mickgreenhough – Yahoo Mail
From: L Michael Hohmann [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: 21 October 2015 17:31
To: ‘email@example.com’ <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: EU or else…
Dear Professor Myddelton,
Thank you for letting me pause you on your way out after your invigorating opening talk last night.
I enclose a .pdf collection of nine pamphlets that I found in 2006 when taking an interest in the UE gestation. I had remembered reading that a tenth of these conferences existed to consider what Germany should do when losing the war. I tried German web searches and found that no. 10, but trying to find a source from where it could be downloaded, none could be found.
Another useful source on things EU is The Euro Probe, of which I enclose a link of the result of searching this site for ‘EU history’: http://www.theeuroprobe.org/?s=eu+history .
Earlier this year I decided to find something by this Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi himself, and after long extended Google searches found the latest book he had written in some obscure second-hand bookshop in a small town called Niesky , titled: DIE EUROPÄISCHE NATION, Deutsche Verlagsanstalt Stuttgart, 1953. This book is the best history book I have come across for tracing the idea of ‘Europe’ from ancient Athens ~500 BCE to 1952.
This book is especially interesting and detailed from the 1910s, and onwards to 1943 when a ‘European Council in America’ was formed, shortly followed by ‘The American Committee for a Free and United Europe’ and the formation of a ‘Research Seminary for Post-War European Federation’ at New-York-University, which organized the Fifth Paneuropa-Congress in March 1943, support by Churchill’s sensational radio broadcast on 12 March in which he sought the formation of a Council of Europe as a war aim.
And so this book continues, naming names with inside knowledge, and above all those very first originators of what became the EU: Robert Schumann, Konrad Adenauer, and Alcide de Gasperi. 
In this context, it is telling that those three also ensured that the newly drafted post-war national constitutions of France, Germany and Italy respectively, all incorporated provisions for renunciation of rights of sovereignty in the context of international organisations. That enabled ratification of such losses of sovereignty by simple majority vote.
From the UK standpoint, Amery’s speech to the Pan-European Congress in Berlin on 17 Mai 1930, given in German, is fully reprinted – and should be heeded in the current discussion; just two sentences: “…The innermost nature of the British people would prevent any earnest participation in a Paneuropa. And every Englishman or European does a disservice both to Europe as well as to Britain when playing with such a thought…. I can’t see any reason why we on this side of the Atlantic Ocean could not be equally good and trustworthy neighbours with Europe as we are on the other side of this ocean where we are fearless and unarmed neighbours of the United States along the 6000km long undefended boundary of Canada…” But these two sentences by no means do full justice to Amery’s speech which takes up three full pages of print.
The rest of EU gestation up to 1952 is also detailed with names of doers and their deeds. I wished there were an English translation of this Coudenhove-Kalergi book…
I trust these sources will be of some interest.
I myself am now fully occupied with reading learning blogging and talking on Clean Energy and Sustainability, as in my current favourite on relevant news articles:
All summed up in David Archibald’s TWILIGHT OF ABUNDANCE:
“Global warming did serve a couple of useful purposes. The issue has been a litmus test for our political class. Any politician who has stated a belief in global warming is either a cynical opportunist or an easily deluded fool. In neither case should that politician ever be taken seriously again. No excuses can be accepted. “
They will all shortly be on display in Paris.
If that were not enough, one should also listen to official spokesmen of the IPCC themselves:
“Prof. Dr H. Stephen Schneider, lead author in Working Group II of the IPCC (said in 1989): ‘For these reasons we have to announce terrifying scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements with no mention of any doubts whatever which we might have. In order to attract attention, we need dramatic statements leaving no doubt about what is said. Every one of us researchers must decide how far he would want to be honest rather than effective.”
In an interview published in the Neue Zürcher Zeitung on 14 November 2010, Ottmar Edenhofer, co-chair of IPCC Working Group III, said “The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War…. one must say clearly that de facto we redistribute the world’s wealth by climate policy…. One has to rid oneself of the illusion that international climate politics have anything to do with environmental concerns.”
Knowing also that there is no escape from THE FOUR LAWS WITHOUT WHICH NOTHING WHATSOEVER IN THE UNIVERSE THAT HAPPENS, HAPPENS – and cannot be overruled by edicts from whoever, be it Pope, Obama, Merkel, IMF, UN, EU, IPCC, the Supreme Court, EPA, or anyone, so it is high time to remember Alexius Meinong: TRUTH IS A PURELY HUMAN CONSTRUCT BUT FACTS ARE ETERNAL. Try this perhaps: http://tinyurl.com/nbfc2qo or this; http://tinyurl.com/naexuho and decide for yourself. This consideration is not bad to remember either: http://cleanenergypundit.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/thefour-laws-withoutwhich-nothing.html
Why I do what I do is at http://cleanenergypundit.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/why-some-haveasked-what-it-actually-is.html
And, inter alia, re-discovering things on wealth creation from 1968, more relevant today than ever IMHO:
All about wrestling with that other Hydra – universal helotization through energy control, one of its heads being the EU, of course.
Dipl-Ing L Michael Hohmann
ARCHITECT + CLEAN ENERGY PUNDIT