Written by Sandor Nemeth
*Special Note: This article was sent to me as a personal email by Pastor Sandor Nemeth, pastor of the 70,000-member Faith Church in Budapest, Hungary. It is posted here with his full permission and blessing.
I would like to offer you my thoughts and analysis on events that are taking place in the European Union lately.
I believe these events have a prophetic significance: not only will they determine the future of the nations of Europe, but they will also initiate a significant change in the geopolitical climate of the world.
The parliamentary elections in the European Union will take place in May, 2019, for which the campaigning has just begun. Last week the main players have made important statements - the spirit of which will characterise the campaign at least until next May.
The struggle between sovereignists and globalists will not come to an end following the elections. The future will be determined by the power relations developing after May.
The EU is in a crisis.
There are a number of reasons why - the main one being the wrong reaction given to mass and illegal immigration. This issue has deepened the differences between the member states.
In its current state, the EU is impotent.
The European elite is afraid that it will be permanently left behind by the United States, by China, and even by Russia. A fear exists that Europe will only play a marginal role in the forming of future world politics. There would be many negative consequences of such a scenario for Europe, resulting in a diminishing quality of life for the citizens of the member states.
The fear of such a scenario is especially apparent amongst the German and French elite.
The EU in its current state is not yet an empire.
I believe interpretations by Christians equating current Europe with the beast of Revelation 13 are mistaken. Without a doubt, an empire can emerge out of Europe and the foundations for an empire could be established by the Europe of today - already in the foreseeable future.
This is precisely why this beginning of the election campaign of the EU parliament is so exciting - from a Biblical point of view. I am sure the upcoming months will show us exactly what will be at stake in May.
In recent years, politicians from the left and right have envisioned different ideas about the future of Europe.
The most popular among these is the belief that more integration is the solution to the continent’s problems. These are the globalists, who aim to integrate the different systems of the member states. They desire to establish a governing and controlling body that would be supranational. They would submit the member states to this centralised authority, so only decisions on less important issues would remain in the power of nation states.
This concept is primarily represented by the French and the Germans, as such a structure would be in the interest of large and strong European nations. This would grant them a power-position in geopolitics that they desired to achieve multiple times in the past - through military means. Now they see an opportunity to achieve their old dream through peaceful means, through treaties on multiple levels, through alliances, and through bargaining.
The other European member states - especially the Eastern-European ones do not want greater integration.
They emphasise a necessity to maintain national independence, although they envision a close partnership with Western states. Eastern-European states also want to stick to their Christian traditions - so they oppose the cultural revolution of ultraliberals. This minority group of nations desires to live in a Europe of nation states, without the supremacy of an centralised empire.
This past week European power- and political groups made their positions clear on the two visions about the future of the continent.
This took place at the voting on the Sargentini Report, which accuses Hungary of violating basic European and democratic values. The report lists the areas where the author believes the Orban-cabinet violated democratic and European basic values on which the EU is founded and based on which it operates.
In addition to this, the author of the report advises that the European Commission initiate Article 7 against our nation. This would result in the suspension and limitation of our rights in the governing institutions of the EU. These measures could also result in serious financial burdens for Hungarians.
The report does not take into account the fact that Hungary - along with other Eastern-European nations - is a post-Communist society. It is exactly the political right - among them the party of Prime Minister Viktor Orban (Fidesz) - that are doing the most to overcome this heritage.
No Eastern-European nation has yet fully succeeded in achieving this, so all of them could be accused of having a “deficit in democracy.”
Having said this, in my opinion, this is also true for the Western states. Even though they had the opportunity, already after the Second World War - and primarily thanks to the United States - to dismantle autocracies and to build democracies.
A main obstacle in overcoming post-communist social structures is that upon the fall of Soviet-type Communism, the Western political elite made an alliance with reform-communists. They did this to achieve economic and financial domination in the process of the privatisation programs in these nations and to secure the Eastern-European market for their products.
A clear winner of these times was Germany. For a number of years now, all of Europe lays at the feet of Germany - as their market.
The result of the voting on the Sargentini-report proves that the German right believes that the leftist and liberal, Eastern-European political side is closer to them than the Christian-leaning, populist right.
It is important to briefly discuss the contents of the report.
This document contains a lot of lies and also information that is used by the author to portray realities in Hungary in a distorted, false way. The report is a mixture of lies and truth, the the spirit and goal of which are outrageous and unacceptable to me.
I spent forty years living in a dictatorship.
As I personally was often the target of such attacks, I am quite aware of the methodology of corrupt propagandists. The EU has not yet been able to better the professional rhetoric of Bolshevik propaganda. Though Judith Sargentini clearly is striving to reach their level, she has yet much to learn about the skills of deception, falsifying reality, and character assassination.
Without going into detail in refuting the statements made in the report, I would like to give a feeling as to what my problems are with it.
The independence of courts is problematic in Hungary (my personal experiences have also lead me to this conclusion), because - besides brilliant and professional individuals - there are judges who are tied to intelligence agencies that were in alliance with the previous regime - and this influences their decisions. I agree that retiring these judges is our common interest.
In regards to the fairness of elections and the fairness of the election system - opposition politicians and left wing liberals only started to seriously question these when, on election-day, at around midnight, it came out that it wasn’t them, but Fidesz that are due to win a two-thirds majority in parliament.
Liberals only started to tune up their rhetoric on the Hungarian educational system when the government began to question the unlawful privileges that George Soros’s university had in Hungary. The left liberals became all the more angry when the government did not allow a gender-faculty to be opened at a major Hungarian university. The majority of Hungarians supported the intervention of government in this area as the vast majority of tax payers do not wish to financially support the education of activists promoting sexually deviant behaviour.
The Sargentini Report is also damning towards the Hungarian government in relation to basic human rights. In this area criticism does have some validity, however, it is up to one's worldview whether one considers these actions of the government morally right or wrong.
As a Christian, I agree with the Orban-cabinet in introducing the traditional concept of marriage into our constitution. The state grants the right for everyone to freely chose their lifestyle, but in relation to homosexual rights it rejects the ultraliberal concept and rather supports traditional families and does not allow for various forms of homosexual marriage.
During the Orban administration there is no state-supported gay- and gender propaganda in the government operated media and in educational institutions. At the same time, the state has tolerated lectures and opinions on these issues in cultural institutions. I have no information on anyone being persecuted for their homosexual lifestyle. Christian churches are free to preach God’s law and the redemption from the Gospels in relation to all such actions and lifestyles that the Word of God deems sinful and bad.
In addition to the above, the Hungarian government opposes illegal immigration and decides - based on our current, effective laws - who it will allow into our country. There are individuals even within our church who recently received their Hungarian citizenship. Xenophobia, racism and antisemitism in Hungary is not greater than it is in Western countries. In fact, while antisemitism is receding in Hungary, in the West it is on the rise.
The centre of European anti-Zionism is not Budapest, but Brussels.
As a member of a Dutch Green Party, Judith Sergentini is a militant anti-Zionist. In other words, she is a loud voice for modern-day antisemitism. She has labeled Israel an apartheid state and she is also a advocate for gay rights.
In preparing her report, Sargentini only consulted with left liberal journalists, activists of NGOs of George Soros and representatives of homosexual and lesbian organisations. She was not interested in the opinion of the Hungarian State or of right-leaning intellectuals, church leaders and public figures.
In relation to the status of the Hungarian churches and freedom of religion she included the opinion of a minister who has a 200-member congregation and has traditionally had a close alliance with left liberals, regularly speaking at their events. His conflict with the Hungarian government in this respect is unique and in no way does it realistically portray the status of the church in Hungary.
Having a knowledge of freedom of religion and the legal status of religious organisations in Europe, I can say that the Hungarian regulations - in spite of some valid points of criticism and objections - are still the most liberal regulations in Europe.
Independence of the media is also a European problem. The criticism you can hear in relation to Hungary could be said about every other European country. The differences are only in details and methodology.
This - of course - does not mean that there are no valid objections to make about the current status of the media in Hungary. Our disgust at the objections given in the report comes from the evident hypocrisy and one-sidedness.
The overall status of the Hungarian media has not become worse than it was in previous administrations. Yes, there have been changes in the market. During left wing governments, the liberal media was in majority, now the Orban-cabinet is striving to reshape the market according to its’ own interests - in sometimes objectionable ways.
In spite of the above, and although the interests of some parties have really been hurt - we cannot say that the government has eradicated freedom of the press or that it has completely subdued the media. In spite of a few worrying incidents, independent press still exists in Hungary - of course, it could be stronger.
The media in alliance with the left liberal parties and the organisations of George Soros are just as one-sided and exclusive as the state media.
The report uses an anti-corruption rhetoric. Yes, corruption is present in Hungary, the question is whether the system itself is corrupt or whether corruption is just a byproduct of the Orban-government. I have an opinion on this, but do not wish to enter into accusations and guessing.
However, corruption is also present in the EU. For a layman, it is very difficult to grasp how decision makers in EU institutions and in the member states nourish and encourage abuse.
Prior to voting on the report, a heated debate broke out between Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orban and those who put forward or supported the report. I watched the discussion - which went on for nearly two hours. I understood what the most powerful European countries, Germany and France want to establish in Europe. I already had suspicions and presumptions about the true motives of these governments, but when the legitimate representatives of these powers spoke openly and clearly about their objectives - this was new.
The opposition to globalisation and migration has grown among the European countries in the past few years.
This brought with it the increasing popularity of the political parties and movements that support nation states. Viktor Orban became the leader of the oppositions against globalist Brussels. Orban’s party again won a two-thirds majority in the Hungarian parliament at the last elections held in the spring of this year. This was good news for the anti-globalists, but not for Merkel, Macron, their followers and leftist liberals. In the last couple of months the Western media has upped their attack on the Hungarian prime minister.
This September a new chapter in this confrontation has been opened.
Several Western politicians, like the German foreign minister, Heiko Maas, Merkel, Juncker and Macron declared that they envision a sovereign Europe, a union based on a federation of states, a superpower. They aim to achieve this by having the member states waive certain areas of their sovereignty, like foreign affairs, the military, border control, economic and financial independence. So they should raise their sovereignty to the level of the European Union.
In the German parliament, Angela Merkel spoke of taking away the task of border control from the member states and instead, a European army would be responsible for this.
The Southern border of our country is not only the border of Hungary, but also the border of the European Union. If Merkel’s plan is realised, border control would be taken away from our democratically elected government.
This is how Merkel would like to ensure mass, legal migration to Europe. The European central government would decide on letting in and distributing migrants. In this way, the policy of migration would also be dominated by Germany.
Such a decision would effectively mean a military occupation of Hungary, casting us into a colonial state. For if an international border controlling agency were to decide on who may enter and exit Hungary, that would effectively mean the cessation of the Hungarian border, replaced by the border of an empire.
By the way, the border of the ancient Roman Empire also ran here, along the River Danube...
These declarations by the Germans show that Merkel’s Germany has not given up the vision of Emperor Wilhelm or Adolf Hitler, which is the realisation of a German Empire. Only the methodology, the ideology and the tactics have fallen into step with the requirements of this age.
The German elite has maintained its desire to rule and reign over Europe.
The Eastern-European nations have so far - falsely - believed that the European Union in its current state is the freely chosen partnership of equal nations, based on common interests. The disillusionment began in 2015, when huge crowds of migrants began to invade Europe. Instead of protecting the native population, Merkel’s government - through their words and their policies - encouraged the predominantly Muslim migrants to come to Europe - even illegally.
This is when the international campaign to discredit Hungary began.
The reason was that the Hungarian government insisted on keeping with abiding European and Hungarian regulations. It first restricted, then completely halted illegal migration. In the eyes of the Western elite Viktor Orban became an unacceptable politician.
The Hungarian government got into a sharp conflict especially with the NGOs of George Soros.
Recently, the Italian government also entered this arena, as they began to take actions against the human trafficking and migration in the Mediterranean, declaring that they do not wish to become the migrant camp of Europe.
In order to establish sovereign Europe, the Germans and the French began a very aggressive campaign against countries who wish to maintain their national independence and against Western political parties supporting such politics, which they have labeled “far-right”. This campaign includes false accusations, blackmailing and threats. In several aspects it reminds me of the tactics of the Soviet Bolshevik regime.
Unfortunately, the supporters of sovereign Europe, that is a European superstate have the best chance of winning the EU parliamentary elections coming up in May.
A negative change occurred recently in European politics.
The Christian political parties of Germany and the populist party of Austria - which was traditionally in alliance with political Catholicism - took the side of the left liberal, Soros-supporting political powers and the policies of Macron in the debate on the Sargentini Report.
The goal of this report is to intimidate governments and movements supporting a Europe of free nations by stigmatising and punishing Hungary. The arguments globalists brought up during the debate prove this.
Based on Biblical prophesies, Christians have long said that at the end of this age the Roman Empire will resurface in the form of a United Nations of Europe. In the past 1,500 years repeated efforts have been made to revive this empire. European culture bears the negative ruins of these stillborn experiments.
When the iron curtain fell, Eastern-European nations did not join the European Union to become the subjects and provinces of yet another empire - following the Soviet Union. The West promised freedom and prosperity to nations joining the EU. In exchange for this, the developed West requested that the countries liberated from the occupation of the Communist Soviets open their markets to them. The Eastern-European countries naively and at times irresponsibly did so.
But following the “honeymoon years”, an iron fist has now come down on these fragile and hatching - and fallible - democracies. More and more people are realising that instead of fulfilling the noble promises, these much-abused nations are once again being coerced into submission.
In Strasburg, the Hungarian prime minister was not spared cynical and arrogant words. There was efforts of aggressive indoctrination, condescension and scapegoating. This is all part of outrageous, once again “empire style” politics.
The EU-president, Juncker - known for his staggering - increased tensions with his speech.
He envisaged the possibility of taking away the veto rights of certain member states in the European Commission. In the future, EU matters could be settled by majority voting. Such a course would strengthen German and French dominance in the EU, as the economic, financial and political bargaining potential of these nations is almost limitless, especially against Eastern-European member states. Due to their gullibility, Eastern nations have become dependant on the Western elite, who are starting to abuse the blind trust these countries have put in them.
There is also a struggle between the Germans and the French for dominance in Europe.
Macron would like the French to have the political dominance, for which the Germans would provide the finances. The Germans would like to take full control of Europe. In this current power play the Germans have a greater chance of dominating Europe.
Unless some miracle happens, beginning in May, 2019, we will be eyewitnesses to the birth of a world empire.
As an independent superpower, it will initially strive to be on par with the United States, China and Russia and then it will aim to become the leading world power, so the world might once again come under European dominance.
This will only be possible if member states of the EU are deprived of their sovereignty and areas of competence of national governments and parliaments are minimised.
The debate around the Sargentini Report had other important implications.
The majority in the European Parliament today are politically and morally aligned with Obama and Clinton. They categorically reject the policies of Donald Trump. There is a feeling that many European politicians and public figures are convinced that the legitimately elected Trump is an illegitimate leader of the USA.
Recently, George Soros had a series of discussions with the leaders of the EU.
Back in 2007 he founded the European Council of Foreign Relations - through which he is playing an intermediary role between American and European actual and background powers. Judith Sargentini is also on the list of supporters for one of Soros’s NGOs. Soros and other influential individuals involved in clandestine activities are doing everything in their power to stop the strengthening of anti-globalist, anti-immigration, nationalist and Christian political forces in Europe. To achieve this, now they also have an ally in right-wing European political parties.
A few months ago Soros made his program clear at a conference of the multinational think tank he founded, the European Council of Foreign Relations. In his speech, he laid out “How to Save Europe”:
“Harsh reality may force member states to set aside their national interests in the interest of preserving the European Union. That’s what President Macron was urging in his Aachen speech and he was cautiously endorsed by Chancellor Merkel who is painfully aware of the opposition she faces at home.
If Macron and Merkel succeeded in spite of all the obstacles, they would follow in the footsteps of Jean Monnet and his small band of visionaries (they envisioned the European Union - Soros spoke about this earlier in his speech). As I said before, that small band needs to be replaced by a large upsurge of grass-roots pro-European initiatives. I and my network of Open Society Foundations will do everything in our power to help support those initiatives.”
(“How to save Europe” - opening speech of George Soros at the conference of the European Council of Foreign Relations, 29th May, 2018.)
The past few weeks has shown us that agents of the Soros's network - from leading politicians to his “civilian” NGO-activists - have begun to diligently implement his program. For them it is crucial that European policy fall in line with the vision of Barack Obama. If they succeed in maintaining a continuity of this vision on an international level, then after the Trump-era, they will be able to bring this back to Washington as well more easily and more successfully. Then they can wipe out the legacy of the current American president from the political and social spheres.
Last week we have come to see their aggressive, mob-like methods. They hid it behind sweet and sleek words on human dignity, human rights, justice and the concept of “a family of European peoples.”
It is now clear that the liberal- and the German elite has taken up the cause of establishing a sovereign Europe. This will be their main theme throughout the campaign, this is what they will try to convince everyone of leading up to May.
Of course, unforeseeable events may happen, which could realign the current balance of power.
An example to this is the latest American presidential elections. But whatever may happen, as a believer I am certain that the words of prophecy will not fail. This current age will come to an end along the lines of the revelations of the prophet Daniel and the apostle John.
As we all know, morality of the Europe of liberals is in direct confrontation with God’s commandments.
Christians must not be merely passive agents in the upcoming European parliamentary elections.
It is our moral obligation to do everything in our power to hinder the establishment of a government in the European Union that wishes to force its member states to the acceptance of homosexual marriages, pseudo-scientific gender-ideologies, the liberalisation of abortion and drugs, obligatory migrant quotas and anything else in opposition to our Judeo-Christian worldview.
The prime minister of Hungary, Viktor Orban has taken a stand against such policies.
For this, he has become persona non grata and public enemy number one in the eyes of the Western elite. If Orban were to give up his ideals, he could become a political superstar like the Austrian chancellor.
Hopefully, he will continue on the hard and narrow road, which can lead Hungary into the coming new era.
