“Apart from a clearer codification of when the use of military force is appropriate, the Lisbon Treaty provided for the concept of enhanced cooperation in the area of defense policy. This allows for a minimum of nine EU member states to establish advanced cooperation in an area within the EU’s competence without requiring the involvement of other member states. Lisbon also provides the framework for the development of a permanent structured cooperation in defense, which would allow member states with higher-level militaries to form a permanent defense structure under EU structures.”
Passerby thanks for that great link!
For those of you who haven’t read the information in the link here is a following quotes that I have picked up:
“The Lisbon Treaty, earlier known as the Reform Treaty, was designed to reorganize and restructure the constitutional framework of the EU by amending the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union”
and then it states this:
“While the full effect of the Lisbon Treaty is not yet completely understood, looking at the institutional changes that impact the field of external affairs allows for a heightened understanding of the EU as an international actor.”
Then we have this very key element of this particular paragraph:
” when the Lisbon Treaty entered into force, the EU consolidated the three-pillar system and adopted one legal personality.
Furthermore, in response to the absence of a coordinated foreign policy, the Lisbon Treaty expanded the role of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy in an effort to coordinate foreign policy.”
If any of you are paying attention to the aforementioned…then it should be clear that the person who hold the seat of High Representative has been given “expanded” powers.
This sounds very familiar with the information that Herb Peters has explained in his book Recommendation 666. Also, if one can remember, it was Javier Solana who was the current High Representative at the time just prior to the Lisbon Treaty being ratified that really pushed that it be passed by the people of Ireland. He further stepped down after it had become Law. I find this Highly Suspicious!
Then we have this information:
“The holder of this position is responsible for organizing EU policy in matters of external action, and speaking for the EU on matters of common foreign and security policy. Furthermore, the High Representative chairs the Council of EU Foreign Ministers and sits in the European Commission. In short, the High Representative serves as a foreign minister for the entire EU, allowing for the more cohesive development and expression of the Union’s common foreign and security policy. While the High Representative represents the Union in the international arena, it is always in close cooperation with member states’ diplomatic missions. Furthermore, the centrality of unity in the development and expression of foreign policy is reflected in the fact that the High Representative is responsible for trying to resolve diplomatic problems among the Union’s member states.”
Now I ask, after reading the aforementioned, is Lady Ashton really suited for the High Representatives Position?
As far as what has been left out in the original statements about the EU’s defense, please take a look at this statement:
“Lisbon also provides the framework for the development of a permanent structured cooperation in defense, which would allow member states with higher-level militaries to form a permanent defense structure under EU structures.”
So it appears as if the EU will indeed have a Military Force – but it must fall under “EU structures”. This is consistent with how Militarily – the EU will be a force that cannot be reckoned with.
The article goes on to state how the EU has had limited powers as far as it’s ability to function independently from member states – which sounds like a contradiction; in that it eariler states that each member state will have a say-so, and it is to be respected, but if you read on they give how the actions in Libya led to a lack of “common defense policy”.
The author of this article goes on to state that now the EU is basically taking matters into their own hands by qualifying their quest for a common defense policy by stating this:
“The changes underlined above seem to develop a new EU strategy for the international arena. Under the new institutional framework, the Union is able to act with heightened autonomy and, as such, it demonstrates a united and more highly integrated policy in its external affairs. New unifying concepts are also focused on to achieve strategic coordination in terms of development, the promotion of the rule of law and human rights, and the battle against poverty. Furthermore, these uniting policies aid in the creation of a more positive profile of the Union in the world and in accomplishing alliances with developing countries. As the solidarity clause dictates “the Union and its member states shall act jointly in a spirit of solidarity.” Going forward, the course of the Union will be determined by the political will of its member states, their decisions in how to deal with the challenges of the twenty-first century and their approaches to the new framework established by the Lisbon Treaty.”
In closing, it appears as Herb Peters was “spot on” when he identified “The Ten”; and further provided the fact that Document 666; or Article 666 of this same “Ten” identified the seat of the person who will have the power of EU foreign affairs – which could certainly lead to World domination as far as the powers that have been given to him. Especially when one “may” consider that the 1st Beast that arises from the Sea in Revelation 13 is non other than a World Empire that once was; appeared as if it were dead; then came back to life; and the 10 that were independent from them – as far as it’s Military Wing; and having full voting rights subsequently gave their power and authority back to the 1st Beast.
Please consider the aforementioned things…….
Comment by Wickus:
I just feel this is to important to let it vanish in the comment section. Thanks Passerby for the link and to Mr Baldy for your insight.