German Government Knew Euro Would Fail

German Government Knew Euro Would Fail

Attila Seren/AFP/Getty Images

Newly released papers show the German government knew the euro would fail and lied to the Constitutional Court about it.

Former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl was warned that the euro was doomed to fail, according to secret documents obtained by Spiegel.

“Documents from the Kohl administration, kept confidential until now, indicate that the euro’s founding fathers were well aware of its deficits,” it wrote May 8.

The Trumpet has long warned that European leaders knew exactly what they were doing when they created the euro. The current crisis is not a mistake. They knew that, as Spiegel writes, “a common currency cannot survive on the long term if it is not backed by a political union.” They pushed ahead because they believed a common currency would force the unwilling European people to form a political union.

The documents released to Spiegel give yet more evidence of this.

Italy was allowed to join the euro after some deceptive accounting meant it fulfilled the entrance criteria. “However, the Kohl administration cannot plead ignorance,” writes Spiegel. “In fact, the documents show that it was extremely well informed about the state of Italy’s finances.”

Not only did Kohl ignore warnings that Italy’s debt was way too high, but “the documents that have now been released suggest that the Kohl administration misled both the public and Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court,” it writes.

Kohl’s government told the court that Italy’s breaking of the euro’s financial rules was “neither recognizable nor to be expected.” Meanwhile, the government’s economic advisers were saying that Italy’s “high debt levels” carried “enormous risks.”

Kohl’s government lied to the equivalent of Germany’s supreme court to make sure the euro went ahead. He knew that then Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi was fiddling the books to make Italy look ready for the euro.

JP Morgan Asset Management calculated last week that the eurozone was one of the worst possible common currency zones. The economies involved are too different. In fact, it found that a currency zone made up of countries whose names start with the letter M would make a better currency union than the euro.

As former EU civil servant and author of The Rotten Heart of Europe Bernard Connolly warned in 2007: “And, whereas the mission of the Fed is to avoid a financial crisis, the mission of the ecb [European Central Bank] is to provoke one. The purpose of the crisis will be, as Prodi, then Commission president, said in 2002, to allow the EU to take more power for itself.”

The key leaders knew the euro wasn’t an optimal currency zone. They knew the only way it would work would be to centralize even more power in Brussels. But they couldn’t get voters to agree to this.

Now, as Spiegel observes, all possible solutions to the crisis “boil down to individual countries relinquishing more authority and the central government in Brussels acquiring more in return.”

This is exactly what the euro’s founders wanted.

Jim Rogers on the occupation with the brightest future

World-renowned investor Jim Rogers says the profession of the future is no longer in finance and banking. If you work on Wall Street, prepare for more government regulation, persecution and scapegoating, he says.

There is, however, one occupation that Rogers says will prosper—and it is not a profession generally associated with Harvard or most other Ivy League types. What is this mysterious job opportunity?

Farming. Yes, farming. Rogers says:

I have told you before, become a farmer. Stop all this financial stuff. Become a farmer. Drive a tractor. Get a tractor. Get rid of the Mercedes and get a tractor? … There are many vast opportunities in agriculture and farming.

And why does Rogers say farming is the way to go? Is it because of increasing demand for food from Asia? Are degraded soils restricting food production? Are unpredictable weather patterns pushing up food prices?

All those things may be true, but according to Rogers, there is another ominous trend set to decimate global food production.

Farmers of the bread basket nations are dying. The world is literally running out of farmers. Rogers explains:

The average age of farmers in America is 58. In Asia, 66. In Australia, 58. In ten years American farmers will be 68 if they are still alive.

Where is all the expertise to run farms going to come from? Farming was barely profitable for so long that few children stand ready to take over the family farm. They have gone to the cities instead, to chase higher-paying careers. Running a modern farm is a highly technical and intensive science—not something that you can pick up as you go.

Rogers’s advice: Forget banking and finance and become a farmer. But America’s going to be in a lot of trouble if it is to rely on Wall Street types to produce its food.

Half of Americans Support Homosexual ‘Marriage’

Half of Americans Support Homosexual ‘Marriage’

Getty Images

Half of Americans believe that homosexual “marriages” should be made legal, with the same rights as traditional marriages, a recent Gallup Poll shows.

Although this number is down slightly from 53 percent last year, it is only the second time in Gallup’s history of tracking this issue that at least a majority of Americans support homosexual “marriage.” In 1996, when the Defense of Marriage Act was signed, only 27 percent of Americans supported such marriages.

In this recent poll, 48 percent said such marriages should not be legal.

The poll was conducted just before President Obama publicly declared his support of homosexual “marriage.”

At this same time, North Carolina approved a constitutional amendment defining marriage solely as a union between a man and a woman. In doing so, the state shut the door on the legalization of homosexual “marriages.” North Carolina is the 30th state to pass such an amendment.

The issue of homosexual marriage sharply divides the American public along political and religious lines. In the political arena, Democrats and independents largely favor it while Republicans oppose it, reports Gallup. The Catholic Church officially opposes it, while “significantly less than half of Protestants approve.” The people who do not identify with any religion “overwhelmingly approve.”

As reported by Associated Press, a voter in support of the North Carolina amendment stated, “I know that some people may argue that the Bible may not necessarily be applicable, or it should not be applicable, on such policy matters. But even looking at nature itself, procreation is impossible without a man and a woman. And because of those things, I think it is important that the state of North Carolina’s laws are compatible with the laws of nature but, more importantly, with the laws of God.”

For more information on the subject of homosexual “marriage” see the article, “Would Jesus Flip-Flop on Same-Sex ‘Marriage’?

Palestinians Clash With Israeli Soldiers on Nakba Day

Thousands of Palestinians rallied around Jerusalem on Tuesday to observe “Catastrophe Day.” The protesters, many of whom clashed with Israeli troops, were commemorating the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians after the state of Israel was established in 1948. Palestinians refer to the event as their “Nakba,” or catastrophe.

The friction between protesters and Israeli soldiers at this year’s rally erupted outside Ofer Prison, at the Qalandia checkpoint and in neighborhoods in East Jerusalem. Soldiers responded to dozens of stone-throwers at these locations with tear gas and rubber bullets.

The rowdy 64th anniversary of the Palestinians’ “Nakba” comes after nearly two decades of failed efforts to negotiate the terms of a Palestinian state with Israel.

For years, the Trumpet has shown that Bible prophecy says half of Jerusalem will fall violently to Israel’s enemies. In March 2006, editor in chief Gerald Flurry said that the Palestinians want Jerusalem, with the Temple Mount as their capital, and that they will obtain it by violence. Bible prophecy shows that this dividing of Jerusalem will be the match that ignites a series of explosive end-time events. This year’s Nakba rally shows that Palestinians remain unsatisfied with the status quo, and that the fulfillment of this landmark “trigger” prophecy could be very near.

To understand more, read “Jerusalem Is About to Be Cut in Half.”

How You Dress Matters

How You Dress Matters

Adrian Dennis/AFP/Getty Images

One of Britain’s most iconic institutions holds out for proper dress.

Recently, while making the point about the Anglo-Saxons’ descent into gender confusion being reflected by an increasingly appalling dress sense, we struck a nerve.

Well, it seems there is at least one venerable institution that still has the nerve to impose a dress code on its patrons: the Marylebone Cricket Club in England.

The sad fact is that the old club at Lord’s has to now resort to handing out picture cards to those who seek to view the grand old game of cricket at its most hallowed ground so as to actually educate the public in what is proper dress for the occasion.

It seems that gender confusion, and the decoupling of society from the generally acceptable moral and social standards of generations, have so messed up our perspectives in taste and good manners that we have to resort to kindergarten picture cards to educate adults on that which was once just accepted as a matter of common sense.

The Telegraph reports (May 14),

The Marylebone Cricket Club, the moral guardian of cricketing tradition, has issued picture cards for the first time in its 225-year history to avoid any confusion over its dress code.The photographs, using five members of staff as models, illustrate what is “acceptable” and “unacceptable” when it comes to entering the famous Pavilion and more casual Members’ Friends’ Enclosures.So now even the least sartorially savvy cricket lover will know exactly what is meant by a “lounge suit” or the phrase “smart casual.”The move comes after several complaints were made by mcc members—whose average age is 57—that standards were slipping.

It appears that the major offenders were women patrons. “Many were upset about the amount of flesh on show—especially among newly allowed female members—and what they claimed was a higher emphasis on the ‘casual’ element of the ‘smart casual’ scale.

“One described some women members as wearing ‘garb fit for a vigorous weeding session in the herbaceous border’” (ibid).

Those few who recently cast aspersions at a recent column in which I declared the highest regard for those of the fairer sex who adopt their God-given roles, and reflect those roles in the manner in which they dress, will be condemnatory in their comments on this article.

However, the principles that Lord’s espouses, and the lengths to which it has to go to educate the public in that which was once automatically understood, underline our point. The point is that the loss in our once natural pride of appearing in dress that enhances our natural, God-given, gender-based roles is but a reflection on the general descent from higher standards which Anglo-Saxons once set as an example to the world.

This descent in taste is but a great sign of a generation in confusion as to why it was born, what is the meaning of life, what are the God-ordained roles of the sexes, what is the true reason for marriage and the family and just what is the true destiny of humankind.

We have a book that gives the clear, biblically based answers to all those questions. Its title is The Incredible Human Potential. You may obtain a copy by requesting it gratis from this website. If you read it with a truly open mind, it will clear away all the confusion as to who and what you are and introduce you to the incredible future that you were created to fulfill—man or woman!

Britain’s Misguided Shame Over Its History

Britain’s Misguided Shame Over Its History

Anthony Devlin - WPA Pool /Getty Images

The Queen’s trusted advisers are pushing her to renounce the ‘empire’ that brought civilization to a quarter of the world.

For almost 100 years, Britain has awarded medals and bestowed honors on people who have upheld the ideals of the empire.

One such honor is the “Order of the British Empire.” It was first awarded in 1906. It is the British award for chivalry. It is given to individuals who exemplify distinguished service pertaining to the arts and sciences, valuable public service and work with charities.

There are more than 100,000 living members of the order throughout the world and British Commonwealth.

Yet now, the Queen’s advisers are pushing her to ditch the word “empire” from all official awards.

Why?

According to the Daily Mail, the lord lieutenants, the Queen’s most trusted advisers, believe Britain’s history is something to be ashamed of. George Reid, the lord lieutenant of Clackmannanshire, for example, says there is “unease about the use of the world empire on honors awards.” David Briggs, lord lieutenant of Cheshire, adds that in 2012 it is “inappropriate” to have “an award containing empire.”

The only thing “inappropriate” about using the word empire is that Britain no longer has one. But that is not what they mean.

James Cropper, lord lieutenant of Cumbria, says the award should instead be called something along the lines of “the Queen’s Commonwealth Medal”—which is almost equally absurd since Britain virtually abandoned its vast and loyal Commonwealth when it threw it aside for the European Common Market. Today the Commonwealth is little more than a gathering of various nations that for a moment in time shared an awesome past—a past that Britain is now evidently trying to forget.

There is a horrifying lack of understanding about Britain’s important history, the history of its empire. The whole world, it seems, has been brainwashed into believing some alternative reality about the benefits and harms of that empire.

Today, much of the world equates the British Empire and colonialism with evil and slavery.

The truth is that this upside-down world should be thanking the British Empire for ridding the world of slavery.

In 1806, slavery was universal. It was the way the world worked. In Africa especially, slavery was common. If you were a European sailor and you were shipwrecked in North Africa, good luck to you. Similarly, if you were a Scottish coal miner of Caucasian ethnicity, working in Scotland prior to 1799, there was a good chance you were a slave too.

But in 1807, one nation—and one nation alone—put an end to global slavery. That would be Britain, and its empire.

“From now on, convicted slavers faced, by a nice irony, transportation to Britain’s penal colony in Australia,” says historian Niall Ferguson.

But remember, the world economy—not just the European economy—still ran on slave power. It took years for Britain to bully Portugal and Spain into ending slavery. It wasn’t until 1811 that the Dutch first outlawed slave trading. The United States never abolished slavery until the end of the Civil War in 1865—a full 58 years later.

Brazil was able to import 1.9 million more slaves following Britain’s ban, until it was finally forced to stop. Chile, Argentina and Mexico imported many more too. As did the Chinese, Indians, Turks, Persians and Japanese throughout their histories.

But the point is, it was British effort—backed by Royal Navy cannons and blood—that largely stopped slavery.

As Ferguson notes, “With the true zeal of the convert, the British were now determined ‘to sweep the African and American seas of the atrocious commerce with which they are now infested.’”

And not only that, the Royal Navy was then converted into an emancipating machine, transferring thousands of slaves freed from Portuguese, French and American slavers to Freetown on the west coast of Africa. The freed slaves walked through a Freedom Arch bearing the inscription, “Freed from slavery by British valor and philanthropy.” Each slave was given a quarter acre of land, a cooking pot, a spade—and his freedom.

Britain became “the world’s leading emancipator.”

Not to say that stamping out global slavery was easy. Korea didn’t abolish slavery until 1894, and Morocco didn’t until 1922. It was only in 1962 that slavery was finally outlawed in Saudi Arabia.

But how is it that Britain has forgotten the fact that it was the force behind freedom? And that it was at a time when economically it seemed suicidal?

And just as the British have forgotten how they almost single-handedly stopped global slavery, they have forgotten the force of good their empire was.

Yes, governments run by people make many mistakes. Yes, bad things happened under British rule in its colonies. People did not obey God’s laws. But don’t forget all the good. And don’t discount the fact that compared to other empires, such as the Belgian, Japanese or Ottoman, Britain’s empire was largely a benevolent one.

Most people who associate the British Empire solely with evil haven’t done much studying beyond their politically correct, revisionist high school textbooks. (If you want to read a book that offers a history of the British Empire that is based on realism and fact, read Empire by Niall Ferguson.)

A lot has happened to Britain since it began awarding the Order of the British Empire honor.

In some ways, one hundred years isn’t that long. For some people, it is one lifetime. But look how much Britain has changed since 1906. One hundred years ago, the British Empire was the greatest in the history of the world. Mongols, Romans, Persians, Greeks, Hindus, Mayans, the various Muslim caliphates, never came close to the empire that the sun never set on.

One hundred years ago, the British took pride in their heritage. One hundred years ago, the sun never set on the greatest empire the world had ever seen.

Today, it is as if there is a concerted effort to erase “empire” from their collective history.

But Britain should remember its history. In fact, perhaps the most important part of its history is empire. Empire is the key to the history and future of the British people.

Have you ever wondered how a small island nation of just a few million people ruled over roughly one quarter of the world’s population? Think about that. How is it that the British once controlled Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the United States colonies, India, South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya, and a whole host of other smaller nations and islands? How is it that one small archipelago of cool, misty islands came to control almost every strategic sea gate in the world—dominating its oceans. And how did it do it with an army that rarely exceeded the tens of thousands?

There is a reason for the fantastic success of the British Empire. Likewise, there is a vital reason why it has fallen from that past greatness—and why it is destined to fall even further—and spectacularly so—before it will ever rise again.

If you haven’t read The United States and Britain in Prophecy, you need to. It explains the most important reason Britain became great and why Britain must open its eyes to its true history before it will ever have a future of freedom.