see the creation of a USE allied to the USA, but they are actually Anglosphere puppets within the German establishment. Some of them don’t even realise that the ideas in their heads and the words on their lips are neither German nor European but Anglo-American.

‘More Europe!’: Germany’s battle-cry for the eurozone

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18557059

“It is the rallying cry of Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel as she points to what she thinks is the way out of the euro mire.

“More Europe means that we must give up more powers to Europe,” Mrs Merkel says.

She said it again after meeting the leaders of Spain, France and Italy in Rome: “The lesson of this crisis is more Europe, not less Europe.”

But is Berlin’s ceding power to Brussels also the route to a United States of Europe?

The Future Group A picture of the German conception of Europe’s future is emerging from the utterances of the German foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle, and through the newly published interim report of what is known as the Future Group, which he set up.

The proposals are:

• More European power to determine the economic and tax policies of the member states. There should be a “transfer of sovereignty” to the European centre

• A strengthening of the EU’s “foreign office”, with a common European foreign and security policy

• A smaller European Commission able to make decisions faster

• A bigger role for the European Parliament to make “stronger democratic legitimacy”

• A directly elected President of Europe

• A European army

United States of Europe?So is it a USE – a United States of Europe? There are certainly similarities with the USA – with its central power over economics and common foreign policy.

Without saying United States of Europe, Mr Westerwelle justifies the move to “more Europe” by citing the current crisis in the eurozone.

“It is the worst crisis that Europe has ever faced. We have to learn the right lessons from it. Decision-making in Europe is often too slow,” he says.

“Unfortunately, a cold wind of repatriation is sweeping through the European Union. The grand idea of Europe is in danger.”

He goes on: “But the truth is that we need more Europe, not less. Europe must stand up for itself, for the idea of cultural unity. Steps towards a genuine political union would make a tangible contribution to ending the crisis.”

Mr Westerwelle has some weight behind him. A Future of Europe Group that he set up is made up of fellow foreign ministers from Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Austria, Spain, Portugal, Italy and Poland.

It is not clear if France is in or out. It sent an official to the early meetings with a promise of a foreign minister after the election.

‘Too fast, too far’

But 17 of the 27 countries in the European Union were left out, including Britain and Sweden which are both sceptical about more power going to Brussels.

And it should be said that what Mr Westerwelle thinks is not always what Mrs Merkel thinks. He may be the foreign minister but he comes from a different party in the coalition.

But “more Europe” is their shared desire.

In Britain there is a view, certainly within the Conservative Party which dominates the coalition government, that the lesson to be drawn from the crisis is that European integration went too fast and too far.

In the Eurosceptic view, European integration was ill-advised because the peoples of Europe were not ready for it. They would baulk, so the argument runs, at being pushed and jostled towards a single identity.

In the German view, pushing towards a unified identity is precisely what now needs to be done.

Can they both stay in the same boat if they are rowing in opposite directions? Might they squabble and tip the whole thing over?”