All the European nations’ authentic borders are to be wiped off maps drawn up by the EU – to be replaced by new, bizarre divisions devised so mass migrating aliens to European lands are not alienated by the ancient indigenous Europeans’ history and heritage!
I told you that the European Union sought to replace the ancient cultures of our continent, abolish the age-old borders of both nation states and traditional regions recognised by our folk, and institute literally hundreds of artificial, bureaucratically defined regions and districts – then you might say that such a policy was NUTS.
As it happens you would be quite correct.
In 2003 the European Union established the Nomenclature of Units for Territorial Statistics (NUTS), a programme which has since grown into a non-organic patchwork of transnational regions, as well as subdivisions within nations.
Officially of course all of this is simply to aid collection of statistics, decisions on targeting EU aid to deprived areas, and boosting trade in cross-border areas.
Yet as with all of the European Union's actions, there is another agenda, broader and covert. That is the agenda of weakening traditional boundaries and authentic identities. The muddle of identities that they wish to promote is seen in the attached maps.
For their source I rely on the anti-German, hostile writer Christopher Gilliband for the following information which he gleaned from European Union's website documents. On The Brussels Journal site in his September 2006 article called "Mapping the New Europe", Gillibrand depicts what he terms "The E.U.'s Mad Maps".
He notes – in an endeavour to blame the Germans rather than their hidden occupiers – that: "It seems much of the madness comes from a German-based organisation called Deutscher Verband für Wohnungswesen, Städtbau und Raumordnung – (in English) The German Association for Habitation, Urban Development and Spatial Planning."
Gillibrand explains that: "a European spatial development has been worked out and has been passed into legislation by the informal Area Planning Ministerial Council in Potsdam in 1999."
What Gillibrand fails to explain is who benefits from this muddle? Could it be those who would be most threatened by any assertion of traditional identities and classically authentic values?
The cross border initiative as shown in this map is called INTERREG – a contraction of inter-regional – a programme which is now in its 4th version and has a budget of €7.8billion!
Gillibrand notes: "Circa 700 million euro are available for trans-national co-operation projects in which German public and private institutions participate." Of course so must all members of the E.U. participate! The EU INTERREG programme is funded by all member states.
The effect (as shown in the map above) if not also the purpose is to wipe off the map the historical development and authentic cultural heritage of the European regions so that aliens who are encouraged to mass migrate there will not feel alienated by their lack of roots in the regions!
There can be no doubt the intended result is to atomise all peoples of their racial and cultural identity so that they then must rely upon a self-aggrandising fantasy that they are "citizens of the world" (whereas in most parts of the globe they would either starve or be eaten) – a plausible-sounding notion which retains no authentic route to trace their inherited identity and racial memory.
Robbed of a natural feeling of loyalty and folk affiliation towards one's inherited locale on the planet which naturally shapes specific cultures, all peoples will be robbed of racial diversity to become atomised nomads without deep cultural values borne in common.
Gillibrand's article goes on to point out that: "France will be, much to its surprise, at the centre of nothing. If you look at the map ... Burgundy, including Paris has been returned to England (as has Ireland!) reversing the victories of St. Joan of Arc. ...Scotland has in two circles become part of Scandinavia, only being part of the Union in one circle.
"London has been crossed out - partly by an Atlantic circle and partly by a Scandinavian circle. If Greece is not part of Central Europe, she becomes an associate of Turkey. Curious that Germany" – as Gillibrand goes on to contradict himself – "is also not at the centre of anything. For fear of being seen as Greater Germany, they have been seeking to dissolve themselves in Europe for the last forty years. Some might see the end result as pretty similar."
One informed blogger chastises Gillibrand for his German-blaming nonsense: "We are subject to the usurpation of power by Brussels and the loss of democratic self-determination just like any other European people.
"In fact, even more so, since no major political party in Germany has even the slightest reservations about surrendering our sovereignty to an uncontrollable body of unelected bureaucrats. There practically is no possibility here to express opposition to the progressive 'deepening' of the Union, since all relevant parties are determined not to present any alternatives on this.
"They more or less openly declare that a public debate on EU-matters is not supposed to take place, least of all in the context of elections."
This blogger ought to have noted also that it is against post-war German law to query source critically its own war history without fear of prosecution.
Gillibrand does rightly note that: "Important to this concept of Europe is the idea of power centres for these circles. Just don't ask where these power centres are going to be."
Gillibrand admits: "The E.U. is seeking not just the regionalisation but also the atomisation (in the sense of dividing down to the smallest possible administrative unit) of the nation state. Europe will become like a chemistry experiment as new molecules are formed, new and ever changing combinations of atoms and newly-existing groups of atoms, with shifting loyalties, very few of which will be permanent."
An update of interest in these bizarre E.U. flags appeared in The Mail Online on 30th April 2011 with the headline:
"The EU are trying to wipe us off the map: Brussels merges England and France in new Arc Manche region ... with its own flag".
The newspaper reports that Eric Pickles (the British Conservative Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government), who said he inherited the plans from the Labour Party, "condemned the EU for ploughing millions of pounds of taxpayers' money into the 'Arc Manche', the name given by Brussels to an ambitious attempt to merge Northern France and Southern England."
The logo of the new Arc Manche 'transnational emblem' across England includes the word interreg – the name of a £1billion-a-year EU initiative to reduce the influence of national borders. The article defines – via bread and circuses! – how: "the design will be emblazoned on EU 'vanity projects' in the cross-Channel are, including:
* a £7.6million network of 'cross-Channel' cycle lanes;
* a £5.5million scheme to pay for circus clowns to perform throughout the Arc Manche region;
* a £2million programme of cross-Channel 'contemporary art' tours."
The outraged Government Secretary Eric Pickles claims: "the system – set up under the last Labour Party administration – is an attempt to chip away at the UK's national identity... His outburst comes just days after the EU demanded an extra £682million a year from British taxpayers, taking the UK's annual contribution to the EU budget to more than £10billion – the equivalent of £400 for every household."
However as with other stories of acute public interest, follow-up reports never reach the general public – either because their whistle-blowers are politicians who sustain their outrage only for the short-term expedient to attack Party rivals; or the media are discouraged by their overlords to drop follow-up reports or risk losing their own livelihoods.
Dreamt up by the EU 15 years ago, there are 12 other cross-border regions, including projects linking the west of Spain with Portugal and a number of schemes on the borders of Italy.
West Scotland is with Ireland and parts of France, Spain and Portugal in an Atlantic region. Given the blinkered arguments about "bolstering the notion of an EU superstate", its critics remain little wary that backing these plans means erasing a thousand years of history.
Gillibrand earlier declared: "The Conservatives may have discovered this wickedness and got the story almost right. But you will have to wait for years to draw the right conclusions and for ever for them to do anything about it. For ever, will be too late."
Deception has been central to the EU project from the beginning. As senior British diplomat Sir Crispin Tickell later admitted, the team negotiating Britain's entry into the EU during the early 1970s were keen to get the deal fixed quickly so as to avoid public debate: "It was generally felt that if a high-profile negotiation of this kind lingered on too long, then there would be a severe risk of a change of mood in the country which would be hostile to the whole enterprise."
Of course as Europeans, we face challenges that are far greater than the nation state, and there would be potentially very positive grounds for cross-border cooperation (friendship across frontiers). But that cooperation should be aimed at RESISTING threats to our cultural and racial identity!
The European Union's patchwork schemes actually facilitate such threats. Our European union will have to make a bonfire of the EU's bureaucratic "mad-maps". Our Europe is to be built on a revival of our traditional identities, not their abolition.