Women Suffer From the Retreat of Men

Women Suffer From the Retreat of Men


Britain’s education system is failing both men and women when it says there is no difference between the genders.

It is the best of times and the worst of times for women going through Britain’s education system. On the one hand, they’ve never had it so good. One third more women than men go to university, for example.

Yet, women are also suffering in many ways because of the decline of men. Perhaps none is so disturbing as the rise in sexual violence.

The issue has recently hit the headlines with several cases of sexual bullying being reported in British universities. But statistics from 2010 paint a terrible picture of an endemic problem. A study by the National Union of Students found that one in four female university students had been subject to sexual assault. One in three said they had experienced physical harassment.

These statistics aren’t referring to feminists upset that a man had held the door open for them. They show a serious problem. Sexual assault means rape, attempted rape and other forms of forced “sexual contact.” Physical harassment refers to women being grabbed, their skirts being lifted up and similar lewd behavior. Even these descriptions have been toned down to suit the Trumpet’s family audience. And this doesn’t include the countless women subject to taunts that no one would want their wives, sisters or daughters to hear.

After the recent headlines, the Times’ Catherine Nixey investigated the problem. “‘Laddism’—if you want to give this jolly term to what is sexual harassment—towards female students seems to have got even worse in the decade since I left,” she concluded.

“Ten years ago, no female students posed for ‘Page 3’ pictures,” she wrote, referring to the pictures of topless girls shown on page 3 of The Sun newspaper. “None felt the need to jelly-wrestle in their bikinis,” she continued. “And the sharking [trying to find the good-looking girls before they arrive at university] of my day seems positively homely and amateur compared with how it is done today.”

There were no halcyon days where every male behaved like a perfect gentleman, and Nixey makes this clear in her article. But today the problem is the worst it’s been.

In fact, the problem is so bad that the National Union of Teachers (nut) has gotten involved. As the largest teachers organization in Europe, its views carry some weight and it could make a real difference. So what’s its solution? Teach boys to stand up for and protect women? Restore a sense of chivalry in the younger generation?

No. Instead, it’s going in the opposite direction. Last month, at its annual conference, the nut put forward its big idea: feminizing boys. At the conference, speakers encouraged teachers to teach students that there are no differences between boys and girls, in an effort to combat “raunch culture.”

The union is running a project called “Breaking the Mold,” where it encourages teachers to promote books like William’s Doll, The Sissy Duckling, Bill’s New Frock and The Different Dragon. The conference encouraged teachers to use books that reversed the traditional roles of boys and girls.

It also encouraged teachers to find ways to teach children that “we can all do anything and that we need never feel constrained by our gender.” And it promotes a checklist that asks, “Is there anything about your classroom organization that might reinforce gender stereotypes—e.g. are there ‘boys’ toys’ or ‘girls’ books’?”

One of the teachers told the conference that this program would be “of huge benefit to both boys and girls.”

The crazy thing is, this is exactly the agenda that has caused the explosion of “raunch culture” in the first place. Schools have been trying to feminize boys for years, and today’s university students are the result.

The truth is that women are more vulnerable than men. Instead of denying this, schools should teach boys that their role is to protect women. Really, parents, not schools, should be teaching this, but too many parents have also signed up to this “gender neutral” agenda.

“Insanity,” as the proverb goes, “is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” The fruits of gender-neutral schooling are not good, yet the nut wants to push on with more of the same thing that caused the problem.

In one of the recent incidents to hit the press, women were subject to horrible sexual comments at a debating society tournament. The only ones who stood up for them were other women. Not a single man intervened to say this behavior was unacceptable.

If Britain’s educational establishment really wants to solve the “raunch culture,” it needs to make some big changes. It’s right to complain about the objectification of women and to try to fight it in schools. But it also needs to focus on raising boys’ self-discipline and giving them the courage to stand up for their more vulnerable classmates. If every man saw himself as the protector of women, how many assaults would there be? Anyone that chose to attack a woman, physically or verbally, would quickly be stopped.

The solution to Britain’s “raunch culture” is in fact the exact opposite of what the nut proposes. It is to teach boys and girls their proper roles as men and women. That will give women the self-respect to not engage in bikini-jelly wrestling, and will stop men from coercing them into giving it a try.

This is just one example of how women suffer from the West’s assault on masculinity. For more on this trend, see our resent special feature “The Incredible Shrinking Man.”

Israel, Palestinians Turning to a New Peace Broker

Israeli President Shimon Peres met Pope Francis at the Vatican on Tuesday. Israeli officials said Peres planned to talk to the pope about peace negotiations with the Palestinians. He also planned to discuss the status of church properties in the Holy Land.

Palestinians hope Pope Francis will discourage Israel from extending its West Bank separation barrier through the village of Beit Jala. The planned fence would also affect some Vatican properties.

Also on Tuesday, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas met with Austrian Heinz Fischer in Vienna. The two leaders discussed peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.

These overtures from both Palestinians and Israelis show that they believe the United States is biased and untrustworthy.

Thousands of years ago, the Bible prophesied who the Middle East’s new peace broker would be.

Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry wrote in 1996 that the world’s balance of power was shifting. “A weak U.S. is being pushed aside by Europe,” he wrote. “Europe is moving not only to be a co-sponsor in the peace process—they want to take control of it!” (December 1996).

Although few analysts realize it, Catholic Europe is seeking to develop a dominant presence in Israel, and especially Jerusalem.

The March/April 2001 Trumpet warned readers that the U.S. would be sidelined in the peace process. This is exactly what we see happening today.

Palestinians and Israelis disagree on almost everything, but they appear to agree that involving the EU and the Vatican might be the only solution to the Middle East peace process.

To learn more about why Israel no longer trusts America, read Gerald Flurry’s recent exposé, “The Mystery of President Obama’s Visit to Israel.” For more on the ultimate outcome of Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations, read “The Counterfeit Peacemaker.”

Australia to Sell U.S. Treasuries to Buy Chinese Bonds?

Australia to Sell U.S. Treasuries to Buy Chinese Bonds?


Australia knocks more support out from underneath the dollar.

The Reserve Bank of Australia has announced that for the first time it will invest in China by directly buying Chinese government bonds. Reserve Bank Deputy Governor Phillip Lowe was given the go-ahead by Chinese authorities to announce the approval to a business audience in Shanghai, on April 24.

Lowe said China had decided to approve Australia’s investment and that Australia would invest approximately 5 percent, approximately $2.1 billion, of its foreign currency reserves with the Chinese government.

“This decision to invest in China is an important one. It reflects the broader economic relationship between China and Australia and our increasing financial ties,” said Lowe.

Australia’s Treasurer Wayne Swan called the deal an important step to deepen Australia’s “financial and economic linkages with China.”

Australia currently allocates 45 percent of its foreign reserves to the U.S., 45 percent to Europe, and the rest to Japan and Canada.

So if Australia is to allocate 5 percent to China, which assets will it sell?

Probably its U.S. dollar-based holdings. This will be a blow to America, but it is hard to blame Australia.

The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs reports that in 2012, 30 percent of Australian exports went to China, 7.8 percent went to Europe and only 5.6 percent to the U.S. Economically speaking, America is just a lot less important to Australia than it used to be.

Additionally, on April 10, Australia and China began using Chinese yuan—instead of U.S. dollars—for trade between the two nations. Prime Minister Julia Gillard said it was a strategic step toward further economic integration with China. It is also another reason for Australia to cut its dollar holdings.

America needs to wake up and understand that the dollar’s position as the world’s reserve currency is eroding.

“[O]ver the next 10 years, we’re going to see a profound shift toward a world in which several currencies compete for dominance,” wrote Barry Eichengreen, professor of economics at University of California–Berkeley, in 2011.

The three pillars supporting the dollar’s reserve currency status—the sheer scale of its financial markets, its traditional safe-haven reputation, and the dearth of viable alternatives—are crumbling, he said.

And the impact will spread far beyond the markets. It is America’s standard of living that is being threatened.

Of the three pillars, it is primarily the lack of viable alternative reserve currencies that most appears to be propping up the dollar.

China is now actively working to internationalize the yuan as a dollar alternative. But it is not the yuan that the dollar should most fear.

It is Europe.

That may sound unlikely considering the current economic turmoil in Europe. But it is that very turmoil that has encouraged investors to hide their money in America. Once Germany gets Europe’s house in order, all that safe-haven money will exit America and head back into an economically and politically unified Europe—putting incredible pressure on that third pillar of U.S. dollar dominance.

The dollar’s days as the global reserve currency are numbered. Other nations will soon be vying for that title, and all the perks that go along with it.

The article “The Day the Dollar Dies” offers a glimpse at how fast the dollar could crash.

Berlin’s One-Sided Latino Trade Agreement

Berlin’s One-Sided Latino Trade Agreement


Germany moves to consolidate its Latin American resource bases, but at what cost to Latino economies?

As part of the German government’s policy of strengthening strategic ties with its overseas suppliers of raw materials, Germany is close to approving an EU trade agreement with two principal members of the Pacific Alliance, Colombia and Peru.

Officially launched in June 2012, the Pacific Alliance is the most powerful trading bloc in Latin America, comprising Mexico, Colombia, Peru and Chile. Between them these countries account for over 35 percent of combined Latin American gross domestic product. The bloc exceeded rival alliance Mercosur’s exports in 2010 by close to 60 percent.

German-Foreign-Policy.com reports that “The background to this is the high foreign political and economic significance Berlin attributes to the contract. The agreement secures to German enterprises favorable access to the raw materials of both resource-rich countries …” (April 25; translation ours).

The trade agreement was approved by all other EU nations before final consideration by Berlin this week. But warning bells have been sounded as to its effect on Latinos, with suspicions that the wording of the trade agreement heavily favors the European Union.

In a report authored by German researcher Thomas Fritz and published by the Center for Research and Documentation Chile-Latin America (Berlin) and the Transnational Institute (Amsterdam), titled “The Second Conquest: The EU Free Trade Agreement With Colombia and Peru,” grave doubts are expressed about inequalities built into the trade agreement that disfavor Latinos to the benefit of the EU. These inequalities could well result in the loss of land and livelihood of a significant proportion of the peasantry as major corporations enforce their will in the wake of the agreement.

Yet, despite such concerns, one voice that has supported the agreement being rushed to ratification is that of Germany’s Chancellor Merkel.

An Agence France-Presse report observed that last June “German Chancellor Angela Merkel … pressed for the rapid implementation of an EU free trade deal with Colombia and Peru, saying it was a good way to foster growth during the eurozone crisis.

“Speaking after meeting Peruvian President Ollanta Humala, Merkel said: ‘Particularly in a situation where some European countries are having economic difficulties, a free trade agreement with Colombia and Peru is a good sign to promote growth.

“‘Therefore we want it to come into force quickly,’ the chancellor added.”

No consideration here for any perceived detrimental effect that implementation of the trade agreement may cause to Latinos, though the alarm bells are ringing warning of such.

This is consistent with the hard-nosed attitude that Germany has taken toward countries such as Greece and Cyprus in the wake of the euro crisis. It’s akin to declaring, “let the public go hang as long as we gain the spoils,” be it from enforced austerity measures or one-sided trade agreements.

The chancellor’s statement can only mean one thing. Germany now wanting to rush forward with implementing this trade agreement between the EU, Colombia and Peru is definitely, as German-Foreign-Policy.com states, evidence of the “high foreign political and economic significance Berlin attributes to the contract.”

Trumpet subscribers would be well aware that we have long forecast the increasing linkage of the German-empowered EU and Latin America, specifically as a means of the former securing ongoing access to the region’s copious raw materials, much needed as fodder for German industry.

Yet there is another reason that the Rome/Berlin axis, the real driving force behind the European Union, would find a natural symbiosis with Latin America. It relates to the strong cultural connection that exists between the two—a common European language—Spanish—and a common religion—Roman Catholicism.

Though other nations, in particular China, compete for Latino resources and markets, it is this strong cultural connection which will eventually win the day for the rising Holy Roman Empire over all comers seeking to ally in trade with Latin America.

Germany has placed itself in the position of final judge and last signatory to this trade agreement, with its oversight committee due to approve the agreement this week. All other EU member nations and relevant institutions have already signed up to it.

The agreement between the EU and these two Pacific Alliance nations will not be the last such agreement reached between Latin American economies and the EU, or more specifically its lead economy, Germany. Not by far.

In fact, we expect such agreements to come thick and fast even as Germany increasingly reveals its true imperialist motives in the wake of today’s euro crisis.

It is, as Thomas Fritz obliquely infers, akin to the Holy Roman Empire enacting a second conquest of Latin America—this time by trade agreement, rather than by the rapine and pillage of the Conquistadors.

Keep watching this website for regular updates on this particular phenomenon, which is yet another very strong indicator of the pace of the fulfillment of those bible prophecies that reveal the end-time resurrection of the Holy Roman Empire speeding up.

Of course, to Bible students, that is great news, for it bespeaks the acceleration of prophesied world events that quickly lead to our Savior’s return and the installation of the only true and lasting empire of all—the Kingdom of God on Earth!

Read our booklet The Key of David for a breathtaking introduction to that great, near future, event!

Germany—Reverting to Militaristic Type?

Germany—Reverting to Militaristic Type?

Getty Images

A recent secret meeting emphasizes an increasing focus by Germany on raising its military profile.

From the time that Nazi elites met behind closed doors at the Red House during World War ii to instruct Germany’s top wartime industrialists to revive the nation’s industrial base as a means of preparing for the Fourth Reich in the case of military defeat, secret meetings of the influential in Germany have been part of its rebuilding an imperial future. (The Red House intelligence report is reprinted in full in our free booklet Germany’s Conquest of the Balkans.)

It therefore ought to come as no surprise to read reports of a secret meeting on armaments held recently by the Fraunhofer Society in Baden Wurttemberg.

German-Foreign-Policy.com reports that the secret meeting was held under the title “International Symposium on Ballistics” and “dealt with explosives and projectiles as well as armoring. Media representatives were refused access to the urban congress center under threat of using force” (April 26; translation ours).

Established in 1949, four years after the conclusion of World War ii, the Fraunhofer Society is the largest research institute in Germany. It is headquartered in Munich and comprises 60 institutes, employing 13,000 personnel utilizing a budget of over €1 billion.

One Munich information website claims that “The Fraunhofer Society is very interested in making the results of its innovative research public.” However, it would appear from this latest episode that when it comes to “innovative research” on explosive devices and armaments, any interest in making the results available to the public is curtailed dramatically, under threat of force, to ensure secrecy.

Over the past 20 years following the reunification of Germany, German industry has quietly retooled to become the world’s third-largest producer of military hardware. Perhaps this would not be of any general concern had it not been for that nation’s unfortunate record of instigating mass warfare in its own imperial interests.

Realizing this, German elites have been careful not to disturb public opinion which bills Germany as a democratic state bent on maintaining world peace.

At the same time they have, since the Balkan wars of the 1990s, been carefully building up German military presence in zones of combat over a wide perimeter south and east of Berlin (Daniel 8:9). Inevitably this steadily increasing military effort will involve heightened demand for armaments to resupply German forces as they risk increasing engagement in combat in foreign theaters.

Since former Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg began to steadily engage public opinion in support of Germany’s armed forces, German elites have been carefully considering their options in respect of the propaganda to achieve this.

As general opinion in Europe is increasingly turning against “the German way” which is proving detrimental to European economies as the euro crisis grinds on, Germans are going to feel increasingly embattled and hard done by, by the rest of Europe.

Add to this the very real threat of Islamist extremism, most especially from Iran, and you have a highly sensitized situation building in Germany which elites will take advantage of to gain public support for an acceleration of German militarization.

There is yet another aspect to this. As German hegemony spreads globally, the German government will have no option but to increase its military power to protect both its resource bases overseas and its increasing foreign assets. This is an inevitable result of any policy of imperialism.

So, whichever way you slice the cake of the perennial German question, the course of imperialist growth upon which the nation embarked immediately upon reunification in 1991 has now come full circle to place Germany back into its inevitable role as a rising military power for the third time in a single century.

Not only have Germany’s industrialists responded magnificently to their orders to revive German industry as the backbone for a Fourth Reich, they are now placing their nation at the very forefront of the technological edge in the latest developments in the armaments trade.

Had German elites held a secret, closed-door meeting on ballistics 50 years ago, it would have set alarm bells ringing in Western diplomatic circles. Yet not even a whimper will be raised in response to this inevitable outcome of the Red House gathering of the 1940s.

This is destined to have but one clear result. A result which the prophecies in your Bible declare will bring great devastation to Anglo-Saxon nations in particular. Read our publications The United States and Britain in Prophecy and Nahum—An End-Time Prophecy for Germany to understand the prophesied outcome of the return of German militarization.

We know that it is said that it’s always darkest before the dawn. Germany is set on a course that will soon turn over one of the darkest pages in mankind’s history. But the good news is, once that page is turned, it will open the brightest of chapters for the future history of humanity.

That reality is revealed in our booklet The Wonderful World Tomorrow—What It Will Be Like. It is a booklet replete with examples of the hope for the future that the Eternal God has planned to enable humankind to fulfill its incredible human potential. Its vision is guaranteed to give you a life filled with hope for the future, a hope which we all drastically need as the clouds of mass public confusion about the future of mankind darken the lives of so many in this day and age.

Study the prophecies that guarantee this brightest of futures for humanity and your life will become one of joyful anticipation, especially amid the increasingly darkened days we shall have to survive in order to obtain it.

Homosexual ‘Marriage’ Splits France

Homosexual ‘Marriage’ Splits France


France reacts strongly to new homosexual ‘marriage’ laws. Could this be the start of a ‘Catholic Spring’ in Europe?

France’s lower house of parliament passed a law on April 23 allowing homosexuals to “marry.” The law carried 331 votes, with 225 dissenting. It is expected to be approved by the Constitutional Court and French President François Hollande over the next few months.

France, it seems, has joined the new trend of so-called liberalism that is sweeping the world.

However, France is not what it seems. The opposition to homosexual “marriage” has been stronger in this country than perhaps anywhere else in the world where similar laws have been introduced.

The director of studies at the Institute of Democracy and Cooperation in Paris, John Laughland, explained the situation in an article titled “Why France’s Gay Marriage Debate Has Started to Look Like a Revolution,” in the latest issue of the Spectator.

“Revolutions are often sparked by an unexpected shock to an already weakened regime,” he writes. “As commentators in France remark not only on the crisis engulfing François Hollande’s government but also on the apparent death-rattle of the country’s entire political system, it could be that his flagship policy of legalizing gay marriage—or rather, the gigantic public reaction against it, unique in Europe—will be the last straw that breaks the Fifth Republic’s back.”

While Mr. Laughland may be on to something, his article needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. Laughland’s Institute of Democracy and Cooperation is funded by Russian non-governmental organizations and seems to be part of Russia’s push back against Western criticism of its human rights record. Even Russian media has referred to the institute as a “pro-Kremlin think tank.” By saying the West is ignoring and mistreating its own protesters, Russia helps get itself off the hook.

With that caveat: “Opposition to the bill has electrified the middle classes, the young and much of provincial France,” Laughland writes. “On Sunday, 24 March, in the freezing cold, the 4-kilometer stretch from the Arche de la Défense to the Arc de Triomphe was full of people protesting against the bill. On 13 January, also chilly, the Champ de Mars was similarly crammed. When Johnny Hallyday or the World Cup got crowds like that, people talked of 2 million. But the police, evidently acting under political orders, have claimed that both demonstrations—which are without doubt the largest public movements in French history—garnered a few hundred thousand at most. Credible accusations surfaced in Le Figaro on Monday night that the film taken from police helicopters on 24 March and released by the Prefecture has been manipulated to reduce the apparent numbers of demonstrators.”

Even if the conservative police figures are considered, these are among the biggest protests France has seen in a generation. You have to go back to France’s failed attempts to reform its mostly Catholic private schools in 1984 to find a protest substantially larger. Since then, the only protest bigger than the recent ones was on May 1, 2002, when hundreds of thousands turned out to demonstrate against Jean-Marie Le Pen’s presidential bid.

A hugely unpopular government is legalizing homosexual “marriage” against the wishes of close to half of the population. A recent poll found that while 52 percent supported homosexual “marriage,” 52 percent also opposed allowing homosexual couples to adopt—something included in this law.

Just like in much of southern Europe, the target of public anger is the whole political system, not just a single party or figure. Last year, the National Front’s Marine Le Pen—a political outsider—won a record 18 percent of the vote.

French President François Hollande’s popularity rating is around 27 percent—the lowest of any French president. But where can the French turn? There is no popular figure on the right and to many, Le Pen and the National Front are beyond the pale.

There is a hole at the heart of French politics. But it is a Roman Catholic-shaped hole. Under a scandal-ridden government, the nation cries out for an honest, reputable and pro-family leadership—which the Catholic Church claims to embody.

“The protests have re-awoken old demons—church versus republic; ‘real’ France versus ‘anti-France’—which weakened the country in the 1890s and the 1930s,” wrote the Independent’s man in Paris John Lichfield.

The protests have brought out a new breed of political activists—those who don’t usually take to the streets. Lichfield writes that traditional Catholics have joined with the hard right in taking to the street. “The crossover between hard-right activists and Catho-traditionalist kids fits a pattern which has worried politicians of both right and left in recent weeks,” he continues. “The mass gay marriage protests have eroded the increasingly flimsy barriers between the ‘traditional’ and the ‘hard’ right in France; between the National Front and the center right.” The Catholic Church has been at the heart of these demonstrations. It obviously still holds a lot of sway.

France is not following in the same trend as Britain and America, rejecting traditional morality and religion with hardly a fight. Rather, this could be the moment that France changes direction and starts a new trend, perhaps rapidly and suddenly.

Despite being a strongly Catholic country, religion has been kept firmly out of France’s government. Former President Nicolas Sarkozy took some unprecedented steps away from the separation of church and state. But the separation remains.

The legalization of homosexual “marriage” could make the French realize they no longer want this separation. Rather than being another step against religion, the homosexual “marriage” law could be the trigger that brings religion back to the heart of French government.

Across southern Europe, the very method of government, not just the governments themselves, is very unpopular. In Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain and now France, this unpopularity is reaching unprecedented levels. This public pressure will soon push Europe to adopt a radical change in government. Watch for this change, and watch for the Catholic Church to be part of it.

“Had the mobilization in Paris taken place in Tahrir Square, the world’s media would be unanimous that a ‘French Spring’ was about to sweep away an outdated power structure, especially since the demonstrations … are attended by an overwhelming number of people in their late teens and early 20s,” writes Laughland. He may be right. Perhaps this is the start of a Catholic Spring in Europe.