Sunday, 27 June 2010

Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU Dictatorship

     I recently came across the website of  'Brussels Journal', in which was an article, published in February 2006, entitled 'Former Soviet Dissident Warns for EU Dictatorship'. The article deals with an interview between reporter Paul Belien, and Soviet dissident, Vladimir Bukovsky, aged 63 years, then living in the UK. Although this interview was more than four years ago, Vladimir Bukovsky  has proved surprisingly  accurate in his views. His certain conviction of economic collapse within the EU is exactly what is happening today, and his dire warning on a Euro police force (Europol) with increasingly unlimited and authoritarian legal power, is reflected  in the manner of the  recent heavy-handed police operation in Belgium, aimed at the collective hierarchy of the Catholic Church in that country. This is not to suggest that police action was unecessary, but the manner and scale of the operation, must surely come under scrutiny. Increasing legal prohibitions on free-speech,  increasing state control over parent's rights,  'political correctness' rather than 'common-sense'  in civil rights and equality laws, and much new European legislation, provide additional incentives for a large and powerful Europol.

Mr Bukovsky's view simply put, is that the EU was formulated, designed and intended, to emulate the old Soviet Union. This opinion might appear old hat or wildly eccentric to many readers, but what really strikes home is the accuracy of Mr Bukovsky's forecast. I have been given permission by Thomas Landen, the Editor of 'Brussel's Journal' to reproduce this article, which I think is both  challenging and relevant in Europe today.

Vladimir Bukovksy, the 63-year old former Soviet dissident, fears that the European Union is on its way to becoming another Soviet Union. In a speech he delivered in Brussels last week Mr Bukovsky called the EU a “monster” that must be destroyed, the sooner the better, before it develops into a fullfledged totalitarian state. Mr Bukovsky paid a visit to the European Parliament on Thursday at the invitation of Fidesz, the Hungarian Civic Forum. Fidesz, a member of the European Christian Democrat group, had invited the former Soviet dissident over from England, where he lives, on the occasion of this year’s 50th anniversary of the 1956 Hungarian Uprising. After his morning meeting with the Hungarians, Mr Bukovsky gave an afternoon speech in a Polish restaurant in the Trier straat, opposite the European Parliament, where he spoke at the invitation of the United Kingdom Independence Party, of which he is a patron.
 An interview with Vladimir Bukovsky about the impending EUSSR

In his speech Mr Bukovsky referred to confidential documents from secret Soviet files which he was allowed to read in 1992. These documents confirm the existence of a “conspiracy” to turn the European Union into a socialist organization.
I attended the meeting and taped the speech. A transcript can be found below. I also had a brief interview with Mr Bukovsky (4 minutes), a transcript of which can also be found below. The interview about the European Union had to be cut short because Mr Bukovsky had other engagements, but it brought back some memories to me, as I had interviewed Vladimir Bukovsky twenty years ago, in 1986, when the Soviet Union, the first monster that he so valiantly fought, was still alive and thriving. 

Mr Bukovsky was one of the heroes of the 20th century. As a young man he exposed the use of psychiatric imprisonment against political prisoners in the former USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 1917-1991) and spent a total of twelve years (1964-1976), from his 22nd to his 34th year, in Soviet jails, labour camps and psychiatric institutions. In 1976 the Soviets expelled him to the West. In 1992 he was invited by the Russian government to serve as an expert testifying at the trial conducted to determine whether the Soviet Communist Party had been a criminal institution. To prepare for his testimony Mr Bukovsky was granted access to a large number of documents from Soviet secret archives. He is one of the few people ever to have seen these documents because they are still classified. Using a small handheld scanner and a laptop computer, however, he managed to copy many documents (some with high security clearance), including KGB reports to the Soviet government.

An interview with Vladimir Bukovsky

Paul Belien: You were a very famous Soviet dissident and now you are drawing a parallel between the European Union and the Soviet Union. Can you explain this?
Vladimir Bukovsky: I am referrring to structures, to certain ideologies being instilled, to the plans, the direction, the inevitable expansion, the obliteration of nations, which was the purpose of the Soviet Union. Most people do not understand this. They do not know it, but we do because we were raised in the Soviet Union where we had to study the Soviet ideology in school and at university. The ultimate purpose of the Soviet Union was to create a new historic entity, the Soviet people, all around the globe. The same is true in the EU today. They are trying to create a new people. They call this people “Europeans”, whatever that means. According to Communist doctrine as well as to many forms of Socialist thinking, the state, the national state, is supposed to wither away. In Russia, however, the opposite happened. Instead of withering away the Soviet state became a very powerful state, but the nationalities were obliterated. But when the time of the Soviet collapse came these suppressed feelings of national identity came bouncing back and they nearly destroyed the country. It was so frightening.
PB: Do you think the same thing can happen when the European Union collapses?
VB: Absolutely, you can press a spring only that much, and the human psyche is very resilient you know. You can press it, you can press it, but don’t forget it is still accumulating a power to rebound. It is like a spring and it always goes to overshoot.
PB: But all these countries that joined the European Union did so voluntarily.
VB: No, they did not. Look at Denmark which voted against the Maastricht treaty twice. Look at Ireland [which voted against the Nice treaty]. Look at many other countries, they are under enormous pressure. It is almost blackmail. Switzerland was forced to vote five times in a referendum. All five times they have rejected it, but who knows what will happen the sixth time, the seventh time. It is always the same thing. It is a trick for idiots. The people have to vote in referendums until the people vote the way that is wanted. Then they have to stop voting. Why stop? Let us continue voting. The European Union is what Americans would call a shotgun marriage.
PB: What do you think young people should do about the European Union? What should they insist on, to democratize the institution or just abolish it?
VB: I think that the European Union, like the Soviet Union, cannot be democratized. Gorbachev tried to democratize it and it blew up. This kind of structures cannot be democratized.
PB: But we have a European Parliament which is chosen by the people.
VB: The European Parliament is elected on the basis of proportional representation, which is not true representation. And what does it vote on? The percentage of fat in yoghurt, that kind of thing. It is ridiculous. It is given the task of the Supreme Soviet. The average MP can speak for six minutes per year in the Chamber. That is not a real parliament.

Transcript of Mr Bukovsky’s Brussels speech

'In 1992 I had unprecedented access to Politburo and Central Committee secret documents which have been classified, and still are even now, for 30 years. These documents show very clearly that the whole idea of turning the European common market into a federal state was agreed between the left-wing parties of Europe and Moscow as a joint project which Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1988-89 called our “common European home.”
The idea was very simple. It first came up in 1985-86, when the Italian Communists visited Gorbachev, followed by the German Social-Democrats. They all complained that the changes in the world, particularly after British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, introduced privatisation and economic liberalisation, were threatening to wipe out the achievement (as they called it) of generations of Socialists and Social-Democrats – threatening to reverse it completely. Therefore the only way to withstand this onslaught of wild capitalism (as they called it) was to try to introduce the same socialist goals in all countries at once. Prior to that, the left-wing parties and the Soviet Union had opposed European integration very much because they perceived it as a means to block their socialist goals. From 1985 onwards they completely changed their view. The Soviets came to a conclusion and to an agreement with the left-wing parties that if they worked together they could hijack the whole European project and turn it upside down. Instead of an open market they would turn it into a federal state.
According to the secret Soviet documents, 1985-86 is the turning point. I have published most of these documents. You might even find them on the internet. But the conversations they had are really eye opening. For the first time you understand that there is a conspiracy – quite understandable for them, as they were trying to save their political hides. In the East the Soviets needed a change of relations with Europe because they were entering a protracted and very deep structural crisis; in the West the left-wing parties were afraid of being wiped out and losing their influence and prestige. So it was a conspiracy, quite openly made by them, agreed upon, and worked out.
In January of 1989, for example, a delegation of the Trilateral Commission came to see Gorbachev. It included former Japanese Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone, former French President ValĂ©ry Giscard d’Estaing, American banker David Rockefeller and former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. They had a very nice conversation where they tried to explain to Gorbachev that Soviet Russia had to integrate into the financial institutions of the world, such as Gatt, the IMF and the World Bank.
In the middle of it Giscard d’Estaing suddenly takes the floor and says: “Mr President, I cannot tell you exactly when it will happen – probably within 15 years – but Europe is going to be a federal state and you have to prepare yourself for that. You have to work out with us, and the European leaders, how you would react to that, how would you allow the other Easteuropean countries to interact with it or how to become a part of it, you have to be prepared.”
This was January 1989, at a time when the 1992 Maastricht treaty had not even been drafted. How the hell did Giscard d’Estaing know what was going to happen in 15 years time? And surprise, surprise, how did he become the author of the European constitution in 2002-03? A very good question. It does smell of conspiracy, doesn’t it?
Luckily for us the Soviet part of this conspiracy collapsed earlier and it did not reach the point where Moscow could influence the course of events. But the original idea was to have what they called a convergency, whereby the Soviet Union would mellow somewhat and become more social-democratic, while Western Europe would become social-democratic and socialist. Then there will be convergency. The structures have to fit each other. This is why the structures of the European Union were initially built with the purpose of fitting into the Soviet structure. This is why they are so similar in functioning and in structure.
It is no accident that the European Parliament, for example, reminds me of the Supreme Soviet. It looks like the Supreme Soviet because it was designed like it. Similary, when you look at the European Commission it looks like the Politburo. I mean it does so exactly, except for the fact that the Commission now has 25 members and the Politburo usually had 13 or 15 members. Apart from that they are exactly the same, unaccountable to anyone, not directly elected by anyone at all. When you look into all this bizarre activity of the European Union with its 80,000 pages of regulations it looks like Gosplan. We used to have an organisation which was planning everything in the economy, to the last nut and bolt, five years in advance. Exactly the same thing is happening in the EU. When you look at the type of EU corruption, it is exactly the Soviet type of corruption, going from top to bottom rather than going from bottom to top.

If you go through all the structures and features of this emerging European monster you will notice that it more and more resembles the Soviet Union. Of course, it is a milder version of the Soviet Union. Please, do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that it has a Gulag. It has no KGB – not yet – but I am very carefully watching such structures as Europol for example. That really worries me a lot because this organisation will probably have powers bigger than those of the KGB. They will have diplomatic immunity. Can you imagine a KGB with diplomatic immunity? They will have to police us on 32 kinds of crimes – two of which are particularly worrying, one is called racism, another is called xenophobia. No criminal court on earth defines anything like this as a crime [this is not entirely true, as Belgium already does sopb]. So it is a new crime, and we have already been warned. Someone from the British government told us that those who object to uncontrolled immigration from the Third World will be regarded as racist and those who oppose further European integration will be regarded as xenophobes. I think Patricia Hewitt said this publicly.
Hence, we have now been warned. Meanwhile they are introducing more and more ideology. The Soviet Union used to be a state run by ideology. Today’s ideology of the European Union is social-democratic, statist, and a big part of it is also political correctness. I watch very carefully how political correctness spreads and becomes an oppressive ideology, not to mention the fact that they forbid smoking almost everywhere now. Look at this persecution of people like the Swedish pastor who was persecuted for several months because he said that the Bible does not approve homosexuality. France passed the same law of hate speech concerning gays. Britain is passing hate speech laws concerning race relations and now religious speech, and so on and so forth. What you observe, taken into perspective, is a systematic introduction of ideology which could later be enforced with oppressive measures. Apparently that is the whole purpose of Europol. Otherwise why do we need it? To me Europol looks very suspicious. I watch very carefully who is persecuted for what and what is happening, because that is one field in which I am an expert. I know how Gulags spring up.
It looks like we are living in a period of rapid, systematic and very consistent dismantlement of democracy. Look at this Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill. It makes ministers into legislators who can introduce new laws without bothering to tell Parliament or anyone. My immediate reaction is why do we need it? Britain survived two world wars, the war with Napoleon, the Spanish Armada, not to mention the Cold War, when we were told at any moment we might have a nuclear world war, without any need for introducing this kind legislation, without the need for suspending our civil liberties and introducing emergency powers. Why do we need it right now? This can make a dictatorship out of your country in no time.

Today’s situation is really grim. Major political parties have been completely taken in by the new EU project. None of them really opposes it. They have become very corrupt. Who is going to defend our freedoms? It looks like we are heading towards some kind of collapse, some kind of crisis. The most likely outcome is that there will be an economic collapse in Europe, which in due time is bound to happen with this growth of expenses and taxes. The inability to create a competitive environment, the overregulation of the economy, the bureaucratisation, it is going to lead to economic collapse. Particularly the introduction of the euro was a crazy idea. Currency is not supposed to be political.
I have no doubt about it. There will be a collapse of the European Union pretty much like the Soviet Union collapsed. But do not forget that when these things collapse they leave such devastation that it takes a generation to recover. Just think what will happen if it comes to an economic crisis. The recrimination between nations will be huge. It might come to blows. Look to the huge number of immigrants from Third World countries now living in Europe. This was promoted by the European Union. What will happen with them if there is an economic collapse? We will probably have, like in the Soviet Union at the end, so much ethnic strife that the mind boggles. In no other country were there such ethnic tensions as in the Soviet Union, except probably in Yugoslavia. So that is exactly what will happen here, too. We have to be prepared for that. This huge edifice of bureaucracy is going to collapse on our heads.

This is why, and I am very frank about it, the sooner we finish with the EU the better. The sooner it collapses the less damage it will have done to us and to other countries. But we have to be quick because the Eurocrats are moving very fast. It will be difficult to defeat them. Today it is still simple. If one million people march on Brussels today these guys will run away to the Bahamas. If tomorrow half of the British population refuses to pay its taxes, nothing will happen and no-one will go to jail. Today you can still do that. But I do not know what the situation will be tomorrow with a fully fledged Europol staffed by former Stasi or Securitate officers. Anything may happen.


We are losing time. We have to defeat them. We have to sit and think, work out a strategy in the shortest possible way to achieve maximum effect. Otherwise it will be too late. So what should I say
My conclusion is not optimistic. So far, despite the fact that we do have some anti-EU forces in almost every country, it is not enough. We are losing and we are wasting time.'

'Our Lady of Perpetual Succour, pray for us and for our Country, and guide and protect our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI.'

Tuesday, 8 June 2010

'Sex is for Family in a State of Loving' - unambiguous Catholic Truth

 With thanks to Fr Stephen Boyle, parish priest of New Addington, Surrey, who kindly permitted me to reproduce his 'Parish Pastoral Letter'  written in July last year, on the subject of  'Sex is for family in a state of loving'. Fr Boyle himself acknowledged his debt to his brother Fr John Boyle, parish priest of  Ashford, Kent, who originated the letter in his own parish the previous year. Finally thanks also to Fr  Tim Finigan  who brought this to notice  in a recent post in  'The Hermeneutic of  Continuity'.

This is an excellent letter setting forth simply and straight-forwardly much of the basic Church teaching on human sexual behaviour. Nowadays such a clear and lucid explanation of these important matters is rare indeed. This should not be, for the ambivalent attitude of so many Catholics, old as well as young, cries out for clear and unambiguous spiritual direction on these matters. Fr Boyle states on his website, that he has a copy of a notice entitled,  'Six basic steps to chastity', exhibited on the parish notice-board. Would that such pastoral care be imitated in parishes throughout our Country. 

Good Shepherd Church Pastoral Letter
Sunday 5th July 2009
                      'Sex is for family in a state of loving'.
The occasion for this letter is a homily to be given to the confirmation candidates a week before the confirmation. The topic is entitled above.
                     'The teaching of the Catholic Church'
Many people, non-Catholics included, know the Church's teaching in this area. It bears repeating. Sex is for the marriage state. It is contrary to the Church's teaching to have sex outside of marriage or to be unfaithful in marriage. Sex is also called to be open to life at all times, and so all artificial contraception is sinful, the condom, the pill, sterilization, and the coil. For the Church God is the author of the meaning of sex, and it is called to be the way for conception, and so IVF is seen as wrong. That God is the author of the meaning of sex is also why the Church disagrees with the homosexual act. Abortion is wrong, as it is the taking of human life.  The taking of the morning after pill is clearly very sinful as the aim is to kill any conceived fetus. . Many so called contraceptives like the coil and the pill allow abortion. The Church encourages Natural Family Planning, which allows the spacing of children for good reason in a natural way, taking advantage of the fertile cycles of the woman.
It is clear that many young Catholics who have been through the Catholic system, attended Catholic Schools, been confirmed, do not believe the above to be important. If they have boyfriends or girlfriends, they feel that if they love each other sex naturally follows. Seeing as they have no wish to have children at a young age, they will use contraception. These actions are often associated with their being independently minded, not wishing to be dictated to by the Catholic Church. A few Catholic parents believe in "safe sex" for their children and encourage such practice if their teenage children are in a relationship.
                          Promoting  a civilization of love'
This letter has limited aims. It is to promote sex in marriage, and discourage the 'contraceptive' mentality so prevalent in our society and indeed even in our Church. It is to indicate that young people have been sold a lie. For future happiness, for a world with stable friendships and relationships, for a place where children are brought up in the most secure environments, the Catholic Church's teaching is tried and tested.
Nobody starts married life with the intention of getting divorced. There was horror from confirmation candidates a few years ago when I asked if they wanted to get divorced. Yet it is the case that previous actions make divorce more of a possibility. In 2003 the Sunday Times, (not the most Catholic paper!), revealed the result of the biggest survey of what makes wedlock work. It was commented "I think there is a fantasy that living together is a way of testing what marriage would be like". Cohabiting was seen as increasing the chances of divorce.  Previous actions before you meet your partner affect the marriage. The idea that one could have previous partners and this not seriously affects a future marriage was seen, for the most part, to be unfounded. Details of this survey can be found on the notice board.

                         'Contraception, abortion, and STI's'
A "Contraceptive society" will become a society where abortion is prevalent. None of the contraceptives will stop pregnancy for the sexually active. The lie that they are efficient in this area means that it is no surprise that teenage abortions are so high in this country. A mother attended a clinic last year indicating that the unborn baby had survived the condom the pill and the morning after pill! It also has lead to a dramatic increase in sexually transmitted diseases (STI's) in young people. This is not surprising as pregnancy can only happen a few days in the month, while both sexes can catch a sexual disease any day of the month. Yet still the government promotes condoms as the answer.

                                 'Love involves chastity'
In all the State-sponsored programs, sex is reduced to an activity which can be engaged in whenever it feels right. As the 'for young people' website puts it, 'Sex should be fun, don't make it a problem.' This is disastrous and damaging advice. Sex is the "Marriage Act", and is called to be chaste. There was a television programme on Channel 4 a year ago which had teenagers who had been sexually active being shown the chaste way. For all of them it was a clear realisation that in their previous relationships they had never truly loved. They had been sold the lie that sex 'makes love", but found that true love involved chastity. Chastity means one loves freely and warmly with innocent intention and without erotic disturbance or demand. When appropriate, so in marriage, it integrates sexual feelings into authentic love so that one can give sexually.
Due to the effects of original sin, so many wrong decisions are innocently made in this area, to disastrous effects. As the Church puts it: "In our present fallen condition people mistakenly equate love and sex" (CCC2351).   Such a mistaken view leads to so many broken hearts. Surely it is authentic love that we all wish to experience.

                                       'Sex is for family'
Research shows that, on average, children thrive best in a family where they are raised by their mother and father. The relationship between sex and children must come back into view. There are two purposes for sex, the first being procreation and the second the union of the husband and wife. Anyone who is in a sexual relationship should believe that their spouse would make a good Father or mother, and know that both partners will be there to bring up any child that might be born. To be responsible and honourable is an admirable trait, but surely it comes more naturally in a married relationship.
                               'The value of good friends'
I know many people have appreciated the "Six basic steps to Chastity" which we have on the notice board. Some of the advice is outstanding. Step 4 deals with finding people with similar values. It is important to have good friends who hold the same values. It makes it easier to keep your value system. The hope of a priest is that friendships in a confirmation class are important in this way.

                      'The Catholic Church is the good guy'
It is important to note when the Church has shown evidence for its wisdom in this area.
The Prophetic words of Pope Paul VI
It was in 1968 that the Church affirmed its teaching on artificial contraception. The question then was whether such means could be used in marriage when a couple had already a number of children. The world of teenage sex and abortion that we have today was not under consideration. Pope Paul VI knew well however that the situation we have now was on the horizon if this contraceptive mentality was to win the day.  In his 1968 encyclical on Human Life (Humanae Vitae, n.17) Pope Paul VI wrote prophetically:
'Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law.'
As Pope Paul foresaw, we have indeed experienced a great decline in moral standards.

    'Church's viewpoint confirmed by healthcare professionals'
In the field of sexually transmitted diseases, saved sex is now being widely suggested by many sexual-healthcare workers. The idea is that sex is saved for a time when the relationship between the partners is at such a level of intimacy that it is  exclusive for the rest of their lives. They have come to this view by looking at the disastrous effect that the "contraceptive mentality" has had in the area of STI's.

                              'Catholic Church and Aids'
In the Lancet, the main medical magazine in England, an article call "Cautions about Condoms in the Spread of Aids" said: "the likelihood of failure is sufficiently high that condom use by risk groups should not be described as safe-sex". It is noticeable that countries with large Catholic populations shows significantly lower rate of HIV/Aids infections than countries with mostly non-Catholic populations. Thus Burundi (62%) has a 6% Aids rate, Ghana (63% Christian) has a 3.1% infection rate while Botswana (5% Catholic) has a 37.3% infection rate.
  'The Church is being faithful to Jesus/The value of confession'
Jesus himself said that if we even look at someone lustfully we have committed adultery of the heart (Mt5:28). This is the same Jesus who forgave the woman caught committing adultery. His standards of sexual morality are as demanding as His compassion for weak human beings is great. The Church practices the mercy of God in confession. If one has fallen in these matters, the road to forgiveness remains open. Should anyone have failed in any of these areas, I urge them to avail themselves of this gift of mercy. No priest will condemn you. Rather, he will administer lovingly and joyfully the forgiveness of Christ, and provide help to avoid falls in the future. All that is needed on our part is sincere sorrow and a purpose of amendment.

                      'The call for a civilization of love'
Dear friends. We would all wish to build a civilisation of love. The vision of love that the State is presenting to our youngsters is not the vision of love that Jesus Christ came to share with us. Let us help promote this Catholic vision of true love. I ask that parents take a personal interest in the sex education of their child. I ask that teenagers make a stand for a truly beautiful vision of love and sex.
One of the fruits of the Holy Spirit is chastity. We ask for his power in our lives and pray for the confirmation candidates of 2009.
I would be pleased to receive your comments on the matters I have raised. Please feel free to phone, email or write, or come along and see me. If any of you would like to form a discussion group to talk about these issues, just let me know.
I would happily try to organise some speakers on the subject of family life and education for loving if people were interested.
This pastoral letter ends with a moving witness to forgiveness and the hurt of abortion
Wishing you the grace and peace of God our Father and of the Lord Jesus Christ, I am
Yours devotedly,
Fr. Stephen

Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us, and guide and protect our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI