Beyond BREXIT: the EU’s Military Union

Marie Koh


The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
I the Lord search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.
Jeremiah 17:9-10

What is really going on with Brexit? What is the big deal with Theresa May’s Brexit plan, or better still, is there even one to begin with?
Her government likes to throw out words like, ‘a deep and special partnership’, ‘cooperation’ and ‘relationship’. Feeling warm and cozy yet? The question is, ‘a special partnership’ with whom or what exactly?

According to a 5 year research report produced by David Ellis and his team from the Strategic Defense Initiative, members of the Royal Marines, veterans and UK Column reporters; what we are really dealing with here is something called Military Union, European Military Unification into a Military Union. A long-term plan designed to bind all operational budgets, capital budgets, policy, industry, officer training and all other public services such as the police, security, intelligence and so on under a European Union umbrella.

This is important to the European Union because once they have Military Union (MU) on the pan-European bases, it allows them to control all these budgets and take control of national militaries under a unified single point control from Brussels.

So what we have here is parliament deciding to ‘subcontract’ to a super-national cooperation which would include all the British Armed Forces such as Royal Marines, Special Forces, Paras, Army and the Air Force; in other words, it will give Eastern European land lot countries access to Britain’s Navy and its nuclear capabilities. Presently, it’s the Ministry of Defense (MoD) who reassess, amend and rearms the armed forces, however under MU the armed forces will come under a European commend structure for evaluation, who will ultimately have the final say on any matter concerning military.

When Theresa May speaks of ‘a deep and special partnership’ to the public, she does not explain what that entails, but for those who have read the different components of the ‘deal’, have concluded that the special partnership has everything to do with the consolidation of MU by securing control over all defense budgets and transferring it to the European Union in Brussels, meaning; parliament no longer holds competence over the Treasury.

So why aren’t members of parliament (MPs) talking about this? Why are the people who voted Brexit being kept in the dark about what seems to be, a very important issue, after all can a country stand sovereign without its own army?

According to David Ellis, MPs aren’t representing the people, but instead are representing the party under whom they serve. He goes on to say that “they are whipped from the Treasury, who then whips the MPs and the Prime Minister is the first Lord of the Treasury, and that’s who she serves. And the MPs are not making policies.” He adds that many members of the Labor and Tory parties do not know about the formation of MU because they have not been briefed on the details of the deal.

May’s government will gladly discuss currency union, the custom’s union with the public, yet remains silent about Military Union, in fact none of the party representatives will discuss it, not even Nigel Farage, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Boris Johnson or others.

The truth is, the concept of MU has been discussed behind closed doors since the 1940s, particularly by a banker named William Averell Harriman, Chief Envoy to the EU, who in his own words said:

Our whole concept of the unification of Europe was it would first contribute to an economic unification, then we hoped to secure an economic, military, and finally, a political unity.

Sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me. And dictatorships are usually as aggressive on their own people as they are abroad.

Mr. Ellis explains that a British politician outwardly promoting such an idea to the public in the 1940s after World War II would never have accepted such a proposition, for obvious reasons, and yet, here we are 72 years later, facing the prospects of MU despite the demand to exit the European Union.

The big question is; how do we leave the EU if all of Her Majesty’s military is going to operate from Brussels? This includes all of England’s manufacturing and engineering industries that produce military materials and staff. It’s very clear that this is a deep problem that cuts at the very heart of the nation.

Once Brussels has control of the Treasury, they will have their MU, defense spending will rise, which means higher taxes for everyone carried out on a pan-European bases. This is the ‘inconvenient truth’ these politicians won’t talk about.

So when Theresa May talks of ‘a deep and special partnership’ with people, she’s referring to MU moving forward, leaving the masses unaware of what they’re really getting themselves into; for if they knew the truth, they would certainly not agree with her.

Unfortunately, a draft deal for defense spending has recently been secured which means that the MU already exists, and England is in fact deeper into the belly of the beast than ever before. An EU joint accord is already operational at the Royal Navy Nuclear HQ in Northwood. It is staffed with over 100 personnel who are in direct communication to Brussels. This facility is built to full NATO nuclear specification and receives direct funding. Three other such HQs exist in Paris, Greece and Potsdam. These facilities can trigger a full military operation under 24 hours anywhere in Europe.

This is the great deception. People are being lied into submission by their politicians, whiles our freedoms and liberties are being stripped away and sold off overseas by greedy and corrupt bureaucrats.

Unless, we confront them at their own game, there will be tyranny. This does not affect England alone. All of Europe is facing the same challenge. So we are all in this together, for better or for worse.

MPs and politicians are supposed to serve the public, not themselves. They need to be held accountable for what they say and do. It’s really up to people to fight for freedom, and unless enough pressure is imposed on them, they will never be honest and speak truth to the people.

One way to do this is by responding to their Twitter feeds because once they put something out in cyberspace, they cannot undo it. Write letters, make appointments with them, whatever it takes to make them realize that the people know what they’re up to; and that they will not put up with their lies any longer.