Marrakech Declaration

The Rabat Process[1] is a platform for political cooperation between the countries concerned by the migratory routes linking Central, West and North Africa to Europe. Since 2006, the Rabat Process has been promoting the development of migration policies, especially the synergies between migration and development.

WE, Ministers of Foreign Affairs, of the Interior, of Integration, in charge of Migration and high representatives of the following countries:

Burkina Faso
Cabo Verde

Democratic Congo[2]Republic Of The.(DRC).
Equatorial Guinea


Mali, Malta

SãO Tomé And PríNcipe
Sierra Leone


Central African[3]REPUBLIC

CôTe D’Ivoire

Czech Republic




United Kingdom

High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and European Commissioner for Migration, Home Affairs and Citizenship; and high representatives of the Economic Community of West African States Commission ; and Algeria and Libya as observer countries;

MEETING the 2nd May 2018 in Marrakesh, at the invitation of the Kingdom of Morocco;

ACKNOWLEDGING the growing relevance of migration issues at the global level in general, and in Euro-African and Intra-African relations in particular, as well as the need to identify adapted and coordinated responses for the management of migration flows in all their aspects;

RECALLING the commitments made by the Rabat Process partners in the framework of the 2006 Joint Africa-EU Declaration on Migration and Development,  the 2014 Africa-EU Declaration on Migration and Mobility the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development  [4]see Agenda 21 UNCED, 1992 Agenda21.pdf  adopted by the United Nations in 2015 in which States pledged to “leave no-one behind”, the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants adopted the 19th September 2016  by the United Nations, the United Nations Declaration of the High-level Dialogue on International Migration of 2013, and the Political Declaration of the 5th African Union – European Union Summit of 2017

REAFFIRMING the commitments made by the Rabat Process Partners  at the Valletta Summit on Migration in November 2015 and the Senior Officials’ Meeting of Valletta in February 2017 [5]see url:, as well as their adherence to the principles of solidarity, partnership and shared responsibility in the joint management of migration issues in full respect of human rights;

REITERATING the commitment of the Rabat Process Partners  to the effective implementation of the Valletta Joint Action Plan (JVAP);

TAKING INTO ACCOUNT the mandate given to the Rabat and Khartoum Processes  to monitor the JVAP, as well as the mapping exercise already conducted, to ensure its follow-up, and COMMENDING the efforts made to implement the technical instrument for the long-term monitoring of the JVAP;

RECALLING the commitments made by the Rabat Process Partners at the Ministerial Conferences in 2006, 2008, 2011 [6]See Dakar-Agricole-2011-declaration-US.pdf  and 2014,  and the principles contained in the 2011 Dakar Declaration  (an operational and coherent dialogue, a flexible and balanced approach, committed partners and shared responsibility);

RECOGNISING the progress achieved within the framework of the different plans and strategies of the Rabat Process and taking into account the lessons learnt from the analyses carried out at the end of the Rome Programme 2014-2017;

Page 1 of 8

NOTING the value of the technical expertise and experience of external observers such as international organisations working in the field of migration and asylum, civil society actors, members of the diaspora and academic representatives, in enriching and operationalising the dialogue; CALLING for the strengthening of cooperation with the latter through increased consultations;

CONSCIOUS of the driving force of the Rabat Process in identifying common political priorities for migration and asylum issues between Africa and Europe, and its contribution to the formulation and implementation of migration strategies;

ENDEAVOURING to ensure coherence with the implementation instruments which have emerged since 2014 and which redefine the partnership framework, AVOIDING duplication of actions being undertaken in this respect and ENSURING complementarity of interventions;

ADOPT the Marrakesh Programme for 2018-2020,  which comprises the present Political Declaration as well as the targeted, operational Action Plan, and which is based on a regional approach whilst also respecting state sovereignty;

AGREE to align the said Programme with the five domains of the JVAP in order to maintain coherence and complementarity with it:

Domain 1: Development benefits of migration and addressing root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement;

Domain 2: Legal migration and mobility;

Domain 3: Protection and asylum;

Domain 4: Prevention of and fight against irregular migration, migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings;

Domain 5: Return, readmission and reintegration;

AGREE equally to effectively implement, in a balanced way, the Action Plan which is thus adopted by incorporating the following cross-cutting priorities:


A human rights-based approach: the implemented actions will contribute to fully respecting the human rights and dignity of refugees and migrants, irrespective of their migration status;


Particular attention will be paid to the issues of gender and the protection of migrants in vulnerable situations including, in particular, women and children;


Increased attention to the fight against xenophobia, racism and discrimination: the partners will undertake efforts to combat these phenomena, and to promote a balanced narrative on migration and diasporas, based on facts and highlighting their positive contribution to the development of societies in countries of origin, transit and destination;


A regional approach: the identification, formulation and execution of actions will take into account local and regional specificities.


An inclusive and multi-stakeholder approach: in their interventions, the partners will seek to involve all the actors under the coordination of the national authorities (regional organisations, local authorities, traditional and customary authorities, representatives of civil society and migrant and refugee communities, social partners, the private sector, the media Page 2 of 8 and academia) as well as relevant International Organisations, to ensure coordinated and orderly management of all dimensions of the migratory phenomenon.


Particular attention to the collection, analysis and sharing of disaggregated data: among the activities envisaged, the partners will endeavour to identify existing initiatives and studies, to share migration data and will undertake, if necessary, specific studies for operational purposes at national or regional levels. The data and information obtained will feed into and contribute to migration policy-making processes;

DECIDE to target concrete actions which reflect the specific added value of the Rabat Process. This resides, notably, in its ability to build networks of technical and political actors, to formulate actions which take regional specificities into account, and to centralise information gathered as a result of their implementation, whilst at the same time respecting geographical balance at all levels;

AGREE to specify the modalities for the implementation of the targeted actions and to use the relevant mechanisms and tools to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the Marrakesh Programme for 2018-2020 on a periodic basis in order to improve its scope and impact.

Page 3 of 8 Marrakesh Action Plan 2018-2020

DOMAIN 1: Development benefits of migration and addressing root causes of irregular migration and the phenomenon of displaced persons

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development aims, in its Goal 10.7, to “Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies”.

Since its inception, the Rabat Process has consistently promoted the positive potential of regular migration and the key role of the diaspora for countries of origin, transit and destination. The strengthening of synergies between migration and development constitutes a priority domain and a specific feature of the Rabat Process. The dialogue partners agree to pursue this path and will focus most of their actions on maximising the benefits of regular migration for development, including, as a priority, members of the diaspora in this process.

The Rabat Process partners recognise the multiple root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement. These root causes, most of which are interconnected, need to be increasingly addressed through a wide range of appropriate responses both at policy and operational levels. Taking into account the mixed nature of migration flows, the partners reiterate the commitments made in the Valletta framework to invest in development and the eradication of poverty, to fight the root causes of irregular migration, to support humanitarian aid and development assistance in the countries most affected by the phenomenon of displaced persons, and to address environmental and climate change issues in the most affected regions.

Objective 1: Maximising the positive impact of regular migration for development

Action 1: Identify and share good practices that enable countries to gain better knowledge of the profiles of their diasporas and to adopt or to optimise strategies that promote their economic, social and cultural potential for development, whilst also analysing the potential obstacles to the adoption and optimisation of these good practices.

Action 2: Contribute to reducing the costs of remittances and to facilitating remittances sent by migrants to their countries of origin, in particular by supporting innovative or existing initiatives using the potential offered by digitalisation. The partners might refer, for example, to the work carried out by the African Institute for Remittances and its network of focal points.

Action 3: Promote initiatives that support entrepreneurship and productive investment among young people from the African Diaspora (such as the flagship MEETAfrica programme, developed within the framework of the Rabat Process), and encourage these young people to use their skills for the benefit of their countries of origin.

Objective 2: Achieve a common understanding of the root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement in the Rabat Process region

Action 4: Analyse the root causes and make practical recommendations (particularly through the organisation of thematic meetings on this subject) with a view to improving the incorporation of these issues into policy development.

Page 4 of 8

Action 5: Promote a more systematic inclusion of issues related to the root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement into socio-economic development strategies and programmes at national level, and into development cooperation programmes, whilst also promoting ownership of existing regional normative frameworks.

Domain 2: Legal migration and mobility

Taking note of the above-mentioned Goal 10.7 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Rabat Process partners recognise the need to encourage and to strengthen the pathways to regular migration, based on efficient civil registration systems, and to promote the mobility of certain categories of travellers (in particular, businessmen and businesswomen, young professionals or researchers) between European and North, West and Central African countries.

Objective 3: Promote regular migration and mobility, especially of young people and women, between Europe and North, West and Central Africa, and within these regions

Action 6: Encourage the establishment of exchange networks between vocational training institutes and employment agencies in Europe and Africa, in order to draw full benefit from the skills of young migrants and to adapt technical training to the needs of the labour market. Particular attention will be paid to activities targeting women and youth.

Action 7: In accordance with the national legislative frameworks, promote projects which aim to strengthen the portability of the rights and social protection of regular migrants and their families, for example, through the conclusion and the implementation of appropriate bilateral, regional or international conventions.

Action 8: Identify good practices and success factors which can guide relevant policy development and support inter- and intra-regional mobility, in particular through the analysis of existing studies on circular migration, particularly at regional level.

Objective 4: Encourage facilitation of visa issuing procedures

Action 9: In a spirit of partnership, pursue an open dialogue regarding visa facilitation, in particular through meetings and technical training sessions.

Action 10: Support actions designed to improve the accessibility, efficiency and transparency of the various national systems for visa issuance, including support for the creation of local information structures or the establishment of online information portals.

Domain 3: Protection and asylum

Rabat Process partners reiterate their international commitments in the field of protection and asylum, including those contained in the Valletta Political Declaration, and in particular those aimed at providing protection “to all those entitled to it in accordance with international and regional instruments”. They reaffirm their respect for the dignity of refugees and other forcibly displaced persons, and for the protection of their human rights, irrespective of status. The partners encourage countries in their efforts to sign up to and implement existing international conventions on protection, including the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Page 5 of 8 Protocol. They also encourage capacity building of national institutions with regards to asylum systems.

Objective 5: Promote measures aiming to strengthen the protection of refugees and other forcibly displaced persons

Action 11: Identify existing cross-border and regional protection initiatives in one of the sub-regions of the dialogue, and propose actions to stakeholders aimed at improving the protection of refugees and forcibly displaced persons. Particular attention will be paid to take into account the most vulnerable people, the best interests of children and the needs of unaccompanied minors.

Action 12: Promote the adoption of local, national and regional action plans aimed at defining procedures for an effective response, especially in the event of massive displacements of people.

Objective 6: Promote the integration of refugees and forcibly displaced persons into host communities

Action 13: Promote the integration of refugees and forcibly displaced persons through the establishment of awareness-raising campaigns aimed, on the one hand, at local communities and on the other hand, at refugees and asylum seekers, covering their rights and obligations in host countries.

Action 14: Share experiences and good practices which promote access to work and which allow people benefitting from international protection to become more self-reliant.

Domain 4: Prevention of and fight against irregular migration, migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings

The Rabat Process partners reiterate their commitment to international obligations relating to the prevention and fight against migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings, which are two serious forms of organised crime under international law (the 2000 United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the additional United Nations protocols against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Air and Sea, and aimed to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children).

In accordance with the Valletta Political Declaration, the partners encourage the stepping-up of efforts to prevent and combat these phenomena, both in Europe and Africa, through various instruments. Within this framework, the search for alternatives to the informal economy stemming from the illicit smuggling of migrants and the trafficking of human beings, as well as awareness-raising measures, are particularly encouraged.

The partners recognise the contribution of regional and international organisations and civil society organisations in this domain. The added value of the Rabat Process lies, inter alia, in its ability to connect the actors concerned by these two phenomena, in order to promote mutual learning and to improve cooperation.

Objective 7: Build the capacities of public institutions with competency in the areas of integrated border management, and the prevention and fight against migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings

Page 6 of 8

Action 15: Improve the detection capabilities of national authorities with regard to smuggling of migrants and persons in need of international protection, trafficking in human beings, as well as in the area of integrated border management and control.

Action 16: Strengthen judicial and police cooperation at bilateral, inter- and intra-regional and international levels regarding the exchange of information, paying particular attention to financial investigations.

Action 17: Continue and accompany efforts designed to develop and to implement appropriate legislative and institutional frameworks at both national and regional levels, in accordance with the 2000 United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the relevant additional Protocols against the smuggling of migrants and trafficking in human beings.

Objective 8: Improve the protection of migrants and persons in need of international protection who have been smuggled, and victims of trafficking in human beings

Action 18: Facilitate the sharing of good practices in relation to awareness-raising and information on the risks of irregular migration and trafficking in human beings, targeting, in particular, children and women, and involving all stakeholders (the State, the diaspora, the media, social networks, civil society, international organisations and the private sector).

Action 19: Formulate concrete responses regarding the protection and assistance of people affected by smuggling and victims of trafficking in human beings, particular women and girls (reception structures, legal advice, social, psychosocial and health services, interpretation, reintegration, etc.) and promote their inclusion into national, regional and sub regional initiatives and policies.

Domain 5: Return, readmission and reintegration

The Rabat Process partners reiterate their adherence to obligations under international law in the area of return and readmission and recall the importance of sustainable reintegration. They reiterate their support for the principle of non-refoulement and agree to give preference to voluntary return. They recall that policies in the area of return and readmission are the shared responsibility of States, and that they should be efficient, transparent and carried with full respect for the human rights, security and dignity of migrants.

The partners of the Rabat Process applaud the joint progress achieved through the political dialogues which have been initiated in this domain. It is important that these efforts are pursued and that this dialogue is translated into action, leading to strengthened cooperation and more efficient return and readmission.

Objective 9: Strengthen the capacities of the competent authorities in order to improve and ensure the identification processes and the issuing of travel documents.

Action 20: Exchange best practices related to return, readmission and reintegration at national, regional and cross-border levels (in particular through regional consultations).

Action 21: Promote the use of innovative identification techniques. The thematic meeting on return, readmission and reintegration organised in Brussels in 2016 proposed, among other things, the use of videoconferencing for identification or pre-identification, more systematic use of fingerprints, or recourse to joint actions for complex cases. Depending on the needs, provide support (technical Page 7 of 8 assistance, peer support or training) to a specific group of countries in order to help them put these techniques in place.

Objective 10: Encourage programmes that ensure the safe return and sustainable reintegration of migrants, in full respect of their rights and dignity

Action 22: Organise peer-to-peer meetings between European and African cities, and with other competent authorities, to enable mutual learning in migration management, including sustainable return, building on existing networks (such as the City-to-City initiative) and capitalising upon their achievements.

Action 23: Strengthen assisted return programmes and promote actions aimed at accompanying and including all returned migrants in development policies and programmes at local level.

Page 8 of 8




2 Republic Of The.(DRC).
4 see Agenda 21 UNCED, 1992 Agenda21.pdf
5 see url:
6 See Dakar-Agricole-2011-declaration-US.pdf 

Resistance to “The Kalergi Plan”: EPP Madrid Congress – Viktor Orban, Prime Minister of Hungary

Speech of Viktor Orbán at the EPP Congress in Madrid, on the 22nd of October in 2015.

The European “Left” Has A Clear Agenda:
They Are Actually Importing Future Leftist Voters To Europe Hiding Behind Humanism.



I would like to congratulate to Partido Popular and to the Spanish Prime Minister, Mariano Rajoy for the outstanding performance of their government.

Today I would like to speak about the migration crisis. This issue will determine the future of our political family. We are in a deep trouble.

The migration crisis is able to destabilize governments, countries and the whole European continent. We need a strong and clear-cut answer, timetable and action plan of EPP. The Hungarian delegates welcome the resolution of the congress, declaring that the Spanish approach is the right one.

what we have been facing is not a refugee crisis.

Dear Friends,

The danger we have been facing demands open and honest speech.

First of all, dear Friends, what we have been facing is not a refugee crisis.

This is a migratory movement composed of economic migrants, refugees and also foreign fighters.

This is an uncontrolled and unregulated process. I would like to remind you that free choice of a host country is not included in the international law. I also want to underline that there is an unlimited source of supply of people, after Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Africa is now also on the move. The dimension and the volume of the danger is well above our expectations.


This is the right time to make clear the nature and the dimension of our moral responsibility.

We are Christian democrats so the issue of moral responsibility must also be put high into consideration.

We have a heartfelt compassion for the people who left their homes.

They are victims of the bad governance of their own countries.

They are victims of bad international political decisions. And they are victims of our bad European policy as well which raises expectations that are impossible to be fulfilled.

They are obviously victims of the human traffickers. But considering them victims must not turn ourselves into being victims. Just because we do not consider them enemies we must not act against ourselves. 

Our moral responsibility is to give back these people their homes and their countries.

It can’t be our objective to provide them with a new European life. Right to human dignity and security are basic rights. But neither the German, Austrian nor the Hungarian way of life is a basic right of all people on the Earth. It is only a right of those ones who have contributed to it.

Europe is not able to accept everyone who wants a better life. We have to help them to get back their own lives with dignity and we have to send them back to their own countries.


Let me draw your kind attention to the fact that European Christian democratic approach doesn’t tolerate any anti-Muslim policy. Muslim faith which we honor and respect is not responsible for the root causes of this mass migratory movement.


We cannot avoid speaking about the quality of our democracies.

Does it comply with the freedom of information and speech that medias usually show women and children while seventy percent of the migrants are young men and they look like an army?

How could it happen that our people’s feel that their opinion is not being put into consideration? And we have to address the question whether our people want what has been happening.

Did we get authorization from them to allow millions of migrants to enter our continent? Did we get authorization not to comply with the Schengen regulations for months?

No, distinguished Delegates, we did not. And it is not a convincing argument any more that what we have been doing is because of emergency.

I believe we have to gather all our courage, we have to throw away PC-ness and we should launch a big debate. We have to discuss our own intentions regarding our own continent without hypocrisy and pharisaism.

What do we think about our civilization heritage?

Can the change of cultural pattern forced externally?

Do we accept parallel societies? Or we defend our tolerant and rule of law based way of life we have lived so far?


Europe is currently rich and weak. This is the most possibly dangerous mixture.

We seem not to be able to overcome our challenges on our own. Turkey is an important strategic partner.

But if based on the lack of our own power we expect the solution from them that will make us exposed. This is the current situation of Europe.

If we do not want that we have to protect our borders. If we are unable to do so at Greece which is the Eastern gate of the Balkans and the first line of defence than we have to do it at the Western gate of the Balkans at Hungary and Slovenia.


We cannot hide the fact that the European “Left” has a clear agenda.

• They are supportive to migration.

• They actually import future leftist voters to Europe hiding behind humanism.

• It is an old trick but I do not understand why we have to accept it.

• They consider registration and protection of borders bureaucratic, nationalist and against human rights.

• They have a dream about the politically constructed world society without religious traditions, without borders, without nations.((the kalergi plan))

• They attack core values of our European identity: family, nation, subsidiarity and responsibility.


We are EPP. Our behavior should not be determined by the opinion of our rivals. We are a strong and great party.

The stronger the attack, the stronger we need to fight back.

We need to be ready to fight for our principles.

We have to be innovative as well. In the rise of the new crises, the old ways do not work anymore.

We need courage and new experiments, even if not every idea we try succeeds, but it should not stop us from trying. And we should not attack those who are trying. I thank for our President and for sister parties who defended us, Hungarians in the difficult times when we offered new solutions.


We are the European People’s Party – Partie Populaire, Volkspartei, Partido Popular, Party of the People – our responsibility is towards the people. Listen to the people. Let’s be determined, let’s defend Europe. Do not let the leftist mess up and reconstruct Europe! And do not let them oust the soul of Europe! Do not let liberals and socialists take away Europe from the people!

Thank you very much for your attention.

Transcript Source:

The Coudenhove-Kalergi plan – The genocide of the Peoples of Europe

Mass immigration is a phenomenon the causes of which are cleverly concealed by the political elites, and the multicultural propaganda is employed to falsely portray it as inevitable. In this article we intend to prove once and for all, that mass immigration is not a spontaneous phenomenon. What the elites  try to present as an inevitability of modern life, is actually the product of a plan conceived around a table and prepared over decades, to completely change the face of our continent.


Few people know that one of the main instigators of the process of European integration, was a man who also conceived the genocide of the peoples of Europe. He was a sinister individual whose existence is unknown to the masses of our people, but the political elites consider him as the founder of the European Union. His name is Richard von Coudenhove Kalergi. His father was an Austrian diplomat named Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi (with connections to the Byzantine family of the Kallergis), and his mother the Japanese Mitsu Aoyama.

Thanks to his close contacts with European aristocrats and politicians, and due to the network of relationships created his nobleman-diplomat father, Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi was able to work unseen, away from the glare of publicity, and he managed to engage the co-operation of the most influential heads of state for his plan, making them supporters and collaborators for his “project of European integration”.

In 1922 he founded the “Pan-European” movement in Vienna, which aimed to create a New World Order, based on a federation of nations led by the United States. European integration would be just the first step in creating a world government. His earliest supporters included Czech politicians Tomáš Masaryk and Edvard Beneš, and the German Jewish banker Max Warburg, who invested the first 60,000 marks. The Austrian Chancellor Ignaz Seipel and the next president of Austria, Karl Renner, took early responsibility for leading the “Pan-European” movement and later, French politicians, such as Léon Bloum, Aristide Briand, Alcide De Gasperi etc., offered their help.

With the rise of Fascism in Europe during the 1930s, the project of European integration was abandoned and the “Pan-European” movement was forced to dissolve. However, after the Second World War, and thanks to frantic and tireless activity and the support of Winston Churchill, the Jewish Masonic Lodge B’nai B’rith and major newspapers like the New York Times, Kalergi managed to gain acceptance for his plan by the United States Government and later the CIA became involved in driving the plan  towards completion.


In his book «Praktischer Idealismus», Kalergi explains that the citizens of the future “United States of Europe” will not be the people of the Old Continent, but a new mixed breed, the products of thorough and widespread miscegenation. He states that the peoples of Europe should interbreed with Asians and other non-White races, to create a multiracial population, with not clear sense of tradition or identity and therefore easily controlled by the ruling elite.

Kalergi proclaims the need to abolish the right of nations to self-determination and outlines the break-up of nation states through the use of ethnic separatist movements and the destruction of the nations themselves through mass migration. In order for Europe to be easily controlled by the future elite, Kalergi proposes the creation of a homogeneous mixed breed population, and as to who should be the new elite?

Praktischer Idealismus (1925) | by Coudenhove-Kalergie Pages: 191


The man of the future will be of mixed race. The races and classes of today will gradually disappear due to the elimination of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-negroid race of the future, similar in appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the current diversity of peoples and the diversity of individuals. Instead of destroying European Judaism, Europe, against her will, refined and educated this people, driving them to their future status as a leading nation through this artificial evolutionary process. It’s not surprising that the people that escaped from the Ghetto-Prison, became the spiritual nobility of Europe. Thus, the compassionate care given by Europe created a new breed of aristocrats. This happened when the European feudal aristocracy crashed because of the emancipation of the Jews [due to the actions taken by the French Revolution]

Although no textbook mentions Kalergi, his ideas are the guiding principles of the European Union. The belief that the peoples of Europe should be mixed with Africans and Asians, to destroy our identity, to break down traditional ways of living and create a single mixed race, is the reason for community policies that promote minority interests. The underlying motives are not really humanitarian, but because the power behind the ruthless regime dominating the EU plans the greatest genocide in history.

A prestigious prize is awarded every two years by the Coudenhove-Kalergi Foundation (AIMS: Promote a united Europe by extending awards to European celebrities and financing projects that serve the Pan-Europa idea, using the Europe archives from the Coudenhove-Kalergi estate.)[1]Coudenhove-Kalergi Foundation (CKF)  aka. European Society Coudenhove-Kalergi (ES-CK. see URL Europeans who have excelled in promoting this criminal plan. Among those awarded with such a prize are Angela Merkel and Herman Van Rompuy.

The facilitation of genocide, is also the basis of the constant appeals from the United Nations, demanding that we accept millions of immigrants to help counter the low birth rate among Europeans. According to a report published in January 2000 by the population division of the United Nations in New York, under the title “Immigration replacement: A solution to declining and ageing population,” Europe will need to accept 159,000,000 migrants by 2025.

The citing of such precise numbers  is evidence of a premeditated plan. 

Clearly a low birth-rate can easily be reversed with appropriate measures to support families and it is equally clear that the introduction of alien genes will do nothing to preserve our genetic heritage but destroy it. The consequence of current policies promoting multiracialism is to create a weakened disparate population without national, historical or cultural cohesion. In short, the policies of the Kalergi plan have been and still are, the basis of official government policies intent upon the genocide of the Peoples of Europe, through mass immigration.

G. Brock Chisholm, a former director of the World Health Organization (OMS), demonstrated this well when he said:

“What people everywhere need to do is to limit births and promote mixed marriages (between the different races), the outcome will be the creation of a single race throughout the world which can be directed by a central authority. “

G. Brock Chisholm


If we look around us, the implementation of the Kalergi Plan seems to be at an advanced stage. We face Europe’s fusion with the Third World. The plague of interracial marriage produces each year thousands of young people of mixed race: ‘The children of Kalergi’. Under the dual pressures of misinformation and humanitarian stupefaction, promoted by the mass media, we Europeans are being taught to renounce our origins, and to renounce our national identity.

The servants of globalization are trying to convince us that to deny our identity, is a progressive and humanitarian act, that “racism” is wrong, because they want us all to be blind consumers. It is necessary, now more than ever, to counter the lies of the System, to awaken the revolutionary spirit among Europeans. Every one must be made aware of this truth, that European integration amounts to genocide. We have no other option, the alternative is national suicide.

TRANSLATOR’S NOTE: Although the reasons due to which Kalergi made the choices he made are of no particular interest to us, we will try to answer a question that will surely our readers have already asked: Why a European aristocrat with Flemish, Polish, Greek-Byzantine roots and even with some samurai blood in his veins (from his mother) was such body plans and organ in the hands of dark forces? The reasons, in our opinion, are multiple, idiosyncratic, psychological and … women.

We therefore observe a personality with strong snobbish attitudes, arrogance, and, allow me the term, “degenerate elitism.” Also, the fact that his mother was Asian, perhaps created internal conflicts and frustrations, something that can happen to people with such temperament. But the most decisive factor must have been the “proper teenager”, which incidentally of course, was beside him, and became his first woman (at age 13): The Jewess Ida Roland, who would later become a famous actress.


The award of the Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize to President Van Rompuy

On November 16th 2012, the President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, was awarded the Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize, during a special conference in Vienna, to celebrate 90 years of pan-European movement. The prize is awarded every two years to leading personalities for their outstanding contribution to the process of European integration.

A decisive factor that helped him win the prize was the balanced way in which President Van Rompuy executed his duties in the new position of President of the European Council, which was established by the Treaty of Lisbon. He handled this particularly sensitive leading and coordinating role with a spirit of determination and reconciliation, while emphasis was also given to his skilful arbitration on European affairs and unfailing commitment to European moral values.

During his speech, Mr Van Rompuy described the unification of Europe as a peace project.

This idea, which was also the objective of the work of Coudenhove-Kalergi, after 90 years is still important.

The award bears the name of Count Richard Nicolaus von Coudenhove-Kalergi (1894-1972), philosopher, diplomat, publisher and founder of the Pan-European Movement (1923). Coudenhove-Kalergi was the pioneer of European integration and popularized the idea of a federal Europe with his work.

Among the winners of the award, the Federal Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel (2010) and the President of Latvia Vaira Vike-Freiberga (2006), are included.

Original Source:

Charlemagne Prize – 61 Key Promoters of Pan-Europa using the Europe archives from the Coudenhove-Kalergi estate. (Coudenhove-Kalergi plan 1950-2018…)


1 Coudenhove-Kalergi Foundation (CKF)  aka. European Society Coudenhove-Kalergi (ES-CK. see URL

Charlemagne Prize – 61 Key Promoters of Pan-Europa using the Europe archives from the Coudenhove-Kalergi estate. (Coudenhove-Kalergi plan 1950-2018…)

Recipients of the Charlemagne Prize[1]see url

(AIMS: Promote a united Europe by extending awards to European celebrities and financing projects that serve the Pan-Europa idea, using the Europe archives from the Coudenhove-Kalergi estate.)

International Charlemagne Prize Aachen

Created in 1949, and first awarded in 1950, the Charlemagne Prize is one of the most prestigious prizes in Europe.

It compensates public personalities for their contribution in the service of West European understanding and common endeavour, and in the service of humanity and world peace. The prize was conceived by citizens of the German city of Aachen.

Named after Charlemagne, it highlights that Aachen was once the political center of Europe, from where Charlemagne attempted the unification of the continent. Charlemagne is burried in the Aachen cathedral.

  1. 1950 : Richard Nikolaus, Graf von Coudenhove-Kalergi (1894-1972)
  2. 1951 : Hendrik Brugmans (1906-1997)
  3. 1952 : Alcide de Gasperi (1881-1954)
  4. 1953 : Jean Monnet (1888-1979)
  5. 1954 : Konrad Adenauer (1876-1967)
  6. 1956 : Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
  7. 1957 : Paul Henri Spaak (1899-1972)
  8. 1958 : Robert Schuman (1886-1963)
  9. 1959 : George C. Marshall (1880-1959)
  10. 1960 : Joseph Bech (1887-1975)
  11. 1961 : Walter Hallstein (1901-1982)
  12. 1963 : Edward Heath (1916-2005)
  13. 1964 : Antonio Segni (1891-1972)
  14. 1966 : Jens Otto Krag (1914-1978)
  15. 1967 : Joseph Luns (1911-2002)
  16. 1969 : The European Commission
  17. 1970 : François Seydoux de Clausonne (1905-1981)
  18. 1972 : Roy Jenkins (1920-2003)
  19. 1973 : Salvador de Madariaga y Rojo (1886-1978)
  20. 1976 : Leo Tindemans (1922-2014)
  21. 1977 : Walter Scheel (1919-2016)
  22. 1978 : Konstantinos Karamanlis (1907-1998)
  23. 1979 : Emilio Colombo (1920-2013)
  24. 1981 : Simone Veil (1927-2017)
  25. 1982 : Juan Carlos I, rey de España (1938- )
  26. 1984 : Karl Carstens (1914-1992)
  27. 1986 : The People of Luxembourg
  28. 1987 : Henry Kissinger (1923-)
  29. 1988 : François Mitterrand (1916-1996)
  30. 1988 : Helmut Kohl (1930- 2017)
  31. 1989 : Frère Roger[2]of the Taizé Community (1915-2005)
  32. 1990 : Gyula Horn (1932-2013)
  33. 1991 : Václav Havel (1936-2011)
  34. 1992 : Jacques Delors (1925-)
  35. 1993 : Felipe González (1942-)
  36. 1994 : Gro Harlem Brundtland (1939-)
  37. 1995 : Franz Vranitzky (1937-)
  38. 1996 : Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands (1938-)
  39. 1997 : Roman Herzog (1934-2017)
  40. 1998 : Bronislaw Geremek (1932-2008)
  41. 1999 : Tony Blair (1953- )
  42. 2000 : Bill Clinton (1946- )
  43. 2001 : György Konrád (1933-)
  44. 2002 : The Euro
  45. 2003 : Valéry Giscard d’Estaing (1926- )
  46. 2004 : Pat Cox (1952-)
  47. 2004 : Pope John Paul II[3]Karol Józef Wojtyła (extraordinary prize) (1920-2004)
  48. 2005 : Carlo Azeglio Ciampi (1920-2016)
  49. 2006 : Jean-Claude Juncker (1954-)
  50. 2007 : Javier Solana (1942- )
  51. 2008 : Angela Merkel (1954- )
  52. 2009 : Andrea Riccardi (1950-)
  53. 2010 : Donald Tusk (1957-)
  54. 2011 : Jean-Claude Trichet (1942-)
  55. 2012 : Wolfgang Schäuble (1942-)
  56. 2013 : Dalia Grybauskaitė (1956- )
  57. 2014 : Herman Van Rompuy (1947-)
  58. 2015 : Martin Schultz (1955-)
  59. 2016 : Pope Francis[4]Jorge Mario Bergoglio (1936-)
  60. 2017 : Timothy Garton Ash (1955-)
  61. 2018 : Emmanuel Macron (1977-)



1 see url
2 of the Taizé Community
3 Karol Józef Wojtyła
4 Jorge Mario Bergoglio

The Kalergi Plan: The real reason that the European Union is so hostile to Donald Trump @realDonaldTrump

One of the intellectual founding fathers of the European Union, the Austrian diplomat and Freemason Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi outlined his plans for the overall future implications of the EU in his book ‘Practical Idealism’. Looking back at this text many years after it was initially penned by Kalergi it is interesting to note how many of his peculiar and often disturbing plans might be coming to fruition in contemporary Europe.


Kalergi described his dreams for a One World Government with its foundations in the European Union. He hoped that the European project would go on to become the blueprint for a society run entirely by the global elite over a completely powerless population. He wrote that he wished to see the end of national sovereignty and self-determination and he believed that nationalism, and indeed the very concept of nations, could be demolished through multi-culturalism. He wrote that a society that was racially and ethnically diverse was one which was easily controllable by the political elite.

According to Kalegri, a diverse and multi-cultural people were easy to control as they had no common identity to rally behind in the event of a political crisis. In addition to that, a diverse population would be easy to conquer by the means of divide and rule. The newly arrived immigrants would be pitted against the native people with both sides believing that they were a persecuted minority languishing under a system of law that was rigged against their favour.

Since the last world war, the European Union has gradually eroded aspects of national sovereignty for nation states, often making national law subordinate to that decided by unelected figures at the head of the international organisation.

There has also been a concerted attempt to chip away at nationalist sentiments and nation-orientated social projects by such policy decisions as freedom of movement as part of the European integration and Angela Merkel’s open-door policy towards Syrian refugees.


While Kalergi’s text might seem to be a relic of a more authoritarian and intellectually warped era for the people of Europe, it is notable that he is still celebrated and honored among key members of the European Union today. The Kalergi prize, otherwise known as the Charlemagne Prize, was created in his honor to be awarded to European figures who have helped to promote his plan. Among those awarded this prize in recent years are Angela Merkel, Herman Van Rompuy (the former Prime Minister of Belgium and first President of the European Council) and Pope Francis.

The fact that Kalergi is still apparently alive in the minds of many prominent Europeans has led to the suggestion that this is what lies at the obvious antipathy towards the president-elect Donald Trump by European leaders. Kalergi hoped that the United States would be the next region to fall under the One World Government he envisaged and perhaps many people still nourished that dream until his shock election last year.

Trump has proven himself to be openly hostile to the idea of multiculturalism and further immigration to the United States, in stark contrast to any of his recent predecessors. He has also preached an isolationist foreign policy and appears to be drawing the lines of the classic nation state in much darker shades than previous presidents. Perhaps it is the case that he is seen as a potential fly in the ointment when it comes to pursuing Kalergi’s bizarre plan for world domination.

The Kalergi Plan – White Genocide?
Controversial Matters
Published on 20 May 2017

Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi: The conspiracy Fact or Fiction? Here i take a short look at “The Kalergi Plan” (Video requested by a subscriber). A little known conspiracy, that seems to be becoming more and more popular. Probably due to recent events. Many claim a conspiracy of “white genocide” and they often quote his book “Practical Idealism” to back up their claims.. Are they on to something? Or is it all coincidence? You are welcome to come to your own conclusions.

Article Title: The Kalergi Plan: The real reason that the European Union is so hostile to Donald Trump @realDonaldTrump
Article Link:
Date-stamped: May, 29, 2016
Author: Vailham


Migrant Crisis in Europe – Kalergi Plan?

boilingpoint Published on 7 Jul 2017
Here’s a rant on the migrant crisis we’re facing in Europe – a truthful rant that is. This so called ‘crisis’ isn’t really a crisis it’s a deliberate attempt to completely subvert the independence of nations and reduce them to merely regions of the world lorded over by bankers and CEOs who think they’re better than everyone else. There’s no democracy on offer or anything other than turning the world into a big company who you work for while being lorded over by fat cats who make lucrative, crooked deals with each other. what do you think?

Is the Kalergi plan a conspiracy theory?

Guido Colacci, Asst. Editor, Writer & Artist for Steel Notes Magazine

NO, it is not a “Conspiracy Theory.”

It is a fact-based plan which began as something called the Pan European Movement in 1922.

After America’s might and power was observed in WWI, this organization would promote and facilitate a “New World Order” (NWO) requiring a federation of nations led by the United States (sound familiar?).

The first step in this would be the integration of Europe with the aim of creating a World Government.

This found the support of many European politicians. Fortunately, WWII put a hold on it. Today, it is done through manipulating immigration, the acceptance into the country of refugees and a in short, the policies of the Kalergi plan have been and still are, the basis of official government policies intent upon the genocide of the peoples of European descent, through mass influx of peoples from third world countries, middle eastern countries and Asian countries.

This is evident in the United States after the implementation of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, enacted June 30, 1968, also known as the Hart–Celler Act.

It changed the way quotas were allocated by ending the National Origins Formula that had been in place in the United States since the Emergency Quota Act of 1921. Representative Emanuel Celler of New York (New York (state) – Wikipedia) proposed the bill, Senator Philip Hart co-sponsored it, and Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts helped to promote it.

The Hart–Celler Act abolished the quota system based on national origins that had been American immigration policy since the 1920’s. The 1965 Act marked a change from past U.S. policy which had discriminated against non-northern Europeans. In removing racial and national barriers the Act would significantly, and (un)intentionally, alter the demographic mix in the U.S.

The changes are quite obvious in the United States and Europe. In 1920 the US was 90% white, as of 2010 it was 68% white and the number will keep dropping, just as in Europe. The fact that this is happening in a concise, agreed upon and speedy way, is evidence of a premeditated and organized plan.

Article Title: Question: Is the Kalergi plan a conspiracy theory?
Article Link:
Date-stamped: Sep 27, 2017
Author: Guido Colacci

White Genocide in Europe (aka. The Kalergi Plan?)


A conspiracy theory that mass immigration, racial integration, miscegenation, low fertility rates and abortion are being promoted in predominantly white countries to deliberately turn them minority-white and hence cause white people to become extinct through forced assimilation.

It is noted that in Nazi Germany by a pamphlet written for the “Research Department for the Jewish question” of Walter Frank’s “Reich Institute” with the title “Are the White Nations Dying? The Future of the White and the Colored Nations in the Light of Biological Statistics.[1]see url

The are some who hold the view that Jews are responsible for a white genocide such as USA: David Duke, Jared Taylor, Mike Cernovich SA: Steve Hofmeyr. The danger in labelling people because they hold genuine concern for what they see as a possibility to pointing to a sinister plot to wipe out certain people group is absolutely wrong.

Such people being labeled like this has been Brittany Pettibone & Alex Jones which would be stretching the boundary’s of white supremacist well outside the lines, and it could easily be suggested the labelling of these two commentators is just a political attempt from ruling factions to gag these voices, only the gullible and uninformed  would believe the cry of Nazism and white supremacist applies to these two, mainstream media and the democrats have tried since 2016 to label Candidate Trump and now President Trump with the same labels cry of Nazism and white supremacist; that has not floated nor resonated within the majority of american voters, nor is there any credible reality attached to such claims.

WE MUST ALWAYS LISTEN TO PEOPLE IN CONTEXT failing to do so will guarantee we misunderstand the real intentions being conveyed!

Never get your opinions from the information provided from mainstream media, out of context reporting is their speciality and is the tool they use to deceive and influence their readers to hold opinions they what the reader to have.

Take the time to actually study the subject and read the works which influence organizations such as the EU.

2016 has shown what a politician says in public usually is not what he/she is saying behind closed doors to the power brokers of a nation, the private agenda is the real agenda always remember that!

So look deep long and hard before you decide on such matters as this and then form your on convictions, then order your life accordingly to those convictions. 

An interesting take on the origins of antisemitism written by a Jewish-American immigrant named Marcus Eli Ravage. Published in 1928 in Century Magazine, this article explains that Christianity is basically Judaism 2.0 and that the Christianization of Europe essentially amounted to an erasure and replacement of the European people’s native pagan cultures with the national religion of Israel.

It is an interesting read– draw your own conclusions.

Rabbi Ravage did a follow-up essay called see end of Article. “A Commissary to the Gentiles”

“A Real Case Against the Jews” by Rabbi Marcus Eli Ravage

A Real Case Against Jews[2]

The following is an article written by an American Jew in 1928: by Rabbi Marcus Eli Ravage (reprinted from The Century Magazine January 1928)

Of course, you do resent us. It is no good telling me you don’t. So let us not waste any time on denials and alibis.

You know you do, and I know it, and we understand each other.

To be sure, some of your best friends are Jews, and all that. I have heard that before once or twice, I think. And I know too, that you do not include me personally – “me” being any particular individual Jew – when you fling out at us in your wholesale fashion, because I am, well, so different, don’t you know, almost as good as one of yourselves. T

hat little exemption does not, somehow, move me to gratitude; but never mind that now. It is the aggressive, climbing, pushing, materialistic sort you dislike – those, in a world, who remind you so much of your own up-and-coming brethren. We understand each other perfectly. I don’t hold it against you.

Bless my soul, I do not blame anybody for disliking anybody. The thing that intrigues me about this anti-Jewish business, as you play at it, you make such fantastic and transparent excuses, you seem to be suffering from self-consciousness so horribly, that if the performance were not so grotesque it would be irritating.

It is not as if you were amateurs: you have been at it for over fifteen centuries.

Yet watching you and hearing your childish pretexts, one might get the impression that you did not know yourselves what it is all about.

You resent us, but you cannot clearly say why.

You think up a new excuse – a “reason” is what you call it – every other day.

You have been piling up justification for yourself these many hundreds of years and each new invention is more laughable than the last and each new excuse contradicts and annihilates the last.

Not so many years ago I used to hear that we were money-grubbers and commercial materialists; now the complaint is being whispered around that no art and no profession is safe against Jewish invasion.

We are, if you are to be believed, at once clannish and exclusive, and unassimilable because we won’t intermarry with you, and we are also climbers and pushers and a menace to your racial integrity.

Our standard of living is so low that we create your slums and sweat industries, and so high that we crowd you out of your best residential sections.

We shirk our patriotic duty in wartime because we are pacifists by nature and tradition, and we are the arch-plotters of universal wars and the chief beneficiaries of those wars (see “The protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion“.)

We are at once the founders and leading adherents of capitalism and the chief perpetrators of the rebellion against capitalism.

Surely, history has nothing like us for versatility!

And oh! I almost forgot the reasons of reasons. We are the stiff-necked people who never accepted Christianity, and we are the criminal people who crucified its founder.

But I tell you, you are self-deceivers. You lack either the self-knowledge or the mettle to face the facts squarely and own up to the truth. You resent the Jew not because, as some of you seem to think, we crucified Jesus but because we gave him birth. Your real quarrel with us is not that we have rejected Christianity but that we have imposed it upon you!

Your loose, contradictory charges against us are not a patch on the blackness of our proved historic offence. You accuse us of stirring up revolution in Moscow. Suppose we admit the charge. What of it? Compared with what Paul the Jew of Tarsus accomplished in Rome, the Russian upheavals a mere street brawl.

You make much noise and fury about the undue Jewish influence in your theatres and movie palaces. Very good; granted your complaint is well-founded. But what is that compared to our staggering influence in your churches, your schools, your laws and your governments, and the very thoughts you think every day?

A clumsy Russian forges a set of papers and publishes them in a book called “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” which shows that we plotted to bring on the late World War. You believe that book. All right.

For the sake of argument, we will underwrite every word of it. It is genuine and authentic. But what is that besides the unquestionable historical conspiracy which we have carried out, which we never have denied because you never had the courage to charge us with it, and of which the full record is extant for anybody to read?

If you really are serious when you talk of Jewish plots, may I not direct your attention to one worth talking about? What use is it wasting words on the alleged control of your public opinion by Jewish financiers, newspaper owners, and movie magnates, when you might as well justly accuse us of the proved control of your whole civilization by the Jewish Gospels?

You have not begun to appreciate the real depth of our guilt. We are intruders. We are disturbers. We are subverters. We have taken your natural world, your ideals, your destiny, and played havoc with them.

We have been at the bottom of not merely the latest Great War but of nearly all your wars, not only of the Russian but of nearly every other major revolution in your history. We have brought discord and confusion and frustration into your personal and public life. We are still doing it. No one can tell how long, we shall go on doing it.

Look back a little and see what has happened. Nineteen hundred years ago you were an innocent, care-free pagan race. You worshipped countless Gods and Goddesses, the spirits of the air, of the running streams and of the woodland.

You took unblushing pride in the glory of your naked bodies. You carved images of your gods and of the tantalizing human figure. You delighted in the combats of the field, the arena and the battle-ground.

War and slavery were fixed institutions in your systems.

Disporting yourselves on the hillsides and in the valleys of the great outdoors, you took to speculating on the wonder and mystery of life and laid the foundations of natural science and philosophy.

Yours was a noble, sensual culture, unirked by the prickings of the social conscience or by any sentimental questionings about human equality. Who knows what great and glorious destiny might have been yours if we had left you alone.

But we did not leave you alone. We took you in hand and pulled down the beautiful and generous structure you had reared, and changed the whole course of your history. We conquered you as no empire of yours ever subjugated Africa or Asia. And we did it all without bullets, without blood or turmoil, without force of any kind. We did it solely by the irresistible might of our spirit, with ideas, with propaganda.

We made you the willing and unconscious bearers of our mission to the whole world, to the barbarous races of the world, to the countless unborn generations. Without fully understanding what we were doing to you, you became the agents at large of our racial tradition, carrying our gospel to unexplored ends of the earth.

Our tribal customs have become the core of your moral code. Our tribal laws have furnished the basic groundwork of all your august constitutions and legal systems. Our legends and our folk-tales are the sacred lore which you croon to your infants.

Our poets have filled your hymnals and your prayer-books.

Our national history has become an indispensable part of the learning of your pastors and priests and scholars.

Our Kings, our statesmen, our prophets, our warriors are your heroes. Our ancient little country is your Holy Land. Our national literature is your Holy Bible.

What our people thought and taught has become inextricable woven into your very speech and tradition, until no one among you can be called educated who is not familiar with our racial heritage.

Jewish artisans and Jewish fishermen are your teachers and your saints, with countless statues carved in their image and innumerable cathedrals raised to their memories. A Jewish maiden is your ideal of motherhood and womanhood. A Jewish rebel-prophet is the central figure in your religious worship.

We have pulled down your idols, cast aside your racial inheritance, and substituted for them our God and our traditions. No conquest in history can even remotely compare with this clean sweep of our conquest over you.

How did we do it?

Almost by accident.

Nearly two thousand years ago in far-off Palestine, our religion had fallen into decay and materialism. Money-changers were in possession of the temple. Degenerate, selfish priests grew fat. Then a young patriot- idealist arose and went about the land calling for a revival of the faith.

He had no thought of setting up a new church.

Like all the prophets before him, his only aim was to purify and revitalize the old creed. He attacked the priests and drove the money- changers from the temple. This brought him into conflict with the established order and its supporting pillars.

The Roman authorities , who were in occupation of the country, fearing his revolutionary agitation as a political effort to oust them, arrested him, tried him and condemned him to death by crucifixion, a common form of execution at that time.

The followers of Jesus of Nazereth, mainly slaves and poor workmen, in their bereavement and disappointment, turned away from the world and formed themselves into a brotherhood of pacifists non-resisters, sharing their memory of their crucified leader and living together communistically.

They were merely a new sect in Judea, without power or consequence, neither the first nor the last.

Only after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans did the new creed come into prominence.

Then a patriotic Jew named Paul or Saul conceived the idea of humbling the Roman power by destroying the morale of its soldiery with the doctrines of love and non- resistance preached by the little sect of Jewish Christians.

He became the Apostle to the Gentiles, he who hitherto had been one of the most active persecutors of the band. And so well did Paul do his work that within four centuries the great empire which had subjugated Palestine along with half of the world, was a heap of ruins. And the law which went forth from Zion became the official religion of Rome.

This was the beginning of our dominance in your world. But it was only a beginning.

From this time forth your history is little more than a struggle for mastery between your own old pagan spirit and our Jewish spirit.

Half your wars, great and little, are religious wars, fought over the interpretation of one thing or another in our teachings.

You no sooner broke free from your primitive religious simplicity and attempted the practice of the pagan Roman learning than Luther armed with our Gospel arose to down you and re-enthrone our heritage.

Take the three principal revolutions in modern times – the French, the American, and the Russian.

What are they but the triumphs of the Jewish idea of social, political and economic justice?

And the end is still a long way off. We still dominate you.

At this very moment your churches are torn asunder by a civil war between Fundamentalists and Modernists, that is to say between those who cling to our teachings and traditions literally and those who are striving by slow steps to dispossess us.

Again and again the Puritan heritage of Judea breaks out in waves of stage censorship, Sunday blue laws and national prohibition acts. And while these things are happening you twaddle about Jewish influence in the movies.

Is it any wonder you resent us? We have put a clog upon your progress. We have imposed upon you an alien book and an alien faith which you cannot digest, which is at cross-purposes with your native spirit, which keeps you everlasting ill-at-ease, and which you lack the spirit to either reject or accept in full.

In full, of course, you never have accepted our Christian teachings.

In your hearts you still are pagans.

You still take pride in the glory of the nude human figure.

Your social conscience, in spite of all democracy and all your social revolution, is still a pitifully imperfect thing.

We have merely divided your soul. confused your impulses and paralysed your desires.

In the midst of the battle you are obliged to kneel down to him who commanded you to turn the other cheek, who said “Resist not evil” and “Blessed are the peace-makers”.

In your lust for gain you are suddenly disturbed by a memory from your Sunday school days about taking no thought for the morrow.

In your industrial struggles, when you would smash a strike without compunction, you are suddenly reminded that the poor are blessed and that men are brothers in the Fatherhood of the Lord. And you are about to yield to temptation, your Jewish training puts a deterrent hand on your shoulder and dashes the brimming cup from your lips.

You Christians have never become Christianized. To that extent we have failed with you. But we have forever spoiled the fun of paganism for you.

So why should you not resent us? If we were in your place we should probably dislike you more cordially than you do us. But we should make no bones about telling you why. We should not resort to subterfuges and transparent pretext.

With millions of painfully respectable Jewish shopkeepers all about us we should not insult your intelligence and your own honesty by talking about communism as a Jewish philosophy. And with millions hard-working impecunious Jewish peddlers and labourers we should make ourselves ridiculous by talking about international capitalism as a Jewish monopoly.

No we should go straight to the point. We should contemplate this confused ineffectual muddle which we call civilization, this half- Christian half-pagan medley, and – we should say to you point- blank: “For this mess thanks to you, to your prophets, and your Bible.”

A Real Case Against The Jews
Pages 5 | 0.446 mb


• Rabbi Ravage did a follow-up essay called:

Commissary to the Gentiles

The following is an article written by an American Jew in 1928: The Century Magazine February 1928 By Rabbi Marcus Eli Ravage

You Christians worry and complain about the Jew’s influence in your civilization.

We are, you say, an international people, a compact minority in your midst, with traditions, interests, aspirations and objectives distinct from your own. And you declare that this state of affairs is a menace to your orderly development; it confuses your impulses; it defeats your purposes; it muddles up your destiny. I do not altogether see the danger.

Your world has always been ruled by minorities; and it seems to me a matter of indifference what the remote origin and professed creed of the governing clique is. The influence, on the other hand, is certainly there, and it is vastly greater and more insidious than you appear to realize.

That is what puzzles and amuses and sometimes exasperates us about your game of Jew-baiting.

It sounds so portentous. You go about whispering terrifyingly of the Jew in this and that and the other thing. It makes us quake. We are conscious of the injury we did you when we imposed upon you our alien faith and traditions.

Suppose, we say trembling, you should wake up to the fact that your religion, your education, your morals, your social, governmental and legal systems are fundamentally of our making! And then you specify, and talk vaguely of Jewish financiers and Jewish motion-picture promoters, and our terror dissolves in laughter. The Goi, we see with relief, will never know the real blackness of our crimes.

We cannot make it out.

Either you do not know or you have not the courage to charge us with those deeds for which there is at least a shadow of evidence and which an intelligent judge and jury could examine without impatience. Why bandy about unconvincing trifles when you might so easily indict us for serious and provable offences? Why throw up to us a patent and a clumsy forgery such as the Protocols of the Elders Zion when you might as well confront us with the Revelation of St. John? Why talk about Marx and Trotski when you have Jesus of Nazereth and Paul of Tarsus to confound us with?

You call us subverters, agitators, revolution-mongers. It is the truth, and I cower at your discovery.

It could be shown with only the slightest straining and juggling of the facts that we have been at the bottom of all the major revolutions in your history. We undoubtedly had a sizeable finger in the Lutheran Rebellion, and it is simply a fact that we were the prime movers in the bourgeois democratic revolutions of the century before the last, both in France and America. If we were not, we did not know our own interests.

But do you point your accusing finger at us and charge us with these heinous and recorded crimes?

Not at all?

You fantastically lay at our door the recent great War and the upheaval in Russia, which have done not only the most injury to the Jews themselves but which a school-boy could have foreseen would have that result.

But even these plots and revolutions are as nothing compared with the great conspiracy which we engineered at the beginning of this era and which was destined to make the creed of a Jewish sect the religion of the Western world.

The Reformation was not designed in malice purely. It squared us with an ancient enemy and restored our Bible to it’s place of honour in Christendom, The Republican revolutions of the Eighteenth century freed us of our age-long political and social disabilities.

They benefited us, but they did you no harm.

On the contrary, they prospered and expanded you. You owe your preeminence in the world to them.

But the upheaval which brought Christianity into Europe was – or at least may easily be shown to have been – planned and executed by Jews as an act revenge against a great Gentile state. And when you talk about Jewish conspiracies I cannot for the world understand why you do not mention the destruction of Rome and the whole civilization of antiquity concentrated under her banners, at the hands of Jewish Christianity.

It is unbelievable, but you Christians do not seem to know where your religion came from, nor how, nor why. Your historians, with one great exception, do not tell you.

The documents in these case, which are part of your Bible, you chant over but do not read. We have done our work too thoroughly; you believe our propaganda too implicitly. The coming of Christianity is to you not an ordinary historical event growing out of other events of the time, it is the fulfilment of a divine Jewish prophecy – with suitable amendments of your own.

It did not, as you see it, destroy a great Gentile civilization and a great Gentile empire with which Jewry was at war; it did not plunge mankind into barbarism and darkness for a thousand years; it came to bring salvation to the Gentile world!

Yet here, if ever, was a great subversive movement, hatched in Palestine, spread by Jewish agitators, financed by Jewish money, taught in Jewish pamphlets and broadsides, at a time when Jewry and Rome were in a death struggle, and ending in the collapse of the great Gentile empire.

You do not even see it, though an intelligent child, unfuddled by theological magic, could tell you what it is all about after a hasty reading of the simple record. And then you go on prattling of Jewish conspiracies and cite as instances the Great War and the Russian Revolution!

Can you wonder that we Jews have always taken your anti-Semites rather lightly, as long as they did not resort to violence?

And mind you, no less an authority than Gibbon long ago tried to enlighten you.

It is now a century and a half since The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire let the cat out of the bag, Gibbon, not being a parson dabbling in history, did not try to account for the end of a great era by inventing fatuous nonsense about the vice and degradation of Rome, about the decay of morals and faith in an empire which was at that very time in the midst of its most glorious creative period.

How could he?

He was living in the Augustan Age in London which – in spite of nearly two thousand years since the coming of Christian salvation – was a good replica of Augustan Rome in the matter of refined lewdness as the foggy islanders could make it.

No, Gibbons was a race-conscious Gentile and an admirer of the culture of the pagan West, as well as an historian with brains and eyes.

Therefore he had no difficulty laying his finger on the malady that had rotted and wasted away the noble edifice of antique civilization. He put Christianity down – the law which went forth from Zion and the word of God from Jerusalem – as the central cause of the decline and fall of Rome and all she represented.

So far so good. But Gibbon did not go far enough. He was born and died, you see, a century before the invention of scientific anti-Semitism. He left wholly out of account the element of deliberation. He saw an alien creed sweeping out of the East and overwhelming the fair lands of the West. It never occurred to him that the whole scheme of salvation was dedicated. Yet the facts are as plain as you please.

Let me in very brief recount the tale, unembroidered by miracle, prophecy or magic.

For a good perspective, I shall have to go back a space. The action conveniently falls into four parts, rising to a climax in the third. The time, when the first curtain rises, is roughly 65 B.C. Dramatis personae are, minor parts aside, Judea and Rome. Judea is a tiny kingdom off the Eastern Mediterranean.

For five centuries it has been hardly more than a geographical expression.

Again and again it has been overrun and destroyed and its population carried into exile or slavery by its powerful neighbours. Nominally independent, it is now as unstable as ever and on the edge of civil war.

The empire of the West, with her nucleus in the City Republic of Rome, while not yet mistress of the world, is speedily heading that way . She is acknowledged the one great military power of the time as well as the heir of Greece and the centre of civilization.

Up to the present the two states have had little or no contact with one another.

Then without solicitation on her part Rome was suddenly asked take a hand in Judean affairs.

A dispute had arisen between two brothers over the succession to the petty throne, and the Roman general Pompey, who happened to be in Damascus winding up bigger matters, was called upon to arbitrate between the claimants.

With the simple directness of a republican soldier, Pompey exiled one of the brothers, tossed the chief priesthood to his rival, and abolished the kingly dignity altogether.

Not to put too fine a point on it, Pompey’s mediation amounted in effect to making Judea a Roman dependency.

The Jews, not unnaturally, objected; and Rome, to conciliate them and to conform to local prejudice, restored the royal office. She appointed, that is, a king of her own choosing. He was the son of an excise-man, an Idumean by race, named Herod. But the Jews were not placated, and continued making trouble. Rome thought it very ungrateful of them.

All this is merely a prelude, and is introduced into the action to make clear what follows.

Jewish discontent grew to disaffection and open revolt when their Gentile masters began importing into Jerusalem the blessings of Western culture.

Graven images, athletic games, Greek drama, and gladiatorial shows were not to the Jewish taste.

The pious resented them as an offence in the nostrils of Jehovah, even though the resident officials patiently explained they were meant for the entertainment and edification of the non-Jewish garrison. The Judeans resisted with especial strenuousness the advent of the efficient Roman tax-gatherer.

Above all, they wanted back a king of their own royal line.

Among the masses the rebellion took the form of a revival of the old belief in a Messiah, a divinely appointed saviour who was to redeem his people from the foreign yoke and make Judea supreme among the nations.

Claimants to the mission were not wanting.

In Galilee, one Judas led a rather formidable insurrection, which enlisted much popular support. John, called the Baptist, operated in the Jordan country.

He was followed by another north-country man, Jesus of Nazareth.

All three were masters of the technique of couching incendiary political sedition in harmless theological phrases.

All three used the same signal of revolt – “the time is at hand”. And three were speedily apprehended and executed , both Galileans by crucifixion.

Personal qualities aside, Jesus of Nazareth was, like his predecessors, a political agitator engaged in liberating his country from the foreign oppressor.

There is even considerable evidence that he entertained an ambition to become king of an independent Judea. He claimed, or his biographers later claimed for him, descent from the ancient royal line of David. But his paternity is somewhat confused. The same writers who traced the origin of his mother’s husband back to the psalmist-king also pictured Jesus as the son of Jehovah, and admitted that Joseph was not his father.

It seems, however, that Jesus before long realized the hopelessness of his political mission and turned his oratorical gifts and his great popularity with masses in quite another direction.

He began preaching a primitive form of populism, socialism and pacificism.

The effect of this change in his program was to gain him the hostility of the substantial, propertied classes, the priest and patriots generally, and to reduce his following to the poor, labouring mass and the slaves.

After his death these lowly disciples formed themselves into a communistic brotherhood.

A sermon their late leader had once delivered upon a hillside summed up for them the essence of his teachings, and they made it their rule of life.

It was a philosophy calculated to appeal profoundly to humble people.

It comforted those who suffered here on earth with promised rewards beyond the grave. It made virtues of necessities of the weak. Men without hope in the future were admonished to take no thought for the morrow.

Men too helpless to resent insult or injury were taught to resist not evil.

Men condemned to lifelong drudgery and indigence were assured of the dignity of labour and of poverty. The meek, the despised, the disinherited, the downtrodden, were – in the hereafter – to be the elect and favoured of God. The worldly, the ambitious, the rich and powerful, were to be denied admission to heaven.

The upshot, then, of Jesus’ mission was a new sect in Judea.

It was neither the first nor the last.

Judea, like modern America, was a fertile soil for strange creeds.

The Ebionim – the paupers, as they called themselves – did not regard their beliefs as a new religion.

Jews they had been born, and Jews they remained.

The teachings of their master were rather in nature of a social philosophy, an ethic of conduct, a way of life. To modern Christians, who never tire of asking why the Jews did not accept Jesus and his teachings, I can only answer that for a long time none but the Jews did. To be surprised that the whole Jewish people did not turn Ebionim is about as intelligent as to expect all Americans to join the Unitarians or the Baptists or the Christian Scientists.

In ordinary times little attention would been paid to the ragged brotherhood.

Slaves and labourers for the most part, their meekness might even have been encouraged by the soldier class.

But with the country in the midst of a struggle with a foreign foe, the unworldly philosophy took on a dangerous aspect.

It was a creed of disillusion, resignation and defeat. It threatened to undermine the morale of the nation’s fighting men in time of war.

This blessing of the peacemakers, this turning of the other cheek, this non-resistance, this love your enemy, looked like a deliberate attempt to paralyse the national will in a crisis and assure victory to the foe.

So it is not surprising that the Jewish authorities began persecuting the Ebionim. Their meetings were invaded and dispersed, their leaders were clapped into jail, their doctrines were proscribed. It looked for awhile as if the sect would be speedily wiped out. Then, unexpected, the curtain rose on act three, and events took a sudden new turn.

Perhaps the bitterest foe of the sectaries was one Saul, a maker of tents.

A native of Tarsus and thus a man of some education in Greek culture, he despised the new teachings for their unworldliness and their remoteness from life.

A patriotic Jew, he dreaded their effect on the national cause. A travelled man, versed in several languages, he was ideally suited for the task of going about among the scattered Jewish communities to counteract the spread of their socialistic pacifistic doctrines. The leaders in Jerusalem appointed him chief persecutor to the Ebionim.

He was on his way to Damascus one day to arrest a group of the sectaries when a novel idea came to him.

In the quaint phrase of the book of Acts he saw a vision.

He saw as a matter of fact, two.

He perceived, to begin with, how utterly hopeless were the chances of little Judea winning out in an armed conflict against the greatest military power in the world.

Second, and more important, it came to him that the vagabond creed which he had been repressing might be forged into an irresistible weapon against the formidable foe. Pacifism, non-resistance, resignation, love, were dangerous teachings at home. Spread among the enemy’s legions, they might brake down their discipline and thus yet bring victory to Jerusalem. Saul, in a word, was probably the first man to see the possibilities of conducting war by propaganda.

He journeyed on to Damascus, and there, to the amazement alike of his friends and of those he had gone to suppress, he announced his conversion to the faith and applied for admission to the brotherhood.

On his return to Jerusalem he laid his new strategy before the startled Elders of Zion.

After much debate and searching of souls, it was adopted. More resistance was offered by the leaders Ebionim of the capital. They were mistrustful of his motives, and they feared that his proposal to strip the faith of its ancient Jewish observances and practices so as to make it acceptable to Gentiles would fill the fraternity with alien half- converts, and dilute its strength.

But in the end he won them over, too. And so Saul, the fiercest persecutor of Jesus’ followers, became Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles. And so, incidentally, began the spread into pagan lands of the West, an entirely new Oriental religion.

Unfortunately for Paul’s plan, the new strategy worked much too well.

His revamped and rather alluring theology made converts faster than he had dared hope, or than he even wished. His idea, it should be kept in mind, was at this stage purely defensive.

He had as yet no thought of evangelizing the world; he only hoped to discourage the enemy.

With that accomplished, and the Roman garrisons out of Palestine, he was prepared to call a truce. But the slaves and oppressed of the Empire, the wretched conscripts, and the starving proletariat of the capital itself, found as much solace in the adapted Pauline version of the creed as the poor Jews before them had found in the original teachings of their crucified master. .

The result of this unforeseen success was to open the enemy’s eyes to what was going on.

Disturbing reports of insubordination among the troops began pouring into Rome from the army chiefs in Palestine and elsewhere. Instead of giving the imperial authorities pause, the new tactics only stiffened their determination.

Rome swooped down upon Jerusalem with fire and sword, and after a fierce siege which lasted four years, she destroyed the nest of the agitation (70 A.D.). At least she thought she had destroyed it.

The historians of the time leave us in no doubt as to the aims of Rome.

They tell us that Nero sent Vespasian and his son Titus with definite and explicit orders to annihilate Palestine and Christianity together.

To the Romans, Christianity meant nothing more than Judaism militant, anyhow, an interpretation which does not seem far from the facts. As to Nero’s wish, he had at least half of it realized for him. Palestine was so thoroughly annihilated that it has remained a political ruin to this day. But Christianity was not so easily destroyed.

Indeed, it was only after the fall of Jerusalem that Paul’s program developed to the full.

Hitherto, as I have said, his tactic had merely to frighten of the conqueror, in the manner of Moses plaguing the Pharaos. He had gone along cautious and hesitantly, taking care not to arouse the powerful foe. He was willing to dangle his novel weapon before the foe’s nose, and let him feel it’s edge, but he shrank from thrusting it in full force.

Now that the worst had happened and Judea had nothing further to lose, he flung scruples to the wind and carried the war into the enemy’s country. The goal now was nothing less than to humble Rome as she had humbled Jerusalem, to wipe her off the map as she had wiped out Judea.

If Paul’s own writings fail to convince you of this interpretation of his activities, I invite your attention to his more candid associate John.

Where Paul, operating within the shadow of the imperial palace and half the time a prisoner in Roman jails, is obliged to deal in parable and veiled hints, John, addressing himself to disaffected Asiatics, can afford the luxury of plain speaking. At any rate, his pamphlet entitled “Revelation” is, in truth, a revelation of what the whole astonishing business is about.

Rome, fancifully called Babylon, is minutely described in the language of sputtering hate, as the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, as the woman drunken with the blood of the saints (Christians and Jews), as the oppressor of “peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues” and – to remove all doubt of her identity – as “that great city which reigned over the Kings of the earth”.

An Angel triumphantly cries, Babylon the great is fallen” Then follows an orgiastic picture of ruin. Commerce and industry and maritime trade are at an end. Art and music and “the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride” are silenced.

The gentle Christian conquerors wallow in blood up to the bridles of their horses. “Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her.”

And what is the end and purpose of all this chaos and devastation? John is not too reticent to tell us. For he closes his pious prophecy with a vision of the glories of the new – that is, the restored – Jerusalem: not any allegorical fantasy, I pray you, but literally Jerusalem, the capital of a great reunited kingdom of “the twelve tribes of the children of Israel”.

Could any one ask for anything plainer?

Of course, no civilization could forever hold out against this kind of assault .

By the year 200 the efforts of Paul and John and their successors had made such headway among all classes of Roman society that Christianity had become the dominant cult throughout the empire.

Meantime, as Paul had shrewdly foreseen, Roman morale and discipline had quite broken down, so that more and more the imperial legions, once the terror of the world and the backbone of Western culture, went down to defeat before barbarian invaders.

In the year 326 the emperor Constantine, hoping to check the insidious malady, submitted to conversion and proclaimed Christianity the official religion.

It was too late.

After him the emperor Julian tried to resort once more to suppression. But neither resistance nor concession were of any use. The Roman body politic has become thoroughly worm-eaten with Palestinian propaganda. Paul had triumphed.

This at least is how, were I an anti-Semite in search of a credible sample of subversive Jewish conspiracy, I would interpret the event of a modified Jewish creed into the Western world.

Commissary to the Gentiles
8 pages | 0.655 mb


Protocols Of The Learned Elders Of Zion
73 pages | 112 mb


Wikipedia: White Genocide Conspiracy Theory

HTML Text: Commissary to the Gentiles from ravage.html

HTML Text: Commissary to the Gentiles from commissary.html

PDF: A Real Case Against The Jews from

PDF: Commissary to the Gentiles from


1 see url