` Operation Crossroads in 1946 was a Series of `Two Nuclear Weapon Tests ‘ conducted by US ‘

#AceHistory2Research – Operation Crossroads was a series of two nuclear weapon tests conducted by the United States at Bikini Atoll in mid-1946 to investigate the effect of such weapons on naval ships.

The "Baker" explosion, part of Opera...

The “Baker” explosion, part of Operation Crossroads, a nuclear weapon test by the United States military at Bikini Atoll, Micronesia, on july 25th 1946. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

They were the first nuclear detonations after World War II, and the first ever to be publicly announced beforehand and observed by an invited audience, including a large press corps.

A fleet of 95 target ships was assembled in Bikini Lagoon and hit with two detonations of Fat Man plutonium implosion-type nuclear weapons of the type dropped on Nagasaki, each with a yield of 23 kt (96 TJ).

The first test, Able, was an air burst that sank five ships and demonstrated the survivability of ships located more than 1 kilometre (0.62 mi) from the explosion.

The second test, Baker, was an underwater explosion, which effectively destroyed the entire target fleet with radioactive contamination. It was the first case of immediate, concentrated radioactive fallout from a nuclear explosion.

The fallout from Baker and subsequent Bikini tests still renders the area uninhabitable. Glenn Seaborg, the longest-serving chairman of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, called Baker “the world’s first nuclear disaster.”



Enhanced by Zemanta

#acehistory2research, #ahn2014, #baker, #bikini-atoll, #fat-man, #glenn-t-seaborg, #nagasaki, #nuclear-weapons-testing, #operation-crossroads, #united-states, #world-war-ii

EU : `Single European State' did not `End' with the `Holy Roman Empire' it had only Just Begun"

#AceHistory2Research says the History of the EU began with an idea and grew into a Union of minds, this is Courtesy of a Guest and fellow Researcher.

It would be appreciated by him and me that you do not break-up such a superb and informative post and article content. Any Re-Blogs are agreeable and will as usual be approved by the Editor. Thank You          

The idea for a single European state did not end with the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire around the turn of the Nineteenth Century. Many individuals set out plans or notions for a united Europe including Leon Trotsky who wrote in 1917:

“The Federated Republic of Europe – the United States of Europe – that is what must be. National autonomy no longer suffices. Economic evolution demands the abolition of national frontiers…Only a Federated Republic of Europe can give peace to the world.

Many European, especially Italian, socialists and communists were taken with the idea of European federalism. This was spear-headed by communist writer and political activist, Altiero Spinelli, who was the chief writer behind the Manifesto for a Free and United Europe written not long after the start of the Second World War – and after the War that paper became the basic document of the European Federalist Movement. Spinelli was a powerful shaper of what today has become the EU, being the major force most recently (until his death in 1984) of the move to make the EU a state in and of itself to which Mrs. Thatcher, then Prime Minister of Britain, said “No! No! No!”. Spinelli was able to push forward his centralist ideas by promoting “subsidiarity” which turned out to be a meaningless concept and deception.[16]

Jean Monnet, a Frenchman and a senior figure in the League of Nations, was a proponent of the supranational state. He was disappointed, for instance, that the member nations of the League of Nations could exercise a national veto. In 1931 he published The United States of Europe, a collections of papers which addressed the idea of building a Federal Europe within the framework of the League of Nations. Monnet was supported by another senior member of the League of Nations, Arthur Salter. He was British and every bit as much a supranationalist as Monnet.

Paul-Henri Spaak was one of the “founding fathers” of the EU. He openly described himself as a national socialist (Nazi) and considered Hitler’s achievements “magnificent”. Hermann Goering in 1940 made the first reference to a “European Economic Community” and Kaiser Wilhelm in this same year spoke of a “United States of Europe”

In fact the blueprint for the EU’s Treaty of Rome is believed by some to have been developed by Hitler’s European “architect”, Reinhard Heydrich, who called it “The Reich Plan for the Domination of Europe” (this was widely published in 1942 but copies mysteriously disappeared later so that few now exist)

The following list (tabulated below) can be found in the work cited in the table title. It shows that the EU architects and the Nazis did share concepts and terminology.

Indeed the authors of this work, Rodney Atkinson and Norris McWhirter, went as far as to write:

“To say that the European Union was based on the Nazi version of Europe or that there are parallels would be an understatement. The entire ‘European’ enterprise since the founding of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951 (and given an enormous boost by the Maastricht Treaty on European Union) is an exact replica of the Nazi’s ideas for Europe…

However, it should be noted that the idea of a single Europe pre-dates Hitler’s Nazism, though this is not to say that the same hidden interests were not supportive of both Nazism and the European movement, perhaps supporting the former to facilitate the latter. But it was Monnet, at least visibly, who was to found and develop the structural beginnings of the EU and to be accredited as “the Father of Europe”.

The Powers Behind the Scenes

There are two contending schools of thought on history. The first, and by far the most popular, is “The Accidental View of History” which holds that history is largely a series of unrelated events or events which are related only by accident or simple cause and effect; the second school of thought is “The Conspiratorial View of History” which holds that superintending forces have directed many of the important events of history.

Is there evidence to suggest that there are “powers behind the scenes” which have supported and financed the organizations and individuals that have promoted the move towarTable 2.0 Comparison of Nazi ideas for Europe with modern policies of the EU. Taken from pages 124-125 of “Treason at Maastricht” (see “Suggestions for Further Study” at the end of this article).



“Europäische Wirtschaftgemeinschaft” (European Economic Community) European Economic Community
Lebensraum (living space) European Space
Collective “access” to basic commodities Common energy, fishing and agricultural policies
European Currency System European Exchange Rate Mechanism
Europabank (Berlin) European Central Bank (Frankfurt)
European Regional Principle Committee of the Regions
Common Labour Policy Social Chapter
Economic and Trading Agreements Single Market
European Industrial Economy Common Industrial Policy
“The transformation of the laws of supply and demand.” Resistance to GATT
“Replacing capital with organised labour” European Works Councils

In September 2000, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, EU reporter for The Telegraph, wrote a story reporting on recently declassified US government documents showing “that the US intelligence community ran a campaign in the Fifties and Sixties to build momentum for a united Europe. It funded and directed the European federalist movement.”

Mr. Evans-Pritchard wrote:

“Washington’s main tool for shaping the European agenda was the American Committee for a United Europe [ACUE], created in 1948. The chairman was [William] Donovan [head of the American wartime “Office of Strategic Services”, which was later to become the CIA], ostensibly a private lawyer by then.

The vice-chairman was Allen Dulles, the CIA director in the Fifties. The board included Walter Bedell Smith, the CIA’s first director, and a roster of ex-OSS figures and officials who moved in and out of the CIA. The documents show that ACUE financed the European Movement, the most important federalist organisation in the post-war years. In 1958, for example, it provided 53.5 per cent of the movement’s funds.

The European Youth Campaign, an arm of the European Movement, was wholly funded and controlled by Washington…”

Donovan, Smith, and Dulles were all members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a group that along with its British sister-organization, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, and the Bilderbergers, has strongly but secretively supported and financed globalist movements – including National Socialism (Nazism), and International Socialism/Communism – with a view to establishing a “New World Order”.

Joseph Retinger, another of the founding fathers of the EU, was a polish socialist who, though having no visible means of support, travelled between the US, Mexico and Europe during the 1920s and 30s. It was he who recruited the ex-SS Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands to establish the secretive Bilderberg Group. In his diary Retinger wrote:

“In November 1946, I had a very long talk with Mr. Averell Harriman, American Ambassador in London…. Averell Harriman was my sponsor and arranged my visit [to the U.S.]…. At the time (the end of 1946) I found in America a unanimous approval for our ideas among financiers, businessmen and politicians. Mr. Leffingwell, senior partner in J.P. Morgan’s, Nelson and David Rockefeller, Alfred Sloan, Chairman of the Dodge Motor Company … George Franklin, and especially my old friend, Adolf Berle Jr., were all in favor, and Berle agreed to lead the American Section. John Foster Dulles also agreed to help us…. Later on, whenever we needed any assistance for the European Movement, Dulles was among those in America who helped us most.”

All of those men mentioned in this entry were members of the CFR.

The Grand Design of the EU

Paul-Henri Spaak encourage his fellow EU founders that “the most effective way to disguise their project’s political purpose was to conceal it behind a pretense that it was concerned only with economic cooperation, based on dismantling trade barriers: a ‘common market'” (emphasis added) and Jean Monnet supported this dishonest approach.

In the closing words of his memoirs, Monnet wrote:

“The sovereign nations of the past can no longer solve the problems of the present: they cannot ensure their own progress or control their own future. And the Community itself is only a stage on the way to the organised world of tomorrow.” (emphasis added).

And in a communiqué of 22 August 1962 this same man spelled out the grand design of Europe when he wrote:

“It is impossible to solve problems between European States who preserve full sovereignty. We are convinced that our times must see the creation of vast units like the United States and the USSR, and to establish a [world-wide] organisation to ensure co-operation between all those vast units. It is this organization which will create the new world order.” (emphasis added)

It seems beyond doubt now that regionalisation, despite initial promises to the contrary, was and is about the elimination of national sovereignty – and is itself a pre-planned stage toward globalisation (the joining together of regionalised blocs into a world government). The true story behind Europe can be ignored no longer.

A Resurrection of the Holy Roman Empire?

Rome (the Pope) has sought to supplant English Protestantism with Roman Catholicism for many centuries. The power of Rome, founded upon the philosophy of the old Roman Empire, espouses Civil Law and Corpus Juris (Civil Law is also called Roman Canon Law). The Vatican therefore is most supportive of the EU, seeing it as a means of establishing the largest Holy Roman Empire the world has ever seen. Our forebears, being quite aware of this through direct experience, wrote into the British Constitution the “Coronation Oath”, part of which states that the British monarch should “maintain the Protestant Reformed religion established by law.” Some have also expressed concern at the “spiritual” meaning of the symbols used by the EU.

A Brief Review of Treaties and Legislation

Treaty of Rome, 1957 – This treaty’s purpose was…

“to lay the foundations of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe…the constant improvement of the living and working conditions of the people, the reduction of differences in wealth between regions…”

That is to say, it espoused both socialism and the concept of an ever-increasing union among the nations of Europe. In fact this document was actually a constitution disguised as a treaty because, unlike a treaty, it did not leave the several parties’ national sovereignties intact.

Common Market, 1973 – Section 2 of the European Communities Act (the enabling legislation to enter into the Common Market) set down the principle that British Law would always from then on be subordinate to European Law; that, when the two conflicted, it would be the European and not the British Law that would prevail. Thus the supremacy of Parliament was overthrown.

Single European Act, 1986 – this provided the means by which Britain entered the Single Market of 1992. It eroded Britain’s already-diminished decision-making powers by extending QMV (Qualified Majority Voting) to more areas.

Maastricht Treaty, 1992 – This was the treaty that established the idea of European citizenship and the Euro currency. It also surrendered the Queen’s power in Parliament to an unelected body in Europe.

Amsterdam Treaty, 1998 – the European Union gained a “legal personality” giving it such powers as the ability to sign treaties that bind all its member states; it also gave greater scope to the European Court of Justice, and the Council of Ministers was given powers to punish any member state that persistently breached the treaty.

The Schengen Agreement, 1990 – signatories gave up their right to police their own borders. Borders are an integral part of liberty, both nationally and locally.

Treaty of Nice, 2000 – Further centralised Europe. Britain here gave up its veto in thirty more areas of policy setting.

Structure of the European Union

Presidency – this is largely symbolic in nature

European Commission – Unelected body that meets in secret. Consists of 1-2 commissioners from each nation. This is an extremely powerful body that makes EU law. The Treaty of Rome forbids commissioners to represent the interests of their own nation; they must put the Union first.

European Council – Extremely powerful. Meets in total secrecy. Its deliberations are seldom published and when they are it is only after they have been implemented. Comprises the leaders of the member states and their foreign secretaries.

Council of Ministers – This has the role of developing the EU. It consists of ministers from the member states, which minister attends depends upon the subject being discussed. Due to Qualified Majority Voting it is very difficult for Britain to stop anything it disagrees with. It is not answerable to any elected institution and meets behind closed doors.

European Parliament – this is a part of the EU Government which serves the purpose of creating an appearance of democracy. In reality the EP has very little influence. It does not pass laws, only resolutions and the manner in which it does so is far from just. Its members are called MEPs (Ministers of the European Parliament). It acts more like a discussion group though the Commission has no obligation to follow its recommendations. Although it ratifies the Commission’s laws, in reality it is quite powerless to ultimately prevent such laws being passed: MEPs are often confused and misled, laws can be grouped and voted on by block, and such votes go through before they have time to be discussed (in fact each MEP gets just 90 seconds (at best) per week to speak – their microphone is cut off after their allotted minute and a half), and all MEPs not in attendance are considered to be voting for the law by default!

European Court of Justice – Not an independent judiciary or check on the legislative or executive, but a political court to enforce the several treaties/EU Constitution (i.e. to enforce the Union and its aims).

European Central Bank – The ECB is not accountable to any elected institution and meets in secret. Those states within the single currency effectively lose all control over the amount of money and credit in circulation and the ability to fix interest rates. All these and other powers are centralised into the powerful ECB.[36]

Separation of Powers

One of the most important principles of a free and just government is what is known as “separation of powers” and the concomitant “checks and balances” – this structures governmental powers in such a way as to make it as difficult as possible for any individual or faction to gain overall control of the three powers of government (i.e. having the power to make law, enforce law and adjudicate disputes of the law).

However, with the EU we find that the executive is not elected and holds all the power, and the legislature is elected but has no power! The judiciary is under the control of the executive and thus cannot do anything but enforce the whims of the executive. It has been said that the concentration of powers is the very definition of tyranny.

The EU, Common Law and Natural Rights

The EU is based on Civil Law and a Corpus Juris judicial system. It is in every instance listed in table 1.0 above an exact oppositeof the traditional US and British system of Common Law. The European system is simply not acceptable to anyone who loves freedom under law.

Listed below are some of those areas in EU law and policy where natural rights, upon which Common Law is based, are infringed…

Above the Law

Agents of the EU government cannot be prosecuted. All those who work for the EU have a life time’s immunity from prosecution. The buildings, records and files of the EU cannot be searched. They are above the law.

Power of Arrest

A portion of the principle of the separation of powers can be seen in the concept of a warrant for arrest. When the police (a part of the executive branch of government) want to arrest someone they must go to a judge (a part of the judicial branch of government) and receive a warrant to do so. This means they need to convince the judge that they have a reasonable cause to make an arrest. The judge, hopefully independent of the executive as a member of the independent judicial branch of government, will have to agree before the arrest warrant is issued.

The EU has effectively dismantled this important check on government tyranny and at a European level to boot. New extradition procedures empower the EU with the “European Arrest Warrant” which strips the British Government of doing anything to stop European officers from coming into the country and taking whomsoever they want away for incarceration. They do not even need to possess the warrant. There does not even need to be a warrant! The British Government will be powerless to stop them (as eventually with all EU laws).

The Right to Own and Control Property

In his classic and (in the opinion of this writer) inspired book, The Law, Frédéric Bastiat, the French economist (1801-1850), states:

“Life, faculties, production – in other words, individuality, liberty, property – this is man. And in spite of the cunning of artful political leaders, these three gifts from God precede all human legislation, and are superior to it…”

Under Common Law depriving people of their property can only be justified as a punishment for a criminal offence wherein the offender has been found guilty of seeking to illegally deprive, or actually depriving, another of his property, life (person) or liberty.

Indeed, governments are set up to protect property rights in the first place and it is the right to own and control property that facilitates every other freedom (see end note . The right to own and control property precedes and is superior to government. Governments that unjustly violate property rights are ignoring one of the prime purposes for their existence in the first place.

So what is the EU’s take on the right to own and control property? From the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union we read that:

“no one may be deprived of his or her possessions, except in the public interest…

And the Charter of Fundamental Rights (Article 52) allows the EU to limit rights “where necessary” in the “general interest” of the EU. It is the European Court that will decide what is both “necessary” and what exactly constitutes the “general interest”.

There is no such person as a “public interest”; what this means is that the EU Government will deprive people of possessions when they so choose – for they will decide what the public interest is.

The Right to Free Speech (and to criticise the EU)

The European Court of Justice has ruled that it may lawfully suppress political criticism of its institutions and leading figures; that dissent can be restricted to “protect the rights of others” and punish those who “damaged the institution’s image and reputation”

The Advocate-General of the ECJ gave a legal opinion (ref. case C-274/99) that criticism of the EU was akin to blasphemy. Punishing someone for allegedly criticising the EU, whether such allegations were proven or not, were (said he) not an infringement of free speech.[45]

Another example of the EU’s attitude toward freedom of speech is their Weights and Measures (Metrication Amendments) Regulations 2001 which will make it a criminal offence to even so much as mention imperial measurements at work or in any official capacity.[46]

The EU is also creating “new crimes” whereby it can make illegal expressions it deems to be “xenophobic” or “racist”. Terms it will define of course.

The Right to be Left Alone

The right to be left alone, emanating from if not synonymous with the right to liberty, is one of the most crucial freedoms in a free society. Again, the EU has little respect for this right and the privacy of its citizens.

Europol, the new European Police force, is not accountable to an elected body. It answers to a committee formed by the Council of Ministers. It has a much wider function than fighting crime, being possessed of the ability to store information on a central database(provisions for which were made under the Maastricht Treaty) on anyone (criminal or not), including a record of an individual’s political and religious affiliations.

Historical precedence has shown that ID cards and other ways of recording personal information have always been abused – if not by the government that established it, then by a successor. Anonymity is an important part of the right to be left alone. Contrary to popular belief information-storing and ID cards do not decrease crime, they serve only to control and impede law-abiding people in their rights and liberty.[47]

Worrying powers have already been exercised when in 2002 the Council of Ministers instructed police to place on their database suspected political “troublemakers” with a view to preventing them from leaving their home countries and attending protests directed at EU summits.[48]

Common Law presupposes that everything is permitted that is not expressly forbidden by law whereas the Civil Law of Europe takes the view that everything is illegal unless expressly permitted by law. Under Common Law all men are presumed innocent and given the benefit of the doubt, under Civil Law all people are seen as potential criminals, presumed guilty and given no benefit of doubt. Hence the right to be left alone, the right to anonymity, is in total harmony with Common Law but in diametric opposition to Civil Law.

The Right of Self-Defence

Like Hitler, Mussolini and other tyrants, the EU wants all its citizens disarmed. The final right of people to remove their government by force of arms is hardly possible when they have had their right to keep and bear arms removed from them. On this subject Henry St. George Tucker wrote:

“This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty . . . . The right of self defense is the first law of nature. . . . Wherever . . . the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.” 

The right to keep and bear arms is enshrined in the English Bill of Rights (1689) which, in part, reads: “The subjects…may have arms for their defence suitable to their condition and as allowed by law.” This is a declaration of a lawful right and is not subject to infringement by governments of the day; its inclusion was and is for the very purpose of protecting from such infringement

The Right of Free Association

The EU is also looking to fund political parties with taxpayers’ money, a proposal that is so clearly wrong it is a wonder anyone could support it. Although the EU claims this will bring more democracy and transparency (which it will not) the real effect of state funding will be that the EU will control which parties are legal and which are not.

One Polish MP, currently an observer Member of the European Parliament, gave this warning when he found out about the proposed EU statute on European political parties:  exactly what the Communists did in Poland…They didn’t ban elections: we had elections all the time…All they did was to ban the opposition parties from contesting the elections. And do you know what their official excuse was? Exactlythe same as this. They said it was to stop fascist parties. Only pretty soon that came to apply to everyone except the Communists and their Agrarian allies.” (emphasis added)

This voice of experience should be a wake-up call to us all regarding the true nature of the EU.

The Right to Trial by Jury

This is not the only reference in this essay to trial by jury, and deliberately so. It’s a crucial freedom. In addition to what has already been written, let’s read what Churchill said on the matter:

“…the great principle of Habeas Corpus and Trial by Jury…are the supreme protection invented by the British people for ordinary individuals against the state. The power of the executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him judgment by his peers for an indefinite period, is in the highest degree odious, and is the foundation of all totalitarian governments.” (emphasis added)

Provisions exist in the Amsterdam Treaty for the Corpus Juris legal system. This can be introduced by Qualified Majority Voting even if the British Parliament is totally against it. The British Government has already been trying to abolish trial by jury for certain offences, no doubt as a preparatory stage to accepting Corpus Juris.

The European Public Prosecutor (set up by Corpus Juris) will initially have powers over cases involving fraud against the budget of the EU but which will later extend to all criminality (or what the EU deems criminal).[54]

The House of Lords, not to mention many lawyers and liberty groups, are opposed to the abolition of these rights protected in the Magna Carta, which might explain at least one of the reasons why the Government is so keen to rid itself of that House and introduce judicial “reform”.

Economic Independence – A Pillar of National Sovereignty

Joining the EURO means Britain’s gold reserves go to Germany and into the vaults of the EU’s Central Bank. All other tangible assets such as silver will almost certainly be relinquished. This means that Britain will find itself incapable of regaining its own independence! Political agreements can be torn up, but should we ask for our gold back one day would it be given? The answer is no – the terms state the transfer is irreversible.[55]

The EU has not had its own accounts signed off by auditors in eight years; the EU is rife with fraud and corruption.[56] Should we trust the EU to make economic decisions for us?

Economic Benefits of the EU – Fact or Fantasy?

This is another area where what is stated by pro-Europeans, or what is commonly accepted, simply contradicts the facts…

Most of our trade is not with Europe. The value of exports and services to the EU is just 16% of UK Gross Domestic Product (GDP).[57]

We do not have the majority of our investments in Europe. The EU costs us a lot more money by being in than out; costs on food alone have been reported as £940 more per family per year than they would be if we were outside the EU. Britain pays far more into the EU than it gets back. Britain’s involvement in the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) was economically disastrous (and unemployment increased by 1.2 million) and it will be worse under full-blown Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) with the Euro as our currency.[58] Let’s not forget that the burdensome VAT is also a tax of European origin.

The majority of British businesses do not support a single currency. Both the Institute of Directors and the Federation of Small Businesses (by far the largest business organisation in the UK with 185,000 members) oppose the Euro.[59] In fact the FSB recently held an Annual Conference where the votes were 104,568 in favour of not signing the EU Constitution (5,292 voted were in favour).[60]

According to one survey the cost to firms would reach £51 billion to convert to the Euro.[61] The bottom line on why the Euro and economy cannot work is because what is being done is chiefly political and not economic.[62]

One more myth to address here is that of unemployment. Leaving the EU will not cause mass unemployment. Distorted reports and false claims that big companies would leave Britain if we came out of the EU have been spread by certain groups and interests who seem to care very little for the truth. One such pro-EU group, called Britain in Europe, leaked a report from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research and claimed it showed eight million jobs in Britain would be lost if Britain left the EU. The director of the Institute, Martin Weale, condemned Britain in Europe‘s distortion of the research as…

“pure Goebbels. In many years of academic research I cannot recall such a wilfull distortion of the facts…Britain in Europe‘s claims are absurd. Nobody could plausibly believe the figures. As the experience of the 1960s indicates, there is no reason why being outside the EU should necessarily involve mass unemployment.” (emphasis added)[63]

The Shadow of Communism

Some, and with considerable justification, have compared the EU to the Soviet Union.[64] Perhaps the most well-known statement came from Mikhail Gorbachev (see quotation below).

Christopher Story of the London-based Soviet Analyst described Romano Prodi’s manifesto of 2000, setting out the Commission’s agenda for the subsequent five years, as:

“purely a Communist program, which is why Mikhail Gorbachev, when he visited London shortly thereafter, in March of that year, was correct in describing the EU as ‘the new European Soviet’. One does not need an advanced degree in Leninist studies to see this.”[65]

Dr. Uno Silberg, PhD and Chairman of the Estonian Movement NO to the European Union, has tabulated comparisons between the European Union and the Soviet Union, and reports that “in the eyes of many Estonians the present EU is nothing less than a disguised Soviet Union.”[66] And they should know.

Staying in Estonia, we find Christopher Bollyn of the American Free Press reporting:

Former Estonian Prime Minister Edgar Savisaar, and others, has compared the EU with the Soviet Union. “The forced propaganda of the European Union is reminiscent of the Soviet Union’s methods and brainwashing,” Rolf Parve, wrote in Kesknädal, the weekly paper of the Center Party.

“Moscow and Brussels differ only in one point,” professor Igor Gräzin, one of the leading anti-EU voices in Estonia says: “The Soviet Union theoretically allowed nations to leave the union. Brussels is creating organs, however, which would kill that idea in the bud.”[67]

Beyond direct comparisons there is also the evidence of communist influence in the EU itself (both now and in its founding). One only has to look to EU leaders and officials to see ties to the KGB and a whole other assortment of dubious connections and damning evidence.[68]

Military Independence – A Pillar of National Sovereignty

Commitments to unified military action were made under Article 5 of the Amsterdam Treaty. The EU Constitution, as it presently stands, under Article 15, would require total obedience to the EU:

“the Union’s competence in matters of common foreign and security policy shall cover all areas and all questions relating to the Union’s security. Member states shall actively and unreservedly support the Union’s common foreign and security policy in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity and shall comply in this area.” (emphasis added)

Common Law, Constitutions and Governments: Is The EU Legal in Britain?

The rights affirmed in the Magna Carta will be null and void if Britain forms a political union with the EU. The Magna Carta ensures that these rights (including presumption of innocence and the right to trial by jury) should be possessed “fully and completely, for themselves and their heirs from us and our heirs, in all matters and in all places for ever.” To enter the EU is to act in opposition to the British Constitution.

This document, the Magna Carta, is the foundation of our Constitution and it cannot be broken[69] by Parliament. It is a covenant between the Constitutional Head (the Sovereign monarch) and the subjects. Common Law and this covenant pre-date Parliament and are therefore not subject to abolition by that body. The purpose of Parliament is to give expression to Common Law, to strengthen that expression butnever to weaken or suppress it).

Let’s put this principle another way because it is vital we understand it if we are to avoid confusion and deceit by unscrupulous political rulers, bodies and movements…

The Common Law represents the natural rights and sovereignty of citizens, these pre-date and are superior to both constitutions and governments.

Just constitutions are based on Common Law whereby they affirm by declaration the natural rights and freedoms of man. Constitutions also establish a structure for government and a framework in which government may fulfil its responsibility and purpose (namely to protect the Common-Law rights of the governed). Governments are therefore inferior to constitutions and Common Law, being born of and bound by them.

Though the people of Britain by revolution may change the Constitution, the Government may not. Parliament exists only to give expressionto those rights affirmed in a constitution. Its duty is thus to deal with procedural and not substantive law (i.e. it cannot abolish or create rights; it cannot yield sovereignty).

Under the British Constitution it is understood that…

“Parliament…has…the right to make or unmake any law whatever; and, further, that no person or body is recognized by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament.”[70]

The principle that no Parliament may bind its successors is clearly violated by signing agreements which claim to trump the supremacy of Parliament and bind future generations to laws they cannot revisit. In this connection it should be noted that the EU itself acts under a doctrine called acquis communautaire (the text of which has been reported as at least 80-100 thousand pages, some sources giving a figure of 320,000 type-written pages as far back as 1998!) which holds that once a power, or area of legislative authority, is gained it never again gives it back. The EU cannot become less centralist, only more centralist. It is in diametric conflict with the British Constitution and the authority and very nature of Parliament.

Some have also argued that Parliament has shared sovereignty, or that it has been pooled. This is a contradiction in terms; sovereignty is an exclusive attribute. You either have it or you do not.[71] Furthermore, sovereignty resides in the individual and, as such, Parliament represents that sovereignty. It cannot yield it or give it away. It is not in their power to surrender it because it does not belong to them. To use an analogy, it would be rather like an employee of a company going to a meeting with another company and selling off or merging his employer’s company without any authority or instruction to do so.

Many other points could be raised here too, such as the fact that the Maastricht Treaty was only valid in Europe if ratified by all countries involved. It was not.[72] Another point, in addition to those already discussed, is our own Act of Union which again has been violated by the Maastricht Treaty and invalidated both the union of Scotland and the rest of the UK as well as Parliament’s own authority.[73]

It is evident from the material above that those seeking to bring Britain into political union with Europe, unwittingly or not, may well be committing acts which are both illegal and treasonable[74] in addition to being unlawful.

The EU Constitution

“The European constitution…shall have primacy over the law of the Member States.” (Article 10.1, proposed EU Constitution)

Romano Prodi, President of the EU Commission, in an address to members of the European Parliament said:

“Europe must assume responsibility for peace and development in the world…With a single voice we can wield real influence. Only united can we put our own humanist stamp on globalisation and infuse it with Europe’s social values…I am convinced that we need a constitution to mark the birth of Europe as a political entity…[The Union] is not an alliance between States or a federation. It is an advanced supranational democracy that needs to be strengthened.” (emphasis added) [75]

Ashley Mote – MEP, author, broadcaster and constitutional historian – says of the proposed Constitution for Europe: “Essentially, it is not a constitution at all. It is little more than an elaborate attempt to legitimise the seizure of power by a ruling elite,” (emphasis added) and he goes on to list six of the fundamental defects in the document:

“It is vague, grandiose, imprecise, deliberately complex, confusing and extremely long.

It is proscriptive rather than enabling. It makes law, instead of creating a framework for law-making.

It offers no effective checks and balances to control future law-makers.

It consolidates power for a system of government by a self-perpetuating bureaucracy.

It puts that elite group above the law to be imposed on everyone else.

It turns the member states from theoretical masters of the house of Brussels into its servants.”[76]

The Constitution also designates the Euro as the currency of the Union, which means Britain’s opt-out of the Euro becomes meaningless if it signs up for the Constitution.[77]

Article 58 of the Constitution reaffirms previous provisions when it provides for a member state to be reduced to colony status, with no voting rights but all obligations to the EU still in force, when she is considered by others to have violated “human rights” and “the rule of law”. Of course, these latter terms are undefined and will be interpreted as the EU’s arbitrary will decides.[78]

The so-called “exit clause” for member states to withdraw from the EU includes a two-year forced waiting period during which the member state loses all decision-making powers in the EU and during which the Union can exercise such powers as it sees fit upon the rebel state.[79]

Any MP who votes to accept the EU Constitution, with its irreversibility (or “pretence” thereof), will be in breach of their Oath of Allegiance which is to defend the Queen as sovereign – and she can remain sovereign only if she is the head of a sovereign state (i.e. an independent, self-determining state which is subordinate to no other).[80]

Treason at Westminster

“Few men have been desperate enough to attack openly, and barefaced, the Liberties of a free People. Such avowed Conspirators can rarely succeed: The Attempt would destroy itself. Even when the Enterprize is begun and visible, the End must be hid, or denied. It is the Business and Policy of Traytors, so to disguise their Treason with plausible Names, and so to recommend it with popular and bewitching Colours, that they themselves shall be adored, while their Work is detested, and yet carried on by those that detest it.

“Thus one Nation has been surrendered to another under the fair Name of mutual Alliance: The Fortresses of a Nation have been given up, or attempted to be given up, under the frugal Notion of saving Charges to a Nation; and Commonwealths have been trepanned into Slavery, by Troops raised or increased to defend them from Slavery…”[81]

The above was originally written in 1720. Little has changed since then. Through the complicity of prominent and influential figures and factions in the Conservative and Labour Party, both employing deceitful and wholly corrupt means,[82] the UK has not only joined but become further entrenched in the EU.

Perhaps we will draw to an end with the now infamous words of Prime Minister Edward Heath. As Prime Minister, in the House of Commons on 25th February, 1970, in the build up to EEC entrance, Heath said: “There will not be a blueprint for a federal Europe.”

Yet in 1991 he was asked: “the single currency; a United States of Europe; was that in your mind when you took Britain in?”. Edward Heath replied, “Of course, yes.” (emphasis added)[83]

And in a White Paper published in July 1971 concerning Britain’s entrance into the supposedly for-trade-only Common Market:

“There is no question of any erosion of essential national sovereignty…There are some in this country who fear that in going into Europe, we shall in some way sacrifice independence and sovereignty. These fears I need hardly say are completely unjustified.” (emphasis added)

Time has shown this to be false. What is more, documents released later showed this statement to have been an outright lie.[84]

Have Ministers been deceiving the British public? As early as 1962 Ministers were formally instructed regarding Common-Market membership:

“Ministers should in public speeches avoid accepting specific commitments or giving explanations of the Government’s general commitments which might prove embarrassing when the final terms (of membership) become known in detail.”[85]

And what about those who want to reform the EU from within? It is simply not possible. The way the EU is structured, our increasing minority status, and a host of other factors spelled out in this essay, stop this from being in any way achievable. The Hansard Society has said:

“Any attempts by any government to try to amend Community legislation to its own wishes are doomed to failure…Parliament has little, if any, input upon the process of European law-making…” (emphasis added)[86]

Conclusion and a Plea

The opening quotation of this article is from Andrew Fletcher of Saltoun. He spoke great wisdom in those words. Truly, unless we first love our own, we can never truly love another; unless we put first our own kin and country in the dispensing of our charity and duty, we will never truly develop the character and feelings necessary to “love [and treat] all equally”. This is a natural truth founded upon free will (itself the reason for sovereignty’s existence) and cannot be forced by political means.

Britain, in stark contrast to Europe, has had a long tradition of liberty of the individual. Today, despite our own domestic problems, our oversea investments are far larger than any European nation; two thirds of all “European” investment into the USA come from Britain; Britain is second to only the United States in terms of investing overseas; over half of all commercially viable inventions discovered in the last sixty years have come out of Britain; British firms were the purchasers of nearly half of international acquisitions and mergers in the first part of 1999 alone. We are the fourth largest economy in the world. This is a triumph of a good system. Yes, it could be improved. Yes, there are problems. But there will be many more problems if we join the EU and, what is more, we will not possess the power to put them right.

Everything Common Law stands for, everything patriots have ever fought for, and everything freemen have ever loved and dreamed of, is now under threat of extinction. Will Britain remain a free nation? That is what hangs in the balance. Don’t let anyone convince you otherwise.

End Notes

  1. “Rights are not gifts from one man to another, nor from one class of men to another; for who is he who could be the first giver, or by what principle, or on what authority, could he possess the right of giving?…It is impossible to discover any origin of rights otherwise than in the origin of man; it consequently follows that rights appertain to man in right of his existence only, and must therefore be equal to every man.” (Thomas Paine, Dissertations on First Principles of Government; emphasis added). Hence Paine explains that the philosophy of Civil Law is unnatural, and that rights are natural (they exist by virtue of nature or God, not because others have granted them to us); he also concludes that they must therefore be equal to all.

  2. “[I]n spite of the cunning of artful political leaders, these three gifts from God [the natural right to individuality (life), liberty, and property] precede all human legislation, and are superior to it. Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (Frédéric Bastiat, The Law, pp. 2; emphasis added). To understand why the right to own and control property is necessary in order to exercise any other right, and why no society can truly be free, or rights secure, where there is no right to own and control property please read Clarence B. Carson’s excellent article The Property Basis of Rights available on-line at

  3. Stand Fast By Our Constitution, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, pp. 139.

  4. The word “sovereignty” has reference to that which is supreme or the highest. Sovereignty exists within the individual because of his free will and so his natural right and power to make his own decisions and to act upon them. It is this power in the individual that, when delegated to government, gives life and authority to the power of government to make and enforce laws. “There are,” said Thomas Paine, “but two divisions into which power can be arranged. First, that of willing or decreeing the laws; secondly, that of executing or putting them in practise. The former corresponds to the intellectual faculties of the human mind which reasons and determines what shall be done; the second, to the mechanical powers of the human body that puts that determination into practise.” (Thomas Paine, Dissertations on First Principles of Government)

  5. As quoted by Eugene W. Castle in Billions, Blunders and Baloney, p. 259 (as referenced by Ezra Taft Benson in his address, United States Foreign Policy given at the Farm Bureau Banquet in Preston, Idaho, June 21st 1968 – see “Suggestions for Further Study” below).

  6. Ezra Taft Benson, United States Foreign Policy given at the Farm Bureau Banquet in Preston, Idaho, June 21st 1968 (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below).

  7. Ibid.

  8. Ibid.

  9. In AD 438 the Roman Senate rubber-stamped the Theodosian Code. This code of laws was created by a group of jurists appointed by both the Eastern Roman Emperor (Theodosius II) and the Western Roman Emperor (Valentinian III). J. Reuben Clark said “[These laws] had provisions covering such so-called modern concepts…as price fixing, black markets, excessive taxation, socialized medicine [a national health service], conscription of labor, anti-semitism, inflation, corruption in government bureaus, the relationship between Church and State – all phrases familiar to our ears. Under these laws the entire population was organized as in one vast army. All, including the highest officials, were strictly classified, and even the least had a station. In substance this meant that everyone did what he was told, and did not act without permission. There was a great body of secret police to report disobedience; there was a ‘special’ secret police appointed to watch the ordinary secret police. These laws were framed to provide security. We of today have heard the same kind of security talk. But, in fact, all this bred not security, but scarcity of grain, of materials, of men. The mere making of laws, even in an absolute despotism, does not change the great laws of nature and economics – neither then nor now, for there can be no permanent stability where men are not free. In fewer than forty years from the issuance of the Theodosian Code the Empire of the West fell, notwithstanding the operation, under complete autocratic powers, of economic devices enacted to promote the welfare of the people and to preserve the empire; some of these devices were the same ones that we have been told will rebuild our economic structure and preserve our free institutions. These devices failed with Rome; they will ultimately fail with us.” (Stand Fast By Our Constitution, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, pp. 140-141).

  10. Not many decades after the Fall of the Western Roman Empire the Byzantine (Eastern Roman Empire) under Emperor Justinian established a new set of laws called the Justinian Code. This set of laws became law throughout all the Eastern Empire in AD 529. When the Empire fell in AD 1453 the philosophy spread west across all Europe as the Byzantines fled the Moslems. Thus the Justinian Code became the system of continental Europe. It is said that the laws of the Justinian Code, a Corpus Juris system, were so many that they filled 2000 books (around 3 million verses). Whereas the absolute power of the ruler was implicit in the Theodosian Code, it was boldly stated in the Justinian Code.

  11. “Here are the principal points of People’s Law [Common Law] as practiced by the Anglo-Saxons (see Colin Rhys Lovell,English Constitutional and Legal History [New York: Oxford University Press, 1962], pp. 3-50): 1. They considered themselves a commonwealth of freemen. 2. All decisions and the selection of leaders had to be with the consent of the people…3. The laws by which they were governed were considered natural laws given by divine dispensation…4. Power was dispersed among the people and never allowed to concentrate in any one person or group. Even in time of war, the authority granted to the leaders was temporary and the power of the people to remove them was direct and simple. 5. Primary responsibility for resolving problems rested first with the individual, then the family, then the tribe or community, then the region, and finally, the nation. 6. They were organized into small, manageable groups where every adult had a voice and vote. They divided the people into units of ten families who elected a leader; then fifty families who elected a leader; then a hundred families who elected a leader; and then a thousand families who elected a leader. 7. They believed the rights of the individual were considered unalienable and could not be violated without risking the wrath of divine justice as well as civil retribution by the people’s judges. 8. The system of justice was structured on the basis of severe punishment unless there was complete reparation to the person who had been wronged…treason… [was] considered [a] capital offense… 9. They always attempted to solve problems on the level where the problem originated. If this was impossible they went no higher than was absolutely necessary to get a remedy. Usually only the most complex problems involving the welfare of the whole people, or a large segment of the whole people, ever went to the leaders for solution.” (The 5,000-Year Leap, Dr. W. Cleon Skousen [USA: National Center for Constitutional Studies, 1981], pp. 12-14).

  12. “…men in our kingdom shall have and hold all the aforesaid liberties, rights and concessions well and peacefully, freely and quietly, fully and completely, for themselves and their heirs from us and our heirs, in all matters and in all places for ever.” (Magna Carta, AD 1215). Those rights include the right to due process of law, the right to trial by jury, and the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

  13. “Jefferson’s great ambition at that time was to promote a renaissance of Anglo-Saxon primitive institutions on the new continent. Thus presented, the American Revolution was nothing but the reclamation of the Anglo-Saxon birthright…” (Gilbert Chinard, Thomas Jefferson: The Apostle of Americanism, 2nd ed. Rev. [Ann Arbor, Mich.: The University of Michigan Press, 1975], pp. 86). It is interesting to note that the members of the committee set up to design the Seal of the United States (Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin) originally intended one side of the seal to show the Children of Israel in the wilderness and the other side to show Hengist and Horsa (according to tradition the first Anglo-Saxons in England). These ideas proved too detailed for a small seal and a simpler design was agreed upon. The Founders were well acquainted with Common Law and that both the Israelites and Anglo-Saxons were governed by it.

  14. “For more than six hundred years – that is, since Magna Carta, in 1215 – there has been no clearer principle of English or American constitutional law, than that, in criminal cases, it is not only the right and duty of juries to judge what are the facts, what is the law, and what was the moral intent of the accused; but that it is also their right, and their primary and paramount duty, to judge of the justice of the law, and to hold all laws invalid, that are, in their opinion, unjust or oppressive, and all persons guiltless in violating, or resisting the execution of, such laws.” (An Essay on the Trial by Jury, 1852, Lysander Spooner; see Vigilance: A Defence of British Liberty, pp. 70-71; see also “Suggestions for Further Study” below). The power of the jury is greater than that of government; without the jury’s consent no person can ever be punished, no unjust law ever applied, and no just law ever misapplied. To take away trial by jury exposes every citizen to a government that acts as both judge and jury – it may do whatever it wants with none to check it! For a brief article on the importance and powers of the jury, see Trial By Jury: An Essential Safeguard For a Free Society available on-line at http://www.freedom-central.net/trialbyjury.htmlIn Europe and under European Law there is no genuine trial by jury anywhere.

  15. Leon Trotsky, October 30th, 1917, at Smolny, Petrograd. As quoted in John Reed’s book, 10 Days That Shook the World.

  16. Godfather of the European Union: Altiero Spinelli by Lindsay Jenkins available on-line at:http://www.brugesgroup.com/mediacentre/?article=104.

  17. The Great Deception: The Secret History of the European Union by Christopher Booker and Richard North, p. 4-17 (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below).

  18. This information taken from Vigilance: A Defence of British Liberty by Ashley Mote (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below).

  19. Some of the papers present at Heydrich’s meeting at the University of Berlin in 1942 included such ominous titles as: “The Economic Face of New Europe”, “Development of the EEC”, “European Agriculture”, “European Transport”, “A European Currency”, “European Trade and Economic Treaties”, “Is Europe a Geographical Concept or a Political Fact?” – words that are all familiar to us today of course. For more information on the EU, Nazi Germany and Reinhard Heydrich read Phillip Day’s excellent article, The German European Economic Community? available on-line athttp://www.campaignfortruth.com/Eclub/101002/germaneec.htm. The original papers have recently been translated into English and made freely available on-line at:

  20. For more information on the authors’ views on the subject of Nazi origins of the EU see their work Treason at Maastricht, page 123 and also chapter 18. (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below)

  21. See The Great Deception: The Secret History of the European Union by Christopher Booker and Richard North, p. 18-30, Chapter 2, “The Nazi Cul-de-Sac: 1933-1945” (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below). See also the on-line article,The Fascist Inheritance in the European and Blair Projects by Edward Spalton. (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below).

  22. It seems well documented that certain figures and interests involved with building up the Nazis also financed and supported the movement to build a united Europe. The connection between these conspiring parties and the EU is addressed elsewhere in this essay. For their connections to Nazism readers may wish to study Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler by Antony C. Sutton; the text of this book is freely available on-line at http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/.

  23. For an introduction to the conspiratorial view of history the author recommends A. Ralph Epperson’s The Unseen Handpublished by Publius Press. Once you’ve read this you will never view history the same way again. Available for purchase from Amazon UK at http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0961413506/.

  24. See Global Tyranny…Bloc by Bloc by William F. Jasper, “The New American” magazine, Vol. 17, No. 8, April 9th, 2001. Available on YouTube at:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TenIjbnqO0&feature=channel.or in written form here:http://web.archive.org/web/20041212071621/www.stoptheftaa.org/artman/publish/article_8.shtml.

  25. For more information on Bilderbergers and other groups try http://www.bilderberg.org which has a huge list of articles and links on the matter. Also, The Chronological History of the New World Order by D.L. Cuddy, Ph.D, gives a more general listing of dates and quotations charting the globalist agenda from the beginning of the 20th century; viewable on-line at:
    http://www.silentmajority.co.uk/eurorealist/nwochronology. Inclusion of these links should not be taken to mean that the author of the essay you are now reading agrees with everything written or linked to on these sites. Readers may also be interested in the Portman Papers in this connection (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below).

  26. For more information on Retinger and others behind the development of the EU, see Rogues’ Gallery of EU Founders by William F. Jasper; availabe on-line at: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JZS/is_14_20/ai_n25093084/. www.stoptheftaa.org looks at the way the same efforts are being made in America and Canada to establish an EU-style superstate – under the guise of economic treaties, and supported by some of the same characters and organizations that have been involved with the founding and growth of the EU.

  27. “Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.” (Communiqué, 30 April 1952, by Jean Monnet, emphasis added). For Paul-Henri Spaak reference see The “New European Soviet” by Vilius Brazenas quoting The Great Deception: The Secret History of the European Union (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below for both sources).

  28. For a full history of the European Union read The Great Deception: The Secret History of the European Union by Christopher Booker and Richard North (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below). A free paper entitled The Bilderberg Group and the project of European unification (by Mike Peters) is also available for download (in text format)athttp://www.bilderberg.org/bblob.rtf. According to WorldNetdaily.com’s story, “Guess who’s at super-secret Bilderberg meeting today: Italy hosts 50th-anniversary confab of mysterious society of world leaders” (Friday, June 4th) – available on-line at http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38783 – attendees from the EU included Frits Bolkestein, Commissioner for the Internal Market in the European Commission; Tommaso Padoa-Schioppa, Director, European Central Bank; Rockwell A. Rockwell A. Schnabel, US Ambassador to the EU; Jean-Claude Trichet, President of the European Central Bank; Antonio M. Vitorino, Justice and Home Affairs Commissioner of the European Union; and Gijs M. de Vries, EU Counter Terrorism Co-ordinator.

  29. “Pope John XXIII envisaged a European religio-political monster which he called ‘the Greatest [Roman] Catholic superstate the world has ever known’. (The Papal Nuncio in Brussels was later to describe the EU as ‘a [Roman] Catholic confederation of States’). United within the ancient boundaries of the Holy Roman Empire by the common spiritual bond of religion, in a burgeoning and booming industrial economy, situated geographically in the world’s most productive industrial complex, it would march onto the scene of world history – so said Pope John XXIII – as ‘the greatest single human force ever seen by man.'” (Professor Arthur Noble, The Conspiracy Behind The European Union: What Every Christian Should Know, delivered at the Annual Autumn Conference of the United Protestant Council in London, Saturday, November 7, 1998; emphasis added. Complete address available online athttp://www.ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=conspiracy). As far back as 1975 Shirley Williams, a British Labour minister and later the co-founder of the Social Democrats, commented: “We will be joined to a Europe in which the Catholic religion will be the dominant faith, and in which the application of the Catholic Social Doctrine will be the major factor in everyday political and economic life.” For more information the reader is referred to The Principality and Power of Europe: Britain and the Emerging Holy European Empire by Adrian Hilton (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below).

  30. For example, see http://www.inplainsite.org/html/european_union.html

  31. Qualified Majority Voting is the practice whereby each member state is assigned a number of votes weighted approximately by population. Britain has 29 votes (from May 2004) out of 345, and 258 votes are required to enact legislation. QMV is extending to more and more areas of legislation as the EU grows – supposedly to prevent “total paralysis” – and Britain has no chance of defending its interests when they differ from EU member states (which they invariably will due to our differing system, traditions and values). We have much to lose. Some assurances have been given that a veto (i.e. no QMV) will apply to important areas such as defence but the truth is there are many “back-doors” through which QMV can impose any and every law upon us, not to mention the compromises the Government seems to be all too willing to engage in (see “Britain yields to EU over criminal justice” by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard and George Jones, The Telegraph, May 19th 2004, on-line at: http://www.openeurope.org.uk/media-centre/article.aspx?newsid=238).

  32. “When the Maastricht Treaty was before Parliament John Major forced it through by ruthless whipping and unacceptable personal pressures. It surrendered sovereign powers of the Queen in Parliament to an unelected body in Europe without a clear mandate from the electorate.” (Sir Peter Smithers, former Secretary General of the Council of Europe, in a letter to the Daily Telegraph, 4th January 2000).

  33. Borders and Liberty by Andrew P. Moriss, “The Freeman: Ideas on Liberty”, July 2004, and available on-line at:http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/borders-and-liberty/. In connection with this article by Andrew Moriss, the author of this essay strongly feels that a country should be established along federal and not national lines. In using these terms the reader should not be blinded by modern usage (which is often wrong). In this essay the author has used “national” to contrast with “supranational”, and espouses nationalism in its non-political sense. The author, however, remains committed to the idea of a union of distinct states or provinces within a country such as existed under the original US Government which was a federal (but since has increasingly become a national) government. Such divisions would no doubt be by county or regions of counties in the United Kingdom.

  34. “One Conservative minister, writing about his first visit to an EU ministerial conference, remarked that on entering the conference chamber he was given a copy of the final communiqué. When he pointed out that the subjects had not yet been discussed he was told: ‘Oh no, sir, the decisions have already been made. You are here only to sign the communiqué.'” (see Vigilance: A Defence of British Liberty, pp. 12; see “Suggestions for Further Study” below)

  35. “Individual MEPs are not an essential, nor even an important, part [of the EU]. We are interchangeable bit-part actors, spear-carriers, participating in a mockery of the parliamentary process. Oratory plays no part. Reason plays no part. Conviction plays no part. Our votes cannot change a directive. We are there merely to furnish an illusion of democracy, providing a veneer to conceal what is a fundamentally undemocratic process.” (Jeffrey Titford, MEP, speaking of his experience of the European Parliament as quoted in Vigilance: A Defence of British Liberty, pp. 27; emphasis added. See “Suggestions for Further Study” below)

  36. For more information on the ECB please read A Sceptical Introduction to the European Union (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below).

  37. “In all tyrannical governments the supreme magistracy, or the right of both making and of enforcing laws, is vested in one and the same man, or one and the same body of men; and whenever these powers are united together, there can be no public liberty…But where the legislative and executive are in distinct hands, the former will take care not to entrust the latter with so large a power, as may tend to the subversion of its own independence and therewith of the liberty of the subject.” (Sir William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England). Compare this with what Montesqueieu said: “When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty; because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate [legislature] should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner…Again, there is no liberty, if the judiciary power be not separated from the legislative and executive. Were it joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control, for the judge would then be the legislator. Were it joined to the executive power, the judge might behave with violence and oppression.”(Charles de Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws, Great Books of the Western World, vol. 38 [Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1952], p. 70)

  38. Referring to the European Parliament, Ashley Mote writes “In the unlikely event that a resolution is voted down, under a procedure known as ‘conciliation’, the vote is overturned and the original reinstated. The parliament itself has no legislative powers.” (Vigilance: A Defence of British Liberty, pp. 27; see “Suggestions for Further Study” below)

  39. “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” (James Madison, Federalist Papers, No. 47).

  40. In the Corpus Juris document published by the EU it reads, in part, “…designed to ensure, in a largely unified European legal area, a fairer, simpler, and more efficient system of repression.” (page 40, paragraph 3). The document also makes reference to professional judges (26), indefinite detention (20,iii), loss of double jeopardy and thus presumption of innocence (27,ii), loss of the right of the accused to be informed of evidence against him (29,iii), secret trials (34), extradition (21,I,b). This document alone exposes the real tyrannical nature of the EU.

  41. “In the territory of each member State and whatever their nationality, officials and other servants of the Communities shall…be immune from legal proceedings in respect of acts performed by them in their official capacity, including their words spoken or written. They shall continue to enjoy this immunity after they have ceased to hold office…” (Chapter V, Article 12 of Protocol 36 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities, Treaty on European Union; 8 April 1965). These privileges are also included in the EU Constitution under Article III-340 which states: “The Union shall enjoy in the territories of the Member States such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the performance of its tasks, under the conditions laid down in the Protocol of 8 April 1965 on the privileges and immunities of the European Communities. The same shall apply to the European Investment Bank.”

  42. See “EU Arrest Warrant Comes Into Force”, European Institute of Protestant Studies, taken from The British Church Newspaper, January 9th 2004, available on-line at: http://www.ianpaisley.org/new_details.asp?ID=183

  43. Chapter II, Art. 17; see also The Human Rights Act 1998, incorporated within British law, Protocol 1, Art. 1.

  44. See “Watch What You Say” by John Hilliker, Philadelphia Trumpeter, July 2001, available on-line at:http://www.olusa.com/politics/free-speech-dying.htm.

  45. “Now It’s Blasphemy to Mock Europe” by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in The Spectator, 18th November, 2000. This article can be read for free on-line but you will need to subscribe first: http://www.spectator.co.uk.

  46. S.I. 2001, No. 85. The exact areas where this infringement of free speech occurs is in public health, public safety, administration and trade. Read the House of Lords debate of March 20th, 2001 athttp://www.bwmaonline.com/Political%20-%20Motion%20on%20March%2020th.htm.

  47. One Government-supported “reason” for ID cards in the UK is to combat social security fraud. This is interesting as Richard Thomas, the new Information Commissioner and Head of the UK Data Protection Office recently said: “A second justification [for ID cards] is social security fraud. Well, the empirical evidence is that the vast bulk of social security fraud is caused by fraud about people’s circumstances, not about their identity…” (“ID Cards ‘will be boon for forgers'” by Alan Travis, home affairs editor, The Guardian, January 8, 2003); full article available on-line from Guardian Unlimited at:
    http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,870470,00.html. For an excellent argument against ID cards see Sean Gabb’s pamphlet, Identity Cards: Some Brief Objections available online athttp://www.seangabb.co.uk/flcomm/flc087.htm; see also a short article by the author at http://www.freedom-central.net/idcards.html which also references many resources for further research.

  48. Government Paves Way for EU Identity Cards by Marc Glendening, Tribune, August 1st 2003; full article available on-line at: http://www.democracy-movement.org.uk/main/tribuneAug03.html.

  49. Henry St. George Tucker, in his edition of Blackstone’s Commentaries, Vol. 1, p. 300 (1803).

  50. For more information please read All The Way Down The Slippery Slope: Gun Prohibition in England and Some Lessons for Civil Liberties in Amercia by Joseph E. Olsen and David B. Kopel, on-line at:http://www.guncite.com/journals/okslip.html.

  51. “Why I am going to the European Court” by Daniel Hannan, MEP; from Freedom Today, May/June 2004, p. 25. View article online at http://www.hannan.co.uk/news.htm.

  52. Winston Churchill, minute to the Home Secretary, 21st November 1943.

  53. Section II, Chapter 8, heading (d): “Measures for countering fraud against the financial interests of the Community.” The House of Lords interviewed two EU representatives who stated that Corpus Juris could be, and would be, introduced under Article 280 of the Amsterdam Treaty (see pages 84-85 of the 9th Report, House of Lords, 1998).

  54. EU Commission proposals (Directorate General XX) detail EU criminal code and procedure. Article 26.1 provides for cases (with sentences up to seven years) to be heard by courts “consisting of professional judges, excluding simple jurors and lay magistrates.”

  55. Protocol annexed to Maastricht Treaty of 1992. Article 30 requires Britain, on her entrance into the EMU, to transfer £8000 million of gold and dollar reserves to the ECB in Frankfurt, Germany. This cannot be reversed once done. Article 42 of this same Protocol allows for all remaining reserves to be transferred if a majority of the other EMU countries ask for it – Britain could not veto this.

  56. In 1999 the entire European Commission was forced to resign due to corruption charges; but most who “resigned” just carried on as normal. The House of Commons’ Public Accounts Committee has the view that corruption is endemic and unreformable in the EU (see PAC report issued 25th August 1999). For more on EU financial corruption see Ashley Mote’s site at: http://www.ashleymote.co.uk.

  57. The Pink Book 2003, United Kingdom Balance of Payments, HM Government, Central Statistics Office, 2004.

  58. See EuroFAQs, The European Union faq, p. 7-9 available as html or pdf on-line at http://www.eurofaq.freeuk.com for full explanations and official sources.

  59. ICM survey of 1000 company chief executives, April 2004.

  60. Sovereignty Journal, April 2004, letter from Donald Martin reporting on FSB Annual Branch Conference held in Blackpool 19th to 21st March 2004.

  61. KPMG Consulting survey based on responses from 300 firms.

  62. “For continental European politicians a single currency is above all a political not an economic issue … In the 19th century there were three failed attempts in parts of Europe to create monetary unions. The German monetary union was fully fledged by the 1870s but it began some 40 years before, initially as a customs union. The Prussian Thaler – as the currency was called – held sway while Bismarck dominated. The French attempt at a Latin Monetary Union started in 1865 and included Belgium, Italy, Greece and Switzerland, and at the time Walter Bagehot warned that if Britain did nothing we would be left out in the cold. We wisely declined to join and never regretted it. In 1873, Sweden, Denmark and Norway started a monetary union which was dissolved in 1924. This albeit limited history shows that monetary unions fail…” (Lord Owen, in The Economist, 24th January 1998; emphasis added).

  63. The Times, 19th February 2000.

  64. Why the New EU is like the Old USSR by Vernon Coleman (quoting Vladimir Bukovsky) available on-line athttp://www.vernoncoleman.com/tneuiltou.htm.

  65. From Euro to Union by William F. Jasper, 28th January 2002, Vol. 18, No. 2 of The New American magazine, available on-line at http://www.usnationhood.com/fromeuro.html. For more information (and also American issues) read “Regional Mergers on the Road to the Global Total State” by the same author, published on-line at:http://www.stoptheftaa.org/artman/publish/article_41.shtml.

  66. The article from which this extract comes no longer seems to be available on-line. There is something akin to it by the same author entitled The Real Purpose of the EU’s Enlargement at: http://www.teameurope.info/node/214. I would suggest contacting Uno Silberg if you want to find the original article (EU and Soviet Union – the same federal socialism).

  67. “Estonians Wary of European Union” by Christopher Bollyn, American Free Press, 20th August 2003; available on-line at: http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=35726.

  68. “Avalanche of doubts leaves Prodi bruised” by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, 10th May 2003, The Telegraph, available on-line at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/05/10/wfile10.xml. See more related information at: http://www.kc3.co.uk/~dt/RProdi.htm.

  69. Defence of the Realm, p. 5; see “Suggestions for Further Study” below.

  70. The Doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty, as explained by Professor A.V. Dicey’s accepted and classic definition given in 1885. See The Law of the Constitution by the same author, 10th edition. (1959), p. 67-68.

  71. “Sovereignty for a nation is hard to come by and even more difficult to retain. It cannot be shared, for then sovereignty becomes something else, and, for want of a better word, when sovereignty is lessened the end-product is internationalism. Sovereignty is neither more nor less than self-government.” Ezra Taft Benson, United States Foreign Policy given at the Farm Bureau Banquet in Preston, Idaho, June 21st 1968; emphasis added (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below).

  72. See Chapter 11, pp. 75-78, of Treason at Maastricht (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below).

  73. In 1706 the people of Scotland effectively decided to share their King and Parliament with England and Wales. Thus was created the United Kingdom. The new Parliament was to be in England, the Scottish Parliament was to no longer exist. The statute which dealt with the terms of this union was called the Act of Union. This vital part of the British Constitution guaranteed that Parliament would not encroach upon the rights of the Scots. If this happened, the Act of Union would be null and void. This would mean the United Kingdom would cease to exist in its present form. It also would mean that Parliament’s authority would cease to exist because that authority originated in the Act. By consenting to the Maastricht Treaty, and thus violating the rights of the Scots, Parliament has invalidated its own authority.

  74. For an explanation of the 8 counts of treason levelled at those involved with signing away British Sovereignty to Europe, see Treason at Maastricht, chapter 4 (pp. 43-51) (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below). For more information on the British Constitution and the EU Constitution’s incompatibility with it, read John Bingley’s excellent The EU Constitution is Incompatible with Ours (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below).

  75. Shaping Tomorrow’s EU, Brussels, 4 April 2002.

  76. From The Proposed EU Constitution is a Weapon of Mass Destruction of all the Member states, an article by Ashley Mote. No longer available on-line but a report of what may have been that speech can be found on-line athttp://www.bullen.demon.co.uk/acml20.htm. Ashley Mote can also be contacted at his site (see above).

  77. The European Constitution against The British Constitution: A Short Critique by Torquil Dick-Erikson, M.A. (Oxon), published by the UK Independence Party, April 2004; pp. 6

  78. Ibid. pp. 15.

  79. Ibid. pp. 15-18.

  80. Ibid. pp. 6.

  81. Number 17, Cato’s Letters, Saturday, February 18, 1720; from The English Libertarian Tradition: From the Writings of John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon in “The Independent Whig” and “Cato’s Letters” [Fox & Wilkes, San Francisco, 1965], p. 52. Cicero’s own words on the matter of treason are also poignant here, said he: “A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not traitor – he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation – he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city – he infects the body politic so that is can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared.” (in a speech to the Roman Senate, 42 B.C.)

  82. For details on the deception, vote-rigging and other underhanded schemes of British politicians see The Great Deception: The Secret History of the European Union, chapter 8, “The Real Deceit of Edward Heath: 1970-1975” (see “Suggestions for Further Study” below)

  83. Question Time, BBC, speaking to Peter Sissons, 1st November 1991. Heath also said: “There is no danger of a single currency.” (EEC membership information leaflet, 1975).

  84. These quotations on Europe, and many others (all referenced and checked) have been compiled on-line at:http://www.liebreich.com/LDC/HTML/Europe/00-Intro.html.

  85. Minutes of the Cabinet Meeting of 23rd October 1962 (released under 30 Year Rule, 1st January 1993).

  86. The 1996 Inter-Governmental Conference: The Agenda, Democracy and Efficiency and the Role of National Parliaments, House of Commons Select Committee on European Law, 1996.

Suggestions for Further Study


Vigilance: A Defence of British Liberty by Ashley Mote. This book is a must-read. The author presents the case very well and in an easy-to-read manner. This book is the one book that, if everyone read, would truly wake up the people of Britain and the free world to their own blessings and the very real threat of the draconian European Union.
http://www.author.co.uk/vigilance or http://www.ashleymote.co.uk/?p=688
NOTE: You may download and print out for free a text file with excerpts from this book at:

Defence of the Realm by Ashley Mote (booklet). Looks at the cogent argument that the EU treaties, et. al., are actually illegal in Britain. The text of this booklet can also be found in the appendix of the above book.

Treason at Maastricht: The Destruction of the Nation State by Rodney Atkinson and Norris McWhirter. This book is a testament to the patriotic and highly knowledgeable Norris McWhirter who sadly died of a heart attack the same week that it was reported that the Prime Minister had agreed to hold a referendum on the EU Constitution. Norris, together with Rodney Atkinson, brought charges of treason against certain individuals in the British Government. This book looks at the eight treason charges, the British Constitution, the Nazi and Bilderberger involvement in the EU, Winston Churchill’s real vision of a future Europe, and the threat that exists to British and American sovereignty today.

The Last Days of Britain: The Final Betrayal by Lindsay Jenkins (foreword by Norman Lamont)
Detailing the decades of dishonesty as both Labour and Conservative governments have betrayed Britain and her people.

Britain Held Hostage by Lindsay Jenkins (foreword by Frederick Forsyth)
Reveals the truth about who really created the EU and why.

The Great Deception: The Secret History of the European Union by Christopher Booker and Richard North.
One of the most professional and detailed works on the history of European union from 1918 to the present. Thoroughly recommended.

The Principality and Power of Europe: Britain and the Emerging Holy European Empire by Adrian Hilton.
Available from Amazon at: http://www.amazon.com/Principality-Power-Europe-Adrian-Hilton/dp/0951838628/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1265374197&sr=1-2

The Law by Frédéric Bastiat. Classic work on the proper role of law in a just society (book). Held in high regard by Britain and the US but ignored in his own country of France, no doubt because he was no friend to statist continental philosophies.http://www.lfb.com

On-line Articles & Essays

Historical Deceptions: European Union by Joel Skousen (on-line essay). Insightful and informed commentary on the dangers of the EU and how it affects all of us. Taken from World Affairs Brief.

An Essay on the Trial By Jury by Lysander Spooner (on-line essay). Excellent essay on the real importance and role of the jury. Once you’ve read this you’ll never look at trial by jury the same again.

A Sceptical Introduction to the European Union by Richard Greaves (article). As the title suggests, an introduction to the EU touching upon its major institutions, monetary and banking system, Europol, Corpus Juris, and other prominent elements. From The Sovereignty Journal.

Corpus Juris and the Threat to British Common Law Rights (web article)

The “New European Soviet” by Vilius Brazenas (magazine article). Mr. Brazenas at ninety plus remembers most of the major events of the last century. He claims the EU is rapidly descending into totalitarianism and tells us exactly why it could be no different.

The Law is Above You: The Christian Roots of English Common Law by Michael A. Clark and others (web article) http://www.britishisrael.co.uk/showart.php?id=31

Britain’s Unique Heritage of Law Threatened by an E.U. Police State: A Napoleonic System of Repression Now Confirmed in Corpus Juris (web article)

Corpus Juris by Stealth. Long web page with updates on current British-EU topics and how they affect our freedom. (web article)

The Fascist Inheritance in the European and Blair Projects by Edward Spalton. Available on-line athttp://klub.org.pl/pipermail/central-europe_klub.org.pl/2004-August/000115.html.

United States Foreign Policy (speech) by Secretary of Agriculture, Ezra Taft Benson). An elaboration on national sovereignty and the true meaning of nationalism; given at the Farm Bureau Banquet in Preston, Idaho, June 21st1968.

Europe’s New Constitution: Philadelphia It Is Not by Patrick Basham and Marian L. Tupy (web article). A comparison of the proposed EU Constitution and the US Constitution. This article was published by Scripps Howard News Service, March 4, 2003.

The EU Constitution is Incompatible with Ours by John Bingley (speech). A plain and well-argued address pointing out the illegitimate position of the EU Constitution within the context of the British Constitution.


Visit the UKIP shop for all the latest books and DVDs on the EU at 


The June Press 
Excellent source of political, economic and historical publications. Also publishes the fortnightly Eurofactsnewsletter available on-line at: http://www.junepress.com/eurofacts.asp. Highly recommended.

Written and maintained by an independent group of journalists, businessmen, politicians and academics who believe Britain’s membership of the European Union has been a political and economic disaster. 
Very clear and well-presented questions and answers about the EU and Britain. Highly recommended.

The Bruges Group
An all-party independent think tank seeking to stop the centralising of power to Brussels. Many good links and articles. Rt. Hon. Baroness Thatcher is the Honorary President.

The Freedom Association (TFA) 
Readers might also want to study the article Conservative MEPs and the European People’s Party: Time for Divorce, by Martin Ball and Jonathan Collet, available on-line athttp://www.brugesgroup.com/mediacentre/index.live?article=94).

News and Resource Portal for Freedom-loving People Everywhere…
International site listing only the most liberty-loving and reliable sources of information from around the world.


Periodicals & Other Publications

Portman Papers
Excellent professional quarterly focusing on the threat to British sovereignty and the Constitution from the EU and other internationalist forces. Portman Papers is not afraid to go into detail about some of the less-accepted truths other publications avoid. 
Highly recommended.

Other Resources

EuroFAQ’s European Constitution Resource Page
Includes a summary of the powers of the EU Constitution, the Government and EU position, news and information on the EU Constitution and referendum, and other links.

New Alliance Constitution and Documents Archive
The official site of the EU, like its legislation, is somewhat hard to navigate and find what you want. So here’s an excellent link resource from New Alliance where you will find all that you need including links to the various EU treaties and a link to the latest translation of the reader-friendly draft EU Constitution published by EU ABC (you may wish to review the PowerPoint presentation found via that particular link too):http://www.newalliance.org.uk/constdoc.htm. The official EU site is at http://europa.eu.int.

About the Author

D. Andrews is a writer and researcher who lives in England, loves his country and is deeply concerned about the decline of freedom in his own land and the rest of the world.

If you feel there is any misrepresentation, error or omission in this article then please contact the author through the feedback form provided below.

NB: As this article is continually being updated and expanded, please check for the latest version at http://www.freedom-central.net/euandbritain.html if you are not currently reading it from that page. This Version: 17.09.04. Word count: c. 16,300

Enhanced by Zemanta

#acehistory2research, #altiero-spinelli, #european-federalist-movement, #european-union, #jean-monnet, #nazi, #norris-mcwhirter, #united-states, #united-states-of-europe, #world-war-ii

Fifteen Years ago `NATO ' invaded ` Yugoslavia ' and left their Mark and their Memories '

#AceHistory2Research – YUGOSLAVIA – 22 March – Fifteen years after NATO invaded Yugoslavia, memories of the 78-day bombing are still haunting present-day Serbia. Above all, people ask why the alliance brought them death and destruction. RT presents its documentary ‘Zashto?’ from the war-torn country.


On March 24, 1999, when NATO started its ruthless bombing campaign against Yugoslavia, Jelena Milincic was a student at the University of Belgrade, and just 18 years old.

When the first strikes hit in the evening, she, her mother, sister, and best friend cowered under a table.

Remembering this now, 15 years later, they laugh.

Back then, it was terrifying.

For the next three months, the relentless air-strikes became part of Jelena’s – and many other people’s – lives.

“In ’99, I was 16 and I was studying in a theatre school. I had no idea that a country in central Europe was being bombed for three months,” RT America journalist Anissa Naouai says in the film.

Operation Allied Force, as it was code-named, lasted until June 10, 1999. Tragically, NATO’s aggression resulted in more than 2,000 civilian deaths, including 88 children.

The authors of ‘Zashto?’ – which means “Why?” in English – Serbian Jelena Milincic and American Anissa Naouai traveled through former Yugoslavia to Belgrade, Kosovo, and Montenegro. They spoke to people who endured the atrocities and horrors of the war and lost loved ones.

“We were just looking for important, heartfelt stories. Serbia is not a very large country, and everywhere we went we found people who were personally affected by the bombings, and feel the war’s impact to this day,” said Milincic, a Serbian journalist.

“Our goal was to show the aspects of the conflict that you did not see in the news, the stories of civilians affected by the events,” Milincic added.

To watch the documentary ‘Zashto?’ tune in to RT on March 24.

RT (Exclusive) 1443125_yt_zashto_promo__480p (1).mp4



#american, #nato, #rt, #serbian, #yugoslavia

` The Democratic Republican Party ‘

#AceHistory2Research – UNITED STATES – 22 March – In United States history, the Democratic-Republican Party, the Republican Party or the Jeffersonian Republicans was a political party organized by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in 1791-93, which opposed the Federalist Party and controlled the Presidency and Congress, and most states, from 1801 to 1825, during the First Party System.

It split after the 1824 presidential election into two parties: the Democratic Party and the short-lived National Republican Party (later succeeded by the Whig Party, some of whose members in 1854 helped to found the modern Republican Party).

The organization formed first as an “Anti-Administration” secret meeting in the national capital (Philadelphia) to oppose the programs of Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton.

Jefferson needed to have a nationwide party to challenge the Federalists, a nationwide party organized by Hamilton.

Foreign affairs took a leading role in 1794-95 as the Republicans vigorously opposed the Jay Treaty with Britain, which was then at war with France.

Republicans saw France as more democratic after its revolution, while Britain represented the hated monarchy. The party denounced many of Hamilton’s measures (especially the national bank) as unconstitutional.

The party was strongest in the South and weakest in the North-east. It favoured states’ rights and the primacy of the yeoman farmers.

Republicans were deeply committed to the principles of republicanism, which they feared were threatened by the supposed monarchical tendencies of the Hamiltonians/Federalists.

The party came to power in 1801 with the election of Jefferson in the 1800 presidential election.

The Federalists — too elitist to appeal to most people — faded away, and totally collapsed after 1815.

The Republicans, despite internal divisions, dominated the First Party System until partisanship itself withered away during the Era of Good Feelings after 1816.

The party selected its presidential candidates in a caucus of members of Congress. They included Thomas Jefferson (nominated 1796; elected 1800-1, 1804), James Madison (1808, 1812), and James Monroe (1816, 1820). By 1824, the caucus system had practically collapsed.

After 1800, the party dominated Congress and most state governments outside New England. By 1824, the party was split 4 ways and lacked a centre.

One remnant followed Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren into the new Democratic Party by 1828.

That party still exists. Another remnant led by John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay formed the National Republicans in 1828; it held its first convention in late 1831 in Baltimore.

It morphed into the Whig Party by 1835.

The Whig Party fell apart in the mid-1850’s because it could not bridge North-South differences on slavery, while the Democrats held together by taking positions favoured by the South.


#baltimore, #britain, #democratic-republican-party, #john-quincy-adams, #new-england, #thomas-jefferson, #whig-party

` Petrograd Telegraph Agency (PTA) ‘

#AceHistory2Research – On August 19, 1914, one day after Tsar Nicholas the Second ruled to rename St. Petersburg into Petrograd, SPTA changed its name accordingly and became the Petrograd Telegraph Agency (PTA).

During the Bolshevik revolution on October 25 (November 7) 1917 the PTA building in Pochtampt Street was seized by revolutionary Baltic Fleet seamen headed by Military Commissar Leonid Stark. The first reports written by Stark about the Bolshevik revolution were immediately wired by PTA to the whole world.

On November 18 (December 1) 1917 the Bolshevik government (Sovnarkom) decreed PTA to become the central government information agency. In March 1918 PTA moved to Moscow where it merged in June with the Press bureau of the government…

Related News – Part One – Extract – On December 31, 1909 the agency was subordinated directly to the Council of Ministers upon a submission of Prime Minister Petr Stolypin – http://wp.me/p48Dp0-bw


#baltic-fleet, #bolshevik, #moscow, #petrograd-telegraph-agency-pta, #st-petersburg, #st-petersburg-telegraph-agency-spta, #tsar-nicholas-the-second

` St Petersburg Telegraph Agency (SPTA) First Official News Agency ‘

#AceHistory2Research The St. Petersburg Telegraph Agency (SPTA), the first official news agency of Russia and the predecessor of ITAR-TASS, began to operate on September 1, 1904.

The creation of the agency was initiated by the Finance, Interior and Foreign Ministries. On July 4, 1904 a meeting of representatives of the ministries empowered “to consider issues concerning the project of a government telegraph agency” adopted the basic documents for the creation and operation of SPTA.

The project to launch SPTA was approved by last Russian Tsar Nicholas the Second. The agency had to “report within the Empire and abroad political, financial, economic, trade and other data of public interest”. Three directors, one from each of the Finance, Interior and Foreign Ministries, comprised the panel that managed the agency.

On December 31, 1909 the agency was subordinated directly to the Council of Ministers upon a submission of Prime Minister Petr Stolypin …………………. more in part two soon


#itar-tass, #russian, #st-petersburg-telegraph-agency-spta, #tsar-nicholas-the-second

“Shroud of Turin `Fact or Fiction’ from `2004 – 2014′ You Decide”

#AceHistory2Research says Second Face on the Shroud of Turin `Fact or Fiction’ according to the latest news’

Institute of Physics ^ | April 13, 2004 | Giulio Fanti and Roberto Maggiolo 

Posted on 04/13/2004 2:52:34 PM PDT by shroudie

The most definitive evidence yet that the Shroud of Turin is not a medieval fake-relic. This is big stuff, published on a highly respected scientific organizations website, the Institute of Physics, a 37,000 member organization of physicists. Their journal is an ethical journal of peer-reviewed scientific studies.Русский: Спас Отпечаток лика Христа на Туринск...

The Washington Times, BBC, the Observer, the Telegraph of London, ABC Australia, the Chicago Sun-Times and several outlets have picked up the story in the last few hours. In my opinion it reinforces the already clear proof that the carbon 14 testing in 1988 was completely erroneous. It clearly eliminates the polemics of medieval paintings, da Vinci conspiracies, proto-photography and other silly concocted theories being bantered about by those skeptical of Christianity.

If it is a genuine burial shroud of a 1st century victim of crucifixion, it can almost certainly be inferred that it is Jesus. If that is so, it buries the extra-liberal revisionism of John Dominic Crossan and Marcus Borg who argue that Jesus was not buried.

If it is a genuine burial shroud of a 1st century victim of crucifixion, how is it that this piece of cloth survived the grave and was not ravaged by decomposition products?

The story at the link is quite technical. I suggest alternatively reading the stories in any of the various newspapers or for a clear concise explanation read first Chemistry of the Image and then Explanation of the Backside Image.

From the extract: “Photographs of the back surface of the Turin Shroud were analysed to verify the existence of a double body image of a man. The body image is very faint and the background not uniform; i.e., the signal-to-noise ratio is lower than one. Therefore, image processing . . . was necessary to highlight body features. This was based on convolution with Gaussian filters, summation of images, and filtering in spatial frequency by direct and inverse bidimensional Fourier transformations.


TOPICS: History
KEYWORDS: clothofturinmedievalhoaxoneborneveryminuteshroudofturin

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-207 next last

It is my opinion that this is near-definative evidence that the Shroud is genuine.
1 posted on 04/13/2004 2:52:37 PM PDT by shroudie

To: shroudie
It is my opinion that this is near-definitive evidence that the Shroud is genuine.Agreed.No one has come up with anything remotely capable of explaining how a painter from the Middle Ages could have faked this kind of double image, or that needed this kind of enhancement to see. The other remarkable features of the shroud were sufficient IMHO, but this seems to seal the case.However, I expect to see near hysterical denials that it is of Jesus Christ. Such a thing would have implications that are simply unacceptable to many people.
2 posted on 04/13/2004 3:04:14 PM PDT by EternalHope (Boycott everything French forever. Including their vassal nations.)

To: shroudie
Good find. The nice thing about IoP is that you can download the journal articles at no charge for 30 days from the date of publication (beyond that you’ll have pay a hefty fee for the download).
3 posted on 04/13/2004 3:07:48 PM PDT by NewHampshireDuo

To: shroudie
I’m not a physicist, but as I read the original article, I think it’s relatively neutral as to whether or not the shroud is genuine. One interesting thing it does highlight, however, is that this image analysis discovered differences between the front and back side images that seem to suggest they do not correspond with one another very closely. If anything, I would think that would cast additional doubt on the shroud.But again, I’m not a physicist…
4 posted on 04/13/2004 3:11:09 PM PDT by LandOfLincolnGOP

To: EternalHope
However, I expect to see near hysterical denials that it is of Jesus Christ. Such a thing would have implications that are simply unacceptable to many people. What I find especially humorous is that many hysterical denials will come from Fundamentalists decrying “false idols”. What a world, what a world…”And as a man was being buried, lo, a marauding band was seen and the man was cast into the grave of Eli’sha; and as soon as the man touched the bones of Eli’sha, he revived, and stood on his feet.” — 2 Kg 13:21 (RSV)
5 posted on 04/13/2004 3:15:24 PM PDT by polemikos (Ecce Agnus Dei)

To: EternalHope
> No one has come up with anything remotely capable of explaining how a painter from the Middle Ages could have faked this kind of double imageHmmm. How about this: the painter painted both sides?Not exactly challenging… just paint one side, hold up to the light, paint the other side. Easy.
6 posted on 04/13/2004 3:15:30 PM PDT by orionblamblam

To: EternalHope
> I expect to see near hysterical denials that it is of Jesus Christ.What I find funny is that any scientist who looks at the evidence and says, “Nah, it’s a fake,” will be hysterically described as being in hysterical denial.
7 posted on 04/13/2004 3:18:34 PM PDT by orionblamblam

To: shroudie
It has been recently discoved that there are also two faces on the shroud of Kerry.Jag
8 posted on 04/13/2004 3:20:31 PM PDT by JaguarXKE

To: LandOfLincolnGOP
Much of the current thinking in the Shroud skunkworks is that the correspondance is within the tolerance ranges of gaseous diffusion of heavy amines. Other possibilities, without regard to miraculous causation, would include an ionizing radiation or corona discharge — though some physicists have real problems with this.The differences, such as the nose on the reverse side which doesn’t show the same extension as the front, are probably completely due to chemical reaction differences, image inhibition by bloodstains, and diffusion of amine reactants if the catalyst or the reactant is gaseous.I am not a physicist either, but I know what sort of scientist Fanti is and I know what sort of scientist Ray Roger, UCLA fellow and former head of the bomb explosives group for the Los Alamos Laboratory, is, and they agree emphatically that this rules out forgery or any form of artistic or crafty technique.Fanti’s words are clear: “It is extremely difficult to make a fake with these features.”In fact, the skunkworks group has been working with the double superficiality of the images for some time now. It is hard to imagine how this could be mechanically or artistically produced.


9 posted on 04/13/2004 3:31:34 PM PDT by shroudie

To: orionblamblam
The double superficiality of the frontal image of the Turin Shroud
Giulio Fanti and Roberto Maggiolo
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanica, Università di Padova,
Via Venezia 1, 35137 Padova, Italy
E-mail: giulio.fanti@unipd.it
Received 13 October 2003, accepted for publication 12 March 2004
Published 13 April 2004Abstract. Photographs of the back surface of the Turin Shroud were analysed to verify the existence of a double body image of a man. The body image is very faint and the background not uniform; i.e., the signal-to-noise ratio is lower than one. Therefore, image processing, developed ad hoc, was necessary to highlight body features. This was based on convolution with Gaussian filters, summation of images, and filtering in spatial frequency by direct and inverse bidimensional Fourier transformations. Body features were identified by template matching. The face and probably also the hands are visible on the back of the Turin Shroud, but not features related to the dorsal image. Keywords: image processing, very low signal-to-noise ratio, fast Fourier transform, convolution, Turin ShroudURL: stacks.iop.org/1464-4258/6/491
DOI: 10.1088/1464-4258/6/6/001
PII: S1464-4258(04)70555-3The double superficiality of the frontal image of the Turin ShroudSo, basically, these guys are stating that after running photographs of the back of the Turin cloth through lots of image processing filters and doing a bit of tweaking, they were able to discern faint blurs that bled through from the other side.

That convinces me! It must be Jesus!

10 posted on 04/13/2004 3:38:27 PM PDT by happydogdesign

To: orionblamblam
Right, except he had to paint it without paint or pigment or dyes or colorants of any kind. He would have needed a microscope and a single fiber paintbrush thinner than a human hair. The color is within a thin carbohydrate film that is 180 to 600 nanometers thick on fibers that average 13 microns in diameter (human hair is 100 microns). It is superficial to the topmost crown fibers on both sides of the cloth. There are no visible concentrations of paint on the Shroud. Period.Shroudie
11 posted on 04/13/2004 3:40:03 PM PDT by shroudie

To: orionblamblam
What I find funny is that any scientist who looks at the evidence and says, “Nah, it’s a fake,” will be hysterically described as being in hysterical denial.To say it’s a fake without any idea of HOW it could be faked is simply denial. Thus far, no one has any idea how the image could have been faked.
12 posted on 04/13/2004 3:41:08 PM PDT by EternalHope (Boycott everything French forever. Including their vassal nations.)

To: happydogdesign
There you go again. Nothing bled through. There is no image between the superficial layers. We’ve been through this before, haven’t we.Shroudie
13 posted on 04/13/2004 3:43:25 PM PDT by shroudie

To: shroudie
Sorry, shroudie, I keep forgetting that one should assume a miraculous, supernatural theory is true, then work backwards to prove it’s validity by ignoring or discrediting those nasty secular humanist scientific techniques and inconvenient historical records. But we minions of Satan are always planting those nasty doubts to test the faithful. Rock on! I have to go plant some more dinosaur bones to plague the creation science folks!CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Shroud of TurinPBS “Secrets of the Dead” Buries the Truth About Turin Shroud
14 posted on 04/13/2004 4:00:00 PM PDT by happydogdesign

To: shroudie
You know, we haven’t entertained the theory that Happy is actually Joe Nickell, trolling around Shroud threads. Could be.
15 posted on 04/13/2004 4:10:03 PM PDT by Swordmaker (This tagline shut down for renovations and repairs. Re-open June of 2001.)

To: LandOfLincolnGOP
You need to read more carefully, because on page 500-501 the authors state:
“It should be noted that the image of the face, bs, is found in the same position as the corresponding one on the front, in all its detail, and on the same scale, with non-detectable relative rotation within the range of measurement uncertainty (3% for the scale factor, 3 degrees for relative rotations).”In other words, no significant difference in image position with respect to front and back surfaces.
16 posted on 04/13/2004 4:12:32 PM PDT by Kirkwood

To: happydogdesign
Hmmmm dead links. I guess you don’t want readers to see that your sources are an article that was written in 1908 and copyrighted in 1912, since superceded in the Catholic Encyclopedia in 1968 (still outdated but nowhere nearly as biased as the one YOU like to cite).And that the other is to Joe Nickell, PhD in Art and English, no science to his name, a professional “debunker” with a book to sell… more on that later, Happy.
17 posted on 04/13/2004 4:15:51 PM PDT by Swordmaker (This tagline shut down for renovations and repairs. Re-open June of 2001.)

To: orionblamblam
NO ONE believes that the image was painted – even those who do not believe it is a true death shroud acknowledge it could not have been painted.
18 posted on 04/13/2004 4:17:42 PM PDT by Kirkwood

To: Alamo-Girl; HiTech RedNeck; Don Joe; Young Werther; RightWhale; SMEDLEYBUTLER; mjp; M. Thatcher; …
Shroud of Turin PING!If you want to be included or deleted from the Shroud of Turin Ping List, please Freepmail me.Swordmaker
19 posted on 04/13/2004 10:16:28 PM PDT by Swordmaker (This tagline shut down for renovations and repairs. Re-open June of 2001.)

To: happydogdesign; shroudie
Amusing that the “credulous” shroudie is the one providing technical analysis and scientific documentation, and the “realist” debunker must make do with sarcasm, innuendo and intentionally ignoring established facts…
20 posted on 04/13/2004 10:28:30 PM PDT by Interesting Times (ABCNNBCBS — yesterday’s news.)

To: shroudie
I would have said that it is extremely easy to make a fake with these features, since by the 21st c. we are so clever…and then, if it is just a matter of some sugars and starches, let these brilliant physicists of ours replicate it. Can someone not make a linen as linens were made, dry it in the sun, cover a dead critter for a few hours and see what they get? If it’s gaseous diffusion of heavy amines it should happen with the usual reliability of natural phenomena.This chemical explanation is fine with me but can they demonstrate it?
21 posted on 04/13/2004 11:34:22 PM PDT by Graymatter

To: happydogdesign
Thanks for the links. The second one, dating from April 9, 2004 was VERY interesting!
22 posted on 04/14/2004 5:35:24 AM PDT by Netizen

To: EternalHope
> To say it’s a fake without any idea of HOW it could be faked is simply denial.Incorrect. Here’s the logic:Theory: This is the Actual Shroud OF Jesus.
Refutation: Carbon dating puts it at less than a thousand years old. Theory conclusively refuted.Theory refuted; it’s a fake. Exactly how the image got there is another matter; but the evidence shows it to *not* be the shroud of Jesus
23 posted on 04/14/2004 10:35:12 AM PDT by orionblamblam

To: shroudie
> The color is within a thin carbohydrate film that is 180 to 600 nanometers thick on fibers that average 13 microns in diameterHeck, that’s *easy.* Paint the image on a sheet of paper, place cloth on paper, press. SHAZAM! Instant Shroud, ready to recieve income.
24 posted on 04/14/2004 10:37:02 AM PDT by orionblamblam

To: orionblamblam
Carbon dating puts it at less than a thousand years old. Theory conclusively refuted.Guess you’re not up to date on the carbon dating actually used.The sample used was from a corner the Catholic Church felt was not essential to the shroud. It had been contaminated in a fire, and restored in a way that invalidated its use for carbon dating purposes. In addition, it was subsequently shown that the individual fibers in the shroud had grown a biological “sheath” that was not removed prior to testing, and added new biomass to the original material. Since this new growth was obviously younger than the shroud itself, it undoubtedly changed the tested age of the sample.Attempts have been made to mathematically correct for these problems. You may choose to dispute the math, but the correction results in a first century date for the shroud.
25 posted on 04/14/2004 10:52:29 AM PDT by EternalHope (Boycott everything French forever. Including their vassal nations.)

To: orionblamblam
In regards to the carbon 14 testing which has been completely discredited: M. Sue Benford and Joseph Marino, in collaboration with number of textile experts, identified clear evidence of medieval mending on the Shroud. A patch was expertly sewn to or rewoven into the fabric to repair a damaged edge. It was from this patch—quite likely nothing more than a piece of medieval cloth—that the samples were taken. From documenting photographs of the sample areas, the textile experts identified enough newer thread to permit Ronald Hatfield, of the prestigious radiocarbon dating firm Beta Analytic, to estimate that the true date of the cloth is much older—perhaps even 1st century.Independently, Anna Arnoldi of the University of Milan and Raymond N. Rogers, a Fellow of the University of California Los Alamos National Laboratory have explored the chemical nature of the sample area. They have confirmed the finding of Benford and Marino. Ultraviolet photography and spectral analysis show that the area from which the samples were taken was chemically unlike the rest of the cloth. Chemical analysis reveals the presence of Madder root dye and an aluminum oxide mordant (a reagent that fixes dyes to textiles) not found elsewhere on Shroud. Medieval artisans often dyed threads in this manner when mending damaged tapestries. This was simply to make the repairs less noticeable. The presence of Madder root and mordant suggests that the Shroud was mended in this way.This photograph, by Vern Miller, was taken before the samples carbon 14 testing were cut from the Shroud. It was taken with a heavily-filtered ultraviolet lighting (black light) that did not emit any visible light at all. All of the light you see in the photograph was produced by the fluorescence of chemical compounds on the Shroud. Any variations in color and brightness are a direct result of the chemical composition.The dark brown region across the bottom of the picture is the mended area. The place from which the carbon 14 samples were cut is in the dark brown area just above the tiny triangular white spot located on the bottom edge. (The tiny white triangle is where a small sample was trimmed from the Shroud in 1973 by Gilbert Raes).Microchemical tests also reveal vanillin (C8H8O3 or 4-hydroxy-3-methoxybenzaldehyde) in an area of the cloth from which the carbon 14 sample were cut. But the rest of the cloth does not test positive for it. Vanillin is produced by the thermal decomposition of lignin, a complex polymer, a non-carbohydrate constituent of plant material including flax. Found in medieval materials but not in much older cloths, it diminishes and disappears with time. For instance, the wrappings of the Dead Sea scrolls do not test positive for vanillin.This is an important find. It suggests that the tested samples were possibly much newer and it underscores that the chemical nature of the carbon 14 samples and the main part of the cloth are outstandingly different.
26 posted on 04/14/2004 11:35:41 AM PDT by shroudie

To: EternalHope
> . It had been contaminated in a fireExcept, of course, fire does not invalidate carbon dating.> and added new biomassThis is another red herring. The mass of “biosheath” required to throw off the dating by the required amount would exceed the mass of the shroud itself.The carbon dating may be off by a few dacades, tops. That’s why, when it’s presented, it’s always presented with error bars.

The carbon dating still stands.

27 posted on 04/14/2004 12:20:23 PM PDT by orionblamblam

To: orionblamblam
Maybe this chart will help.
Chemical Differences Carbon 14 Sample Area Main Part of the Shroud of Turin
aluminum as hydrated oxide, common in textile dyeing Significant (10 to 20 times as much as found on main part of Shroud) Virtually none
Madder-root dye (alizarin and
Found Not found
a gum medium  (probably Gum Arabic) vehicle for dye and mordant Found Not present
Lignin at fiber growth nodes Very little Significant
vanillin in lignin Found Not found
significant less
cotton fiber in thread Found Not found
spliced fibers Found Not found

The photograph shown in a previous posting, according to Ray Rogers, a Fellow of the University of California, Los Alamos National Laboratory, a chemist who has scientifically examined the Shroud — in Turin — and studied the object for more than 27 years, “shows the fluorescence of the area of the radiocarbon sample. It proves that the radiocarbon sample did not have the same chemical composition as the rest of the cloth. This is a fact – not an interpretation. . . Notice that the entire area above the Raes sample [the tiny white triangle on the bottom edge] and along the seam is darker than the main part of the cloth. It does not fluoresce. . .Its chemical composition is different from the Shroud. That is exactly the area sampled for the 1988 dating fiasco. . . The radiocarbon sample was invalid. No strange, magical events are needed to explain the invalid date. I do not know what the real date is, but I know the sample used in 1988 did not yield a valid date. The poor preparation for sampling in 1988, the poor verification of the sample, the failure to follow written protocols, and the unrealistic claims made about “unreliable” radiocarbon dating have done great damage.”

The carbon 14 testing, sadly attested to in Nature Magazine in 1989, joins the ranks of junk science. It wasn’t the labs that failed. It was the gross incompetence of the sample selection process.

28 posted on 04/14/2004 12:41:38 PM PDT by shroudie

To: orionblamblam
The carbon dating still stands.The post immediately prior to yours (probably posted while you were writing your reply to me) addresses your statement in detail. To sum up the current state of the scientific investigation, the carbon dating does NOT still stand.As additional information you might consider the book, The Blood and the Shroud, by Ian Wilson, published in 1998. To quote The Washington Post (sorry ’bout that), “Wilson’s outstanding study must surely be the most complete yet undertaken of the subject.” Although it is the most recent book I have personally read on the subject, you can probably find more up to date info. However, it is quite readable and answers most of the non-radiocarbon dating questions quite well.The recent discoveries (repairs at the site of sample used for radiocarbon dating, 1st century stitching methodology, image on the back) are obviously not addressed in the book.Since you raised the radiocarbon dating question, I should re-emphasize the two points I made in my earlier post: fire and biocontamination. Both are addressed in the above referenced book, and both have the potential to skew the results substantially more than you might realize.1. The fire had the potential to cause a chemical change in the type of fibers in the shroud, binding carbon items from the atmosphere at the time of the fire.

2. The biological “sheath” was quite thick, resulting in enough biomass to skew the results substantially.

These two points are separate from the repairs made to the cloth at the site of the sample, which is sufficient to invalidate the radiocarbon testing all by itself.

29 posted on 04/14/2004 1:03:17 PM PDT by EternalHope (Boycott everything French forever. Including their vassal nations.)

To: orionblamblam
Incorrect. Here’s the logic:
Theory: This is the Actual Shroud OF Jesus.
Refutation: Carbon dating puts it at less than a thousand years old. Theory conclusively refuted.
Theory refuted; it’s a fake.
I would agree… IF they had tested the Shroud and not a 16th Century PATCH.It has now been almost conclusively proven that the Carbon 14 testng was done on material that had been patched in the 16th Century, probaby 1535 or 1552. The C14 sample was taken from an area of the Shroud that was SIGNIFICANTLY different from the rest of the Shroud..The following table is borrowed from shroudie’s Shroud Story website and shows the results of the tests comparing the C14 sample piece with the Shroud itself:
Chemical Differences Carbon 14 Sample Area Main Part of the Shroud of Turin
aluminum as hydrated oxide, common in textile dyeing Significant (10 to 20 times as much as found on main part of Shroud) Virtually none
Madder-root dye (alizarin and
Found Not found
a gum medium  (probably Gum Arabic) vehicle for dye and mordant Found Not present
Lignin at fiber growth nodes Very little Significant
vanillin in lignin Found Not found
significant less
cotton fiber in thread Found Not found
spliced fibers Found Not found

So we have a C14 Sample that is:CHEMICALLY different from the body of the Shroud in that it contained Rose Madder-root Dye, Aluminum Oxide (bauxite), Gum coating on the fibers as a mordant (a chemical to “bite” into the linen to allow dyes to adhere), and Vanillin (a decomposition product of lignin that disappears over time), and other chemicals not found elsewhere on the Shroud.

PHYSICALLY different because the patch fluoresces significantly under an ultra-violet light while the rest of the Shroud material fluoresces dimly, The C14 Sample shows significant differences as a TEXTILE in that the threads of the patch were spun in an “S” (counter-clockwise) twist while the entire rest of the Shroud was spun with a “Z” twist. In addition, the average thread size of the C14 Sample is “significantly” (statistically) smaller than the average thread size of the Shroud. The fibers composing the threads of the patch include WOOL and European COTTON which is found NOWHERE ELSE on the Shroud. Finally, the linen of the C14 sample was “retted” using a completely different process from the rest of the Shroud.

The location where C14 sample was taken.

Diagram of the cutting of the sample for distribution
to the three laboratories.
Photos linked from The 1988 Shroud of Turin Radiocarbon Tests Reconsidered
Paper by Bryan J. Walsh, Shroud of Turin Center, Richmond, VA

The samples provided to the Zurich C14 Lab (top) and the Oxford lab.
Note the obvious changes in thread directionality and tone in
the samples from left side to right side, and the subtle variation between
the direction changes. This has been determined to be an area of “invisible
reweaving” where the 16th Century linen patch material is interwoven
with the original shroud material.

This color photo of the one of the Arizona lab’s samples
(the only lab to get two samples) shows a distinct change
in thread quality in the lower right. Note the subtle change
in direction of the “woof” (horizontal) threads.
Sample photos borrowed from
Catholic Counter-Reformation WebsiteBryan J. Walsh’ statistical analysis of the C14 tests performed by the three laboratories show that given the accepted accuracy of the tests, the test results and the reported ages of the 11 tests (three labs Arizona, Oxford, and Zurich, four samples cut into 11 sub-samples (A-4, O-3, Z-4) for testing) COULD NOT HAVE COME FROM THE SAME HOMOGENOUS POPULATION! In other words, the test results varied so greatly that statistically they could not have come from the same sample! Yet we know they did.

Plotting the age variances in the samples show that the age reported is inverse linear proportion to the distance from the edge of the Shroud toward the center. At the time the statistical analysis was done, the evidence of a patch had not been found.

The distances used were:

                 Laboratory                                    Distance (in mm)

Oxford                                50.0  (the approx. distance from the edge of Shroud cloth to center of Oxford sample)

Zurich                                64.0  (the Oxford value plus the approx. distance between the center of both samples)

Arizona                              76.0   (the Zurich value plus the approx. distance between the center of both samples)

A regression analysis was then conducted which compared the subsample radiocarbon dates with the corresponding distance from the edge of the Shroud linen. It was determined that there was statistically significant (P>98.8%, r2=0.49) inverse linear relationship between the date measured and the distance from the sample to the edge of the cloth. This finding indicated that there was an apparent gradient of radiocarbon measured on the Shroud sample with higher levels of14C measured at increasing distance from the edge of the Shroud linen based on the sample measured. This is illustrated on the following chart:

The data and statistical analysis by Walsh is equally valid if it is not distance from the edge of the cloth but rather proportion of patch to original material in a diagonal change across the flawed sample that results in the statistically anomolous results. This is proof that the samples, although cut from the Shroud, and then further cut from the same sample WERE NOT HOMOGINOUS… and in fact were made up of OLD shroud linen intermixed with NEW patch linen.Ergo, the test was flawed from the beginning. It is akin to finding a note on a piece of paper scotch taped to the flyleaf of a book, taking that page, including the scotch taped piece and testing it to find the age of the book. The sample was corrupted by additional anachronistic material, the results are wrong.

30 posted on 04/14/2004 1:11:27 PM PDT by Swordmaker (This tagline shut down for renovations and repairs. Re-open June of 2001.)

To: shroudie
Check out my C14 reply just above on this thread. I have borrowed a chart from your website. Thanks.Swordmaker
31 posted on 04/14/2004 1:12:58 PM PDT by Swordmaker (This tagline shut down for renovations and repairs. Re-open June of 2001.)

To: Swordmaker
Great post!
32 posted on 04/14/2004 1:31:38 PM PDT by shroudie

To: shroudie
I just visited your website. Quite impressive!The last time I read anything extensive on the shroud was five years ago, with occassional articles since then as updates. It is obvious: I am quite out of date!
33 posted on 04/14/2004 1:39:27 PM PDT by EternalHope (Boycott everything French forever. Including their vassal nations.)

To: EternalHope
> The post immediately prior to yours (probably posted while you were writing your reply to me) addresses your statement in detail.The info in the post starts from the position that the shroud is 2k years old, and works backwards from there to “prove” it. It provides zero evidence to refute the medieval age of the shroud.> The fire had the potential to cause a chemical change in the type of fibers in the shroud,Irrelevant. Chemistry has nothing to do with radiocarbon dating.> binding carbon items from the atmosphere

Nope. Fire does not do that to any recognizable degree.

The biological “sheath” was quite thick

As pointed out, it’d have to be several times the mass of the shroud itself. If that were the case, the face would be invisible under the much.

34 posted on 04/14/2004 1:41:26 PM PDT by orionblamblam

To: orionblamblam
Ben Witherington, a well-known, very conservative and respected biblical scholar, wrote that the carbon 14 tests are now significantly disputed. He cited the same material as presented by EternalHope. Until recently, that was the going hypothesis. You are right in saying that the mass of bioplastic would need to be significant. You said more by mass but actual calculations say by as much as 60% because the bioplastic has a moving average age.The scorching proposal that high temperatures from a fire in 1532, which damaged and nearly destroyed the Shroud, enhanced the mix of radioactive carbon 14 and stable carbon 12 isotopes in the cloth is dubious but not completely eliminated. But experiments to test this idea have not been promising. Any change caused by the fire would likely be too trivial to be significant.The data was not refuted until recently, and in the best of scientific method, not until a complete analysis could be completed. Even Harry Gove, inventor of AMS carbon 14 tools, was open to the possibility pending full investigation.The evidence by numerous researchers including Bryan Walsh, M. Sue Benford and Joseph Marino, Anna Arnoldi of the University of Milan and Raymond N. Rogers, a Fellow of the University of California Los Alamos National Laboratory is now complete. Ron Hatfield of Beta Analytic has even estimated from the composite data that a 1st century date is a reasonable estimate.Is the cloth really first century? I think so. Other evidence suggests it is. New carbon 14 testing would be a good solution, but it is one that I don’t think the Turin authorities are about to entertain in the foreseeable future.

I really do believe that it is a burial cloth of a first century crucifixion victim. And if it is, it is easy and reasonable to infer that it is Jesus’ burial cloth. It completely agrees with the biblical narratives of the Passion. Its fuzzy history is better than most history we have for an object such as the Shroud. I am convinced, and not lightly so.

The fact is there may be some bioplastic material and there may be some ion transfer due to the fire, but they are probably a minor factor. The reality is that the radiocarbon dating labs did not test the Shroud but a medieval patch.


35 posted on 04/14/2004 2:20:38 PM PDT by shroudie

To: shroudie
> The scorching proposal that high temperatures from a fire in 1532, which damaged and nearly destroyed the Shroud, enhanced the mix of radioactive carbon 14 and stable carbon 12 isotopes in the cloth is dubious …It’ silly, is what it is. Fire does not effect isotopic ratios of carbon.> I really do believe that it is a burial cloth of a first century crucifixion victim.Then that victim was an alien, because the shroud does not conform to human geometry when actual attempts to fold replicas around humans or humaniform manikens have been attempted. It just doesn’t work.
36 posted on 04/14/2004 2:56:02 PM PDT by orionblamblam

To: orionblamblam
Then that victim was an alien, because the shroud does not conform to human geometry when actual attempts to fold replicas around humans or humaniform manikens have been attempted. It just doesn’t work.Besides, it had to be an alien. Who else would glow-in-the-dark inside a shroud?
37 posted on 04/14/2004 3:11:09 PM PDT by Alex Murphy

To: orionblamblam
You wrote: “It’ silly, is what it is. Fire does not effect isotopic ratios of carbon.”You meant heat, right? In a fire, definate contamination from movement of gaseous products can change the overall molecular level mixture. The heat does not change isotopic ratios of carbon; on that point you are right. But what is the point. It is trivial and not the cause of the carbon 14 error.As for alien: hmm. Do you know how the image was formed? As we do not know, and as we do not presume a contact mechanism, I don’t know how we can simply say it does not conform. The image does definately appear to be collimated. I don’t know how the image was formed, and like you I agree that it does not conform to human geometry — but only for contact mechanisms. I am quite certain it was not faked.
38 posted on 04/14/2004 3:13:52 PM PDT by shroudie

To: shroudie
> In a fire, definate contamination from movement of gaseous products can change the overall molecular level mixture.Errrr…. no. A piece of linen on fire still only has it’s own carbon. Fire does nothign to it, with the exception of turning some of it to carbon dioxide, and this is doen at an equal ratio regardless of isotope. Any carbon dioxide in the air nearby *remains* carbon dioxide at any fire temperature likely to be found Way Back Then.> Do you know how the image was formed?Artificially seems by far the most likely explanation.> I am quite certain it was not faked.

I have this bridge…

39 posted on 04/14/2004 4:30:20 PM PDT by orionblamblam

To: orionblamblam
Look, if you want to believe it is a fake, go ahead. You said earlier that it was painted. Fine. The fact that there is no paint in the images makes this highly suspect. But believe what you want. But do get your facts straight if you wish to try to convince others. And, do a bit of reading on the carbon 14 problems.http://shroudstory.com/faq-carbon-14.htmhttp://shroudstory.com/faq-fakery.htmhttp://shroudstory.com/faq-chemistry.htmShroudie
40 posted on 04/14/2004 5:49:59 PM PDT by shroudie (http://shroudstory.com)

To: shroudie; orionblamblam
Shroudie, this guy is not looking for an answer… he has it. He chooses to ignore the evidence right in front of his face and prefers to continue to attack already discounted and discarded theories just as Joe Nickell does.My post should have layed out the evidence so that anyone on FreeRepublic can see it plainly. The C14 samples are pictured and the OBVIOUS change in material from one side to the other can be plainly seen. The FACTS have been laid out for him as well as others but he CHOOSES not to look. Therefore his position is willfull and fearful. He does not WANT to see the facts in front of his face, so he WILL not.He is afraid that the facts might invalidate his world view because he cannot refute them. Since he can’t refute the latest “Flawed Sample” proof, he falls back on the “Fire Changed Carbon” or “Bioplastic Coating” theories that CAN be refuted and ignores any attempt to agree with him about the old theories and point out the newly proved fact.You warn him about the elephant in the corner of the room and he says “What elephant?” looking everywhere but at the elephant infested corner.This mind is not only closed, it is hermetically sealed.
41 posted on 04/14/2004 9:57:59 PM PDT by Swordmaker (This tagline shut down for renovations and repairs. Re-open June of 2001.)

To: orionblamblam
In a fire, definate contamination from movement of gaseous products can change the overall molecular level mixture.Errrr…. no. A piece of linen on fire still only has it’s own carbon.Errr, Orionblamblam, were you aware the fire under discussion was not JUST the shroud burning all by itself, but included a wooden cathedral, the silver chased reliquary, the draperies draped over the reliquary, books, wooden statues ALL of which contributed carbon from their medieval grown source plants in the form of soot that COULD have infused the linen of the Shroud. With sufficient heat, carbon from those sources could be included with the sample that was later Carbon 14 tested.That being said, there IS NO EVIDENCE on the Shroud of soot from those sources and certainly not in sufficient quantity to skew the C14 date by 1200 years.At the submicroscopic level there is evidence of the Bio-plastic coating on individual fibers of the Shroud’s threads. However, it TOO is insufficient in quantity to skew the date that much. Both soot and germ poop together are insufficient to skew the date by that much.Both of these theories of why the Carbon 14 dates were so out of sync with the other scholarship are irrelevant!


The impeccable work done by the three C14 laboratories was doomed to failure from the moment the agreed testing protocols were discarded (literally at the last moment) in favor of taking the sample from the ONE area on the Shroud almost all scientists involved in the project agreed should be avoided. The labs were given samples that were not exemplar with the main Shroud material in that it contained added a large percentage of contemporary FRENCH linen rewoven into the Shroud linen in either 1535 or 1552 by the Nuns of Poor Clare when they were repairing damage done to the Shroud over the years.

It is so obvious you can even SEE the change from one type of linen to the other in the pretest photos of the actual tested samples in Reply 30 which presents a summary of the evidence.

Orionblamblam, why don’t you open your eyes and your mind and look at the evidence instead of just beating a dead horse. [shroudie, I know what I said in my last post… but I had to try… :^) ]

42 posted on 04/14/2004 10:28:54 PM PDT by Swordmaker (This tagline shut down for renovations and repairs. Re-open June of 2001.)

To: Swordmaker
I fully understand. If he wishes to believe as he does, that is fine with me. If he wishes to shape reality to his “faithview” that is also fine. I don’t respect his total misrepresentation of evidence to others.
43 posted on 04/15/2004 4:24:41 AM PDT by shroudie (http://shroudstory.com)

To: shroudie
You and I agree. That is why I continue to counter those who continually spout the Joe Nickell line of completely outdated “factoids” and why I maintain the Shroud of Turin Ping list.So many people claim to be of a “scientific mind” yet have theirs completely closed… and in fact have latched onto one of the scientists like McCrone who have completely misrepresented what they have found and ignoring EVERYTHING else. Scientific dogma is worse than any Religious dogma around because the practitioners claim to be open-minded.
44 posted on 04/15/2004 8:31:48 AM PDT by Swordmaker (This tagline shut down for renovations and repairs. Re-open June of 2001.)

To: Swordmaker
Reuters is now carrying the story. Of course they mention the carbon 14 testing and ignore the findings that dispute it. I guess they don’t read National Geographic. But the main point of the story is the challenge the second face poses to skeptics and debunkers. Overall a plus.http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=scienceNews&storyID=4835816&section=newsExpect another explosion of data soon when Rogers’ peer-reviewed article appears (so as not to suggest that I am stating anything out of school, National Geographic has announced it).
45 posted on 04/15/2004 8:52:06 AM PDT by shroudie (http://shroudstory.com)

To: Swordmaker
> the fire under discussion was not JUST the shroud burning all by itself, but included a wooden cathedral, the silver chased reliquary, the draperies draped over the reliquary, books, wooden statues ALL of which contributed carbonThey could contribute carbon only in two forms:
1: Carbon dioxide, which would not stick;
2: Soot, which would be cleaned off.The mass of any soot that *could* become “infused” into the linen is far less than the mass of the linen itself.> With sufficient heat, carbon from those sources could be included with the sample that was later Carbon 14 tested.Only if the heat was sufficient to turn the linen itself to ash.

why don’t you open your eyes and your mind and look at the evidence instead of just beating a dead horse

The “dead horse” here is the idea that a shroud that appeared in the middle ages, an era of a thriving market in religious forgeries, was somehow the One True Shroud Of the Theoretical Jesus.

46 posted on 04/15/2004 1:22:20 PM PDT by orionblamblam

To: Swordmaker
> Since he can’t refute the latest “Flawed Sample” proofIt’s hardly proof. There are patches that MIGHT be more recent. But even if so… how much more recent?The obvious conclusion to draw from any such thing as the shroud is Forgery. Forgeries are far more common than True Miracles; consequently, it is up to the believers in miracles to provide their evidence that the shroud is anything more than clever art. So far, that has not been done.Hell, for all we know, the shroud could well be 1st century… taken from a burial, sold to an artist, who then painted on it. Given that there is no blood on the shroud but there is iron oxide and other pigments…Occam’s Razor.
47 posted on 04/15/2004 1:27:45 PM PDT by orionblamblam

To: orionblamblam
The obvious conclusion to draw from any such thing as the shroud is Forgery. Forgeries are far more common than True Miracles; consequently, it is up to the believers in miracles to provide their evidence that the shroud is anything more than clever art. So far, that has not been done.Actually, it is not up to anyone to prove to you that it is real. There is ample evidence that it is not been proven to be a fake and no evidence that it is. There is significant evidence to make a strong case that it is a first century burial cloth. As for miracles, we need only concentrate here on the formation of the images. Much work is being done to show that they might be the result of a perfectly natural phenomenon. Of course, if they are miraculously induced images it is unlikely that science could prove that.Hell, for all we know, the shroud could well be 1st century… taken from a burial, sold to an artist, who then painted on it. Given that there is no blood on the shroud but there is iron oxide and other pigments…Good stretch in thinking. (Oh, did you miss the point about their being blood and no concentrations of pigments or iron oxide to form an image). Now for that to be so we must assume that the cloth was separated from the body it contained. We must, of course, consider Jewish attitudes regarding blood. Now you might develop your theory a bit more to think that Romans unwrapped the body or maybe they had some of their Syrian slaves do it.Occam’s Razor you say. Are you for real?theortical Jesus ??? I guess if you put no stock in history you probably put no stock in science either. Maybe this explains where you are coming from.
48 posted on 04/15/2004 1:55:15 PM PDT by shroudie (http://shroudstory.com)

To: shroudie
The lengths to which atheists and agnostics will go to deny that this is Christ is laughable. If the image is on both sides, then that is compelling evidence. I’m anxious to see what comes of this.
49 posted on 04/15/2004 2:19:39 PM PDT by plain talk

To: polemikos
I am one “fundamental” ( I prefer evangelical) who believes that the Shroud of Turin is the Genuine Grave Cloth of Jesus Christ.And that the image thereon was a result of the Physics of the Resurrection.
50 posted on 04/15/2004 2:41:19 PM PDT by happygrl (this war is for all the marbles…)

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-207 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Courtesy of: FP

Ace Related News :

Read More at: Source 

Related articles

Enhanced by Zemanta

#acehistory2research, #acehistorynews, #history2research, #chicago-sun-times, #christianity, #institute-of-physics, #jesus, #john-dominic-crossan, #marcus-borg, #middle-ages, #turin-shroud, #washington-times

Welcome Everyone to `Ace History News 2014 ‘ Please Comment or Post to be Approved ‘

#AceHistoryNews says good evening from my UK home and to all my friends and readers of my news articles and posts, well just so you can write your news as it happens, and chat on the go.

` Follow my news and views and post in the box’

Ace History 2 Research News

It is not just 140 characters and you can post a link to a video or promote your group, charity, idea or really anything.

Anyone wanting to post a video best way is copy and paste the short URL from theYouTube site and post.

Español: Logo Vectorial de YouTube

Español: Logo Vectorial de YouTube (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Add your own tags and links and enjoy chatting to fellow bloggers.

I ask for you to observe that we do not use it as a spam area, should this happen it will be closed to everyone and l will email those people ,to be the only users.

Share or Tweet at @AceHistoryNews with #AH2RN2104 

Thank you Editor (Ace News Group)

Ace News Services 2014 – http://wp.me/165ui
Ace Finance News 2014 – http://wp.me/zTwj
Ace Food News 2014 – http://wp.me/2QGMH
Ace History News 2014 – http://wp.me/48Dp0
Ace British History News 2014 – http://wp.me/3QKto
Ace Sales & Services 2014 – http://wp.me/2y0H0
Ace Friends News 2014 – http://wp.me/4kIzR

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

#acehistory2research, #acehistorynews, #ace-news-group, #cut-copy-and-paste, #facebook, #friends, #google, #online-communities, #share-or-tweet-acehistorynews-with-ah2rn2014, #social-networking, #tumblr, #twitter, #url-shortening, #wikipedia, #youtube

` Treasure Hunter turns ` Canadian History ‘on its head by finding 16th Century Shilling ‘

#AceHistoryNews say an amateur treasure hunter with a hand-held metal detector has turned Canadian history on its head after finding a 16th century shilling buried in clay on the shores of Vancouver Island.

Coat of arms of Victoria

Coat of arms of Victoria (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The 435-year-old coin discovered in western-most Canada has rekindled a theory that a British explorer made a secret voyage here two centuries before it was discovered by Spanish sailors.

Official historical records show the Spanish were the first Europeans to set foot in what is now Canada’s British Columbia province in 1774, followed four years later by British Royal Navy Captain James Cook.

Retired security systems installer Bruce Campbell found the coin in mid-December, along with a rare 1891 Canadian nickel, a 1960’s dime and penny from 1900.

“I was getting fat and tired of watching TV,” he said about what got him into his hobby, surrounded in his Victoria, British Columbia home by a trove of adventure novels and a few dug up treasures.

He never imagined, he said, stirring up controversy with his latest find.

According to conspiracy theorists and some historians, the silver coin (produced between 1551 and 1553) is evidence that English explorer Sir Francis Drake travelled as far north as Canada’s Pacific Coast during an expedition to California in 1579, in search of the famed Northwest Passage.

But he covered it up at the behest of Queen Elizabeth I, who supposedly wished to avoid confrontation over the new territory with Spain.



Enhanced by Zemanta

#acehistory2research, #ilovehistoryandresearch-2, #british-columbia, #bruce-campbell, #canada, #elizabeth-i-of-england, #francis-drake, #james-cook, #northwest-passage, #vancouver-island

“Freemasonry and its Christian Roots”

What Is Freemasonry?


Freemasonry Research Links

Can someone simultaneously be a Mason and a Christian?

 Let’s find out…

freemason-1Freemasonry is a religion.

“Every Masonic Lodge is a temple of religion, and its teachings are instructions in … the universal, eternal, immutable religion….” Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, by Albert Pike, Washington D.C., 1958, pp. 213, 219.

English: Portrait of Albert Pike.

English: Portrait of Albert Pike. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

“[Masonry is] … the custodian and depository (since Enoch) of the great philosophical and religious truths, unknown to the world at large….” Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, by Albert Pike, Washington D.C., 1958, p. 210.

“Without this religious element it would scarcely be worthy of cultivation by the wise and good….” An Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, by Albert G. Mackey, 1921, pp. 618-619.

“…a worship in which all good men may unite…” by Joseph Newton

“…a religious institution…” by Albert Mackey

“Masonry is the universal religion only because and sl long as it embraces all religions” by J.D. Buck

Freemasonry utilizes deceit to hide the truth from 1st through 29th degree Masons; and Freemasonry’s god is a triune deity called JoaBulOn which stands for Jehovah, Baal, and Osiris.

“Masonry, like all the religions, all the Mysteries, Hermeticism and Alchemy, conceals its secrets from all except the Adepts and Sages, or the Elect, and uses false explanations and misinterpretations of its symbols to mislead those who deserve only to be misled; to conceal the Truth, which it calls light, from them…. Truth is not for those that are unworthy….” Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, by Albert Pike, Washington D.C., 1958, p 104-105.

“The Blue Degrees are but the outer court…of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the [lower] Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them, but it is intended that he shall imagine he understands them.” Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, by Albert Pike, Washington D.C., 1958, p. 819.

God is known as “the nameless one of a hundred names.” Henry Wilson Coil, “A Comprehensive View of Freemasonry,” Richmond: Macoy Publishing, 1973, p. 192.

“God is equally present with the pious Hindu in the temple, the Jew in the synagogue, the Mohammedan in the mosque, and the Christian in the church.” Albert Mackey, “Mackey’s Revised Encyclopedia of Freemasonry,” Richmond: Macoy Publishing, 1966, 1:409-410.

Gob ac

Gob ac (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Freemasonry is not Christian. If it’s not Christian, but it is a religion (which Masons have confirmed above), then it by definition conflicts with Christianity. Thus, logically, one can’t simultaneously be a Christian and a Mason.

Freemasonry is not Christianity … it admits men of every creed within its hospitable bosom….”An Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, by Albert G. Mackey, 1921, pp. 618-619.

“[Masonry] … sees in Moses … in Confucius and Zoroaster, in Jesus of Nazareth, and in [Mohammed] great teachers of morality and eminent reformers….” Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, by Albert Pike, Washington D.C., 1958, pp. 277, 525.

Stained glass at St John the Baptist's Anglica...

Stained glass at St John the Baptist’s Anglican Church http://www.stjohnsashfield.org.au, Ashfield, New South Wales. Illustrates Jesus’ description of himself “I am the Good Shepherd” (from the Gospel of John, chapter 10, verse 11). This version of the image shows the detail of his face. The memorial window is also captioned: “To the Glory of God and in Loving Memory of William Wright. Died 6th November, 1932. Aged 70 Yrs.” (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Other Freemasonry vs. Christianity problems:

The secrets of Masonry are protected by the most vile of blood oaths, every one of which is an offence to Jesus.

The name and nature of the Masonic deity is an offense to the one true God. It is taught in the Royal Arch degree that Masonry draws its teachings and powers from three great teachers and Gods. The combined deity is represented as a three-headed god, whose name is JoaBulOn, which stands for Jehovah, Baal, and Osiris. Every time Masons pronounce that name in the Masonic prayer of worship, they have defiled the Holy name of God.

In the Shrine, the initiate swears a terrible binding oath in the name of “Allah, the God of our Fathers.” Mohammed was a false prophet and Allah is a god who has destroyed nation after nation of his followers. The red Fez itself was originally a badge of honor worn only by a Muslim who had actually killed a Christian and dipped his cap in the martyr’s blood.

At the Apron lecture, the Mason is told that the lambskin apron will be his covering at the great white throne judgment of God. The prayer and dedicatory sounds great, but there is only one Great white throne judgment and it is the judgment of the damned (Rev. 20:11).

The Lodge promises godhood through the Lodge, the usurping of Christ‘s Melchizedek Priesthood, the Holy communion of the dead, drinking wine from the carved out top of a human skull, etc.

Characteristics of Orthodox Christianity:

  1. Acceptance of the Bible as the inspired, infallible, authoritative Word of God.
  2. God became flesh in the physical man Jesus.
  3. Christ atoned for man’s sin through his death on the cross.
  4. Christ arose in bodily form from the grave, conquering death and proving he is God.

Galatians 1:6-12; 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20,21; Revelations 22:18; Deuteronomy 13:1-10

Freemasonry is incompatible with these 4 characteristics of orthodox Christianity. Therefore one cannot simultaneously be a Mason and a Christian. Christians that are Masons must leave the Lodge and repudiate all oaths or suffer the rejection of Christ and the judgment of God’s Word.

High degrees of Freemasonry

High degrees of Freemasonry (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Masonic Doctrine:

Masonic Doctrine on Jesus Christ “Jesus was just a man. He was one of the “exemplars,” one of the great men of the past, but not divine and certainly not the only means of redemption of lost mankind. He was on a level with other great men of the past like Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras and Mohammed. His life and legend were no different from that of Krishna, the Hindu god. He is “the son of Joseph,” not the Son of God.”

Masonic Doctrine of the Bible “The bible of the Christian is merely one of the “holy books” of man, no better than the Koran, the Hindu scriptures or the books of the Chinese and Greek philosophers. It is not to be taken literally, for its true meaning is esoteric (hidden from all but a small number of “enlightened,” elite leaders); the literal, obvious meaning is only for the ignorant masses. It is right to remove references to Jesus in passages used in the ritual. Masonry, contrary to popular belief, is NOT based upon the Bible. Masonry is actually based on the Kabala (Cabala), a medieval book of magic and mysticism.”

Masonic Doctrine of Prayer “Prayers are to be offered to “Deity,” to “The Great Architect of the Universe” (GAOTU), and are to be “universal” in nature, so as not to offend anyone and so as to apply to everyone. Prayer is NEVER to be made “in Jesus name,” or “in Christ’s name”, to do so would offend a Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. If a Worshipful Master allows prayers to be made in Jesus’ name, his lodge can be closed and its charter revoked by the Grand Lodge of his state.”

Masonic Doctrine of God “God is, basically, whatever we perceive Him to be; our idea or concept of God becomes our God. Usually referred to with the vague and general term, “Deity,” the god of Masonry can be the one of our choosing, spoken of generically as “The Great Architect of the Universe.” However, those who pursue the higher studies in Masonry learn that God is the force of nature, specifically the Sun with its life-giving powers. The “advanced, enlightened ones,” the adepts at the top, this nature worship is understood as the worship of the generative principles (i.e. the sex organs), particularly the phallus. Human Nature is also worshipped by some as “Deity,” as are Knowledge and Reason. Since Masonry is a revival of the ancient pagan mystery religions, its god can also be said to be Nature, with its fertility (sex) gods and goddesses representing the Sun and Moon (in Egypt, Osiris and Isis).”

Masonic Doctrine of Satan: “Satan, as an enemy of God and his Kingdom, as an evil power seeking to tempt, deceive and destroy, does not exist. Mankind has merely “supposed” this. The usual Christian perception of Satan is merely a distortion of the truth about Lucifer, the “Light Bearer,” who is actually good and the instrument of liberty, but generally misunderstood and maligned.”

Masonic Doctrine on Exclusiveness “The “light” of Freemasonry, its “secrets” and its pathway to “perfection” are only for the elite few initiated into its knowledge and wisdom. Excluded are women, Negroes, the poor (who haven’t the money with which to pay), the cripples, blind and deaf who can’t perform the recognition signs (or see and hear them), and the feeble-minded who can’t receive the teachings or be trusted to protect them. All such people, including the wives, the daughters and some of the sons of Masons, are considered “profane” (unclean, unworthy) and can never be anything else. No references are required here for it is common knowledge and all of the above confirms and establishes it.”

Masonic Doctrine of Secrecy “Secrecy is the essence of Masonry, necessary for its very existence, and protected by blood oaths of mayhem and murder.”

Masonic Doctrine of Blood Oaths Blood Oaths on penalty of mayhem and violent death are administered at the end of initiation into all Masonic degrees, binding the initiate to protect the “secrets” of the degrees. These oaths of obligation (usually called just “obligation”) are considered unbreakable, and are (collectively) the thing that makes a man a Mason. In this way, these oaths are the cornerstone of Masonry.

Masonic Doctrine of Seeking and Finding “Masonry is a never-ending search for “light,” always promised but never quite realized.”

Masonic Doctrine of Truthfulness “It is right to lie, if necessary, to protect the “secrets” of the Lodge, or to protect another Mason by concealing his wrongdoing. It can even be “right” to deliberately deceive sincere Masons seeking to learn the lessons and “secrets” of Masonry.”

Masonic Doctrine of Spiritual Light and Darkness “All “profane” people (non-Masons), including godly, genuine Christians, are wretched, blind and lost in complete spiritual darkness. Only initiation into the degrees and mysteries of Masonry will bring them out of darkness and “into the light,” cleansing them and imparting new life.”

Masonic Doctrine of Redemption “Redemption is a matter of self-improvement, morality, and good works, including obedience to the Mason’s obligation and all higher Masonic authorities. Faith in the atonement of Jesus has nothing to do with it; it is rather a matter of enlightenment, step by step, which comes with initiation into the Masonic degrees and their mysteries.”

Shaw, Jim & McKenney, Tom, 1988, A Deadly Deception, Huntington House Publishers

Repugnant Masonic (and old Mormon Temple Ceremony) Oaths

1. Masons bind themselves to the penalty of having their throats cut from ear to ear
2. Masons bind themselves to the penalty of having their hearts plucked out of their chests
3. Masons bind themselves to the penalty of having their bodies disemboweled.

Masonic-ob (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Eight Problems With Freemasonry

1. The prevalent use of offensive concepts, titles, and terms such as “Worshipful Master” for the leaders of the lodge; references to their buildings as “mosques,” “shrines,” or “temples”; and the use of such words as “Abaddon” and Jah-Bul-On,” the so-called secret name of God. To many, these terms are not only offensive but sacrilegious.

2. The use of archaic, offensive rituals and so-called “bloody oaths” or “obligations,” among those being that promised by the Entered Apprentice: [not listed for lack of space] or that of the Fellow Craft degree: [not listed for lack of space] Or that of the Master Mason: [not listed for lack of space] Or that of other advanced degrees with required rituals considered by many to be pagan and incompatible with Christian faith and practice. Even though these oaths, obligations and rituals may or may not be taken seriously by the initiate, it is inappropriate for a Christian to “sincerely promise and swear,” with a hand on the Holy Bible, any such promises or oaths, or to participate in any such pagan rituals.

3. The recommended readings in pursuance of advanced degrees, of religions and philosophies, which are undeniably pagan and/or occultic, such as much of the writings of Albert Pike, Albert Mackey, Manly Hall, Rex Hutchins, W.L. Wilmhurst and other such authors; along with their works, such as Morals and Dogma, A Bridge to Light, An Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and The Meaning of Masonry.

4. The reference to the Bible placed on the altar of the lodge as the “furniture of the lodge,” comparing it to the square and compass rather than giving it the supreme place in the lodge.

5. The prevalent use of the term “light” which some may understand as a reference to salvation rather than knowledge or truth.

6. The implication that salvation may be attained by one’s good works, implicit in the statement found in some Masonic writings that “Masonry is continually reminded of that purity of life and conduct which is necessary to obtain admittance into the Celestial Lodge above where the Supreme Architect of the Universe presides.” (Louisiana Monitor, page 79)

Even though many Masons understand that the “purity of life and conduct” can only be achieved through faith in Jesus Christ, others may be led to believe they can earn salvation by living a pure life with good conduct.

7. The heresy of Universalism (the belief all people will eventually be saved), which permeates the writings of many Masonic authors, which is a doctrine inconsistent with New Testament teaching.

8. The refusal of most lodges (although not all) to admit for membership African-Americans.

As reported by the Southern Baptist Home Missions Board,
SBC, 1350 Spring Street NW, Atlanta, GA 30367-5601 (1993)

Masonic Quotations
“We may not call in question the propriety of this organization; if we would be Masons we must yield private judgment. ‘To the law and to the testimony—if any man walk not by this rule it is because there is no light in him.”’—Pierson’s Traditions of Freemasonry, p. 30.”That this surrender of free-will to Masonic authority is absolute (within the scope of the landmarks of the order) and perpetual, may be inferred from an examination of the emblem (the shoe or sandal) which is used to enforce this lesson of resignation. The esotery of the Masonic rituals gives the fullest assurance of this: “once a Mason always a Mason” is an aphorism in our literature conveying an undeniable truth.”—Morris’ Dictionary of Freemasonry, p. 29.

“A Mason should know how to obey those who are set over him, however inferior they may be in worldly rank; or condition.” —Macoy’s Masonic Monitor, p. 14.

“Disobedience and want of respect to Masonic superiors is an offense for which the transgressor subjects himself to punishment.”—Mackey’s Masonic Jurisprudence, p. 511.

“Under the head of Discipline is given a catalogue of fifteen prime classes of un-Masonic acts, of which this is one. It is so subversive of the groundwork of Masonry, in which obedience is most strongly inculcated, that the Mason who disobeys subjects himself to severe penalties.”— Morris’ Dictionary, pp. 91,92

“As a presiding officer the Master is possessed or extraordinary powers which belong to the presiding officer of no other association” Mackey’s Masonic Jurisprudence, p. 344.

“The powers and privileges of the Master of a lodge are by no means limited in extent.”-Chase’s Digest of Masonic Law, page 380.

“An affirmation is not equivalent to an oath in Masonry however it may be in common and is not legitimate in the working of the lodge.”-Ibid. p.13.

The Covenant is irrevocable. Even though a person may be suspended or expelled; though he may withdraw from the Lodge, journey into countries where Masons cannot be found, or become a subject of despotic governments that persecute, or a communicant of bigoted churches that denounce Masonry, he cannot cast off or nullify his Masonic covenant; No law of the land can affect it-no anathema of the church weaken it. It is irrevocable.” Webb’s Freemasons’ Monitor, p. 240.

Note: This accounts for many strange and mysterious proceedings in our would-be courts of justice and in the churches. NO law of the land (that is, civil law,) can even affect this lodge oath or covenant. No anathema of the church (that is, divine law), can weaken it.

Is it any wonder that criminals go scot-free when the sheriff that impanels the jury, enough of the jurors impaneled to bring in a divided verdict, enough witnesses drummed up to make the evidence appear contradictory, the attorneys of the prosecution and of the defense, and the judge on the bench, are irrevocably bound to the prisoner at the bar as sworn brethren, by an obligation considered paramount to all others, civil or divine?

Is it anything strange that there is trouble in the church when the members are bound up, by this strong covenant, with saloon-keepers, irreverent scoffers, and other evil-minded men, in sworn brotherhood?

Can a man simultaneously be a Christian and a Freemason?
The Square and Compasses. The symbols employed...

The Square and Compasses. The symbols employed in Co-Freemasonry are mostly identical with those in other orders of Freemasonry. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A Short History of Freemasonry

Teachings and practices of the secret fraternal order known as the Free and Accepted Masons.

There are 4.75 million members worldwide, mostly in the U.S. and other English-speaking countries, and no central authority. Its ideals include fellowship, religious toleration, and political compromise. Drawing on guild practices of medieval stonemasons, the order’s first Grand Lodge was organized in London (1717).

In America, Masons were active in the Revolution and continued as a force in later politics. In Europe, they included Voltaire, Goethe, Haydn, Mazzini, and Garibaldi. Freemasonry’s identification with 19th-century. bourgeois liberalism led to reaction, e.g., in the U.S., the Anti-masonic Party; its anticlericalism brought the hostility of the Roman Catholic Church. Totalitarian states have always suppressed Freemasonry. Masons have a complex systems of rites and degrees, subsidiary organizations for women and children, and lodges noted for their parades and fraternal gatherings.


The term fraternal society, used interchangeably with fraternal order, refers to voluntary associations that feature elaborate secret initiations. Some orders provide a simple form of life insurance; nearly all exclude women. Nowadays the most important fraternal societies are the Freemasons, Independent Order of Odd Fellows, Knights of Pythias, and the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elk.

Fraternal orders were once a significant – some observers believed characteristic – aspect of American society. Alexis de Tocqueville was struck by the “immense assemblage” of voluntary associations, including fraternal orders, in antebellum America. Henry David Thoreau complained that America was “dwindling” into a nation of “odd-fellows.”

The origins of fraternal orders are obscured by a tangle of implausible legends and dubious histories. Nineteenth-century Freemasons claimed to be heirs of a tradition extending back to the founding of King Solomon’s temple.

Historians of the Knights of Pythias made a case that Pythagoras was the first Pythian, despite the awkward fact that the order apparently had been founded in Washington, D.C., in 1864. The Improved Order of Red Men, established in the 1830s, claimed descent from the Sons of Liberty of the American Revolution. Without doubt, the Freemasons were entitled to claim that they were the nation’s oldest order. But contrary to the claims of some enthusiasts, Freemasonry originated in London in the early 1700s as a stonemasons’ trade guild.

The order soon became a club for tradesmen, merchants, and a few much-celebrated noblemen. In the 1730s and 1740s a handful of Masonic lodges were established in coastal towns in America. Although these lodges were dominated by a mercantile elite, some tradesmen were admitted, such as Benjamin Franklin who, as a young printer, became grand master of Pennsylvania Freemasons in 1734.

Freemasonry became associated with patriotism during the Revolution, largely because George Washington and many of his generals belonged to the order. This patriotic association was strengthened when Washington took his oath of office as president upon a Masonic Bible.

Despite the order’s association with the Founding Fathers and its profession of universal brotherhood, American officials refused to recognize the legitimacy of black Freemasons, who in 1775 had been admitted to a lodge composed mostly of Irish soldiers stationed in Boston harbor. The leader of the blacks, Prince Hall, subsequently received a dispensation from English officials and established African Lodge No. 459. Black Freemasonry, usually called Prince Hall Freemasonry, became popular among middle-class blacks.

During the early 1800s the number of Masonic lodges multiplied rapidly. The order especially appealed to an emerging middle class of lawyers, commercial farmers, and independent tradesmen, many of whom were growing impatient with orthodox religion and established political elites. Tensions between Masonic leaders and the conservative ministry smoldered until 1826, when a disgruntled ex-Freemason, William Morgan, announced his intention of publishing the secret Masonic rituals. Morgan was abducted by Freemasons and was never seen again. What happened to him has never been fully explained.

Twenty-six Masons were indicted on murder and related charges. Only six came to trial; four were convicted of conspiracy and sentenced to terms ranging from several months to two years in jail. When it became known that many of the jurors and prosecutors were Masons, as was Governor DeWitt Clinton of New York, a coalition of ministers and opportunistic politicians formed to suppress the order. The Anti-Masonic party became the first significant third-party in American politics.

Though short-lived as a political movement, Anti-Masonry generated intense public pressure and forced thousands of members to renounce the order and hundreds of lodges to relinquish their charters. By best estimate membership declined from 100,000 in the mid-1820s to 40,000 a decade later.

Many renouncing Freemasons flocked into the Odd Fellows. Odd-Fellowship originated in late-eighteenth-century Great Britain among industrial workers who sought to mitigate the effects of the Industrial Revolution and the English Poor Laws. The order assisted members in dire circumstances and provided them a decent burial. In 1819 English immigrants established the first American lodge of Odd Fellows in Baltimore. During its early decades the order met in taverns and functioned as little more than a drinking society. But the influx of ex-Freemasons during the 1830s and 1840s completely transformed American Odd-Fellowship. This “new and more refined” group, as one nineteenth-century historian described them, gained control of the order, raised fees beyond what most workers could afford, banned liquor from meetings, launched a program to build “temples,” and wrote and performed elaborate successions of initiatory rituals.

By the 1850s Freemasonry, having just begun to recover from the Morgan debacle, adopted a similar program. During the last third of the nineteenth century, fraternal orders, featuring reform and ritual, proliferated among the urban middle classes. By 1900 there were more than three hundred orders; total fraternal membership exceeded 6 million. Ambitious clerks, businessmen, and politicians used the orders to cultivate contacts and establish ties with clients and like-minded people elsewhere. Others found satisfaction in the exotic rituals, which provided a religious experience antithetical to liberal Protestantism and a masculine “family” vastly different from the one in which most members had been raised.

Partly to attenuate women’s complaints about the secrecy, the cost of membership, and the time members spent away from home, most orders supported creation of ladies’ auxiliaries. The Odd-Fellows established the Daughters of Rebekah (1851), and Freemasons, the Order of the Eastern Star (1869).

Early in the twentieth century, however, many young middle-class men, preferring the recreational clubs and service organizations such as Rotary and Kiwanis, refused to follow their fathers into the lodge. Robert and Helen Lynd, in their study of Muncie, Indiana, in the 1920s, reported that “the great days of the lodges have vanished.” Aggressive recruitment policies and relaxed admission standards temporarily masked the weakness of most lodges.

But the onset of the Great Depression brought about the collapse of the institutional foundations of the fraternal movement as members could no longer afford to pay dues and thousands of lodges, unable to meet mortgage payments, went bankrupt. The major orders together lost nearly a million members; hundreds of others passed out of existence entirely.

After World War II, social activities, philanthropy, and community service took precedence over the rituals, which were abbreviated or occasionally abandoned. Most orders languished and increasingly became identified in the public mind with the televised antics of Jackie Gleason’s Ralph Kramden, member of the fictional Loyal Order of Raccoons. In recent decades, however, Freemasonry has gained many new adherents, especially from among white-collar workers and immigrants.

Mark C. Carnes, Secret Ritual and Manhood in Victorian America (1989);

Dorothy Ann Lipson, Freemasonry in Federalist Connecticut, 1789-1835 (1977).


American political party founded to counter the supposed political influence of Freemasonry. It arose in Western  New York state after the disappearance (1826) of William Morgan, a former Mason who had written a book purporting to reveal Masonic secrets. Freemaso