Is anti-democratic EU the Fourth Reich Hitler dreamed of?

[TonyGosling]

Israel's weapons industry earns millions from EU states. It must end
Gina Dowding
16 January 2020 14:33 UTC | Last update: 10 hours 27 min ago
At stake is the union's role as a credible and impartial mediator in the Israel-Palestine conflict
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/eu-must-stop-funding-israeli-wea pons-industry

An Elbit employee operates systems in northern Israel on 4 August (AFP)

Anew report shows that the European Union is funnelling millions of euros of taxpayers’ money to Israeli weapons manufacturers.

With a resolution to the Israel-Palestine conflict seeming ever more elusive, the EU’s role as a credible mediator is growing in importance. This revelation puts that role at risk.

The EU must stop funding the Israeli defence industry, and re-establish itself as an impartial arbiter in this longstanding conflict.

A game of jeopardy
The report, published by the European Coordination of Committees and Associations for Palestine, shows that the EU has handed out 2m euros to private weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems and more than 7m euros to state-owned Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) between 2014 and 2019. The companies received grants under the EU’s programme for research funding, Horizon 2020.

It is unacceptable that EU taxpayers' money is being funnelled to Israeli weapons manufacturers, funding the oppression of Palestinians

With the Trump administration siding firmly with Israel, moving the US embassy to Jerusalem and continuing to provide the Israeli military with billions of dollars in aid each year, the importance of the EU as an impartial and trustworthy mediator is growing.

The fact that EU taxpayers are funding the Israeli military-industrial complex jeopardises this.

In the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute’s 2018 report on the world’s largest weapons manufacturers, Elbit placed 28th, while IAI came 41st.The EU funding two of the world’s largest military companies is ethically dubious in the extreme.

This ethical questionability is aggravated further when considering that Elbit and IAI supply the Israeli military with much of its hardware, arguably making them complicit in the oppression of Palestinians and human rights violations resulting from Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories.

Ethical guidelines
Commission representatives argue that they are following the ethical guidelines of Horizon 2020 when approving grants to Elbit and IAI. I disagree with that judgement, both on ethical grounds and because it is inconsistent with other EU policies.

The EU is adamant about standing up for international law, and has on many occasions strongly condemned Israel’s actions towards Palestinians. This stance is fundamentally undermined by financing companies complicit in the oppression of Palestinians.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks at an IAI plant in January 2019 (AFP)
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks at an IAI plant in January 2019 (AFP)
The European Commission also argues that the projects financed are civilian in nature. Among them are grants for developing drones and surveillance technologies.

Yet, as the participants in Horizon 2020 projects own the results generated, there are no guarantees that technology developed for civilian ends will not be used in military systems and platforms advertised by the very same companies - or in the illegal surveillance of Palestinians in the occupied territories, for that matter.

Time to reconsider
A decade ago, IAI, a renowned drone manufacturer, participated in the EU-funded Oparus project. The results included the improvement of medium altitude long endurance drones, and since then, IAI’s line of these drones have continued to be commercially successful.

On IAI’s website, these mainly surveillance-focused drones are advertised as “robust and combat proven”, highlighting the blurred lines between civilian and military use.


How Israel became one of the world's worst rogue states
Read More »
The fact that the EU is handing out millions of euros to the Israeli military-industrial complex endangers the EU’s reputation as a defender of human rights and international law. It undermines the EU’s efforts to establish itself as a credible and trustworthy partner to both sides of the Israel-Palestine conflict, leaving few remaining impartial mediators.

The European Commission must reconsider which Israeli entities should be able to participate in EU programmes. It is unacceptable that EU taxpayers’ money is being funnelled to Israeli weapons manufacturers, funding the oppression of Palestinians.

The EU must stop financing the Israeli defence industry, and re-establish itself as a credible and impartial mediator in the Israel-Palestine conflict.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Gina Dowding
Gina Dowding is a Member of European Parliament for North West England since July 2019, and a member of the Foreign Affairs, Transport, and Industry, Research and Energy committees. She is also active in the parliamentary delegations to Israel and Palestine, and visited the region including the occupied territories in August 2019 as part of a study visit organised by civil society organisations.

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

The EU was HITLER'S idea and it proves Germany WON the Second World War, claims new book
THE 'fascist' EU was inspired and designed by the NAZIS and is proof Hitler won the Second World War, an outrageous new book is claiming.
By OWEN BENNETT - POLITICAL REPORTER
13:57, Thu, Apr 17, 2014
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/470967/The-EU-was-HITLER-S-idea-a nd-it-proves-Germany-WON-the-Second-World-War-claims-new-book

Adolf Hitler orginally came up with the plan for the EU, the book says[GETTY]

The Nazis wanted to get rid of the clutter of small nations which made up Europe and their plan was quite simple. The EU was Hitler's dream.

Daniel J Beddowes and Falvio Cipollini
'The EU: The Truth About The Fourth Reich - How Hitler Won The Second World War' argues the single currency, the free market and even the phrase "United States of Europe" were all dreamt up by high ranking Nazis, including the Fuhrer himself.

It also claims the only country which benefits from the EU is Germany - just as Hitler planned.

A spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats - which its leader Nick Clegg describes as the "party of in" when it comes to the EU - dismissed the authors of the book as "peddling outlandish myths".

The book, co-written by Daniel J Beddowes and Falvio Cipollini, says: "What is the EU for? Who really benefits? And the answer is of course Germany.

"It is no coincidence that just about every country in the European Union is getting poorer while Germany continues to get richer and richer.

"We may think we won the Second World War. But we lost. It is no surprise that we are all living in the Fourth Reich.

"Knowingly or not those who support and defend the European Union are supporting the Nazi legacy."

Under a chapter heading 'The EU was inspired an designed by Nazis', the authors claim: "Hitler was the man who gave bones to the dreams first expressed by Charlemagne and Napoleon but the finishing touches to the EU as we know it were put in place during World War II by a man called Walther Funk, who was President of the Reichsbank and a director of the Bank for International Settlements.

"It was Funk who predicted the coming of European economic unity. Funk was also Adolf Hitler's economics minister and his key economics advisor."

It continues: "The Nazis wanted to get rid of the clutter of small nations which made up Europe and their plan was quite simple. The EU was Hitler's dream."

The book argues it is no coincidence that the EU is so close to Hitler's plan for post-war Europe.

According to the authors: "In 1945, Hitler's Masterplan was captured by the Allies. The Plan included details of his scheme to create an economic integration of Europe and to found a European Union on a federal basis.

"The Nazi plan for a federal Europe was based on Lenin's belief that 'federation is a transitional form towards complete union of all nations'.

"It is impossible to find a difference between Hitler's plan for a new United States of Europe, dominated by Germany, and the European Union we have today."

Hitler's Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels would have been proud of the BBC, the books says [GETTY]

The book also claims Conservative Prime Minister Ted Heath - "a self-confessed liar and a traitor" - was paid £35,000 to take Britain into the European Economic Community in 1973 and Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels would be proud of the BBC's support of the EU.

The final part of the book lists "73 things you ought to know about the EU (Facts the BBC forgot to tell you)".

In amongst concerns about immigration and the Common Agricultural Policy, the authors argue "The EU is making DIY illegal", "EU law forces pig owners to apply for walking licences" and "The EU wants to control the music you listen to".

It also claims: "The EU has forced us to use light bulbs which are more dangerous and more expensive than the old ones.

"The first problem with the new EU light-bulbs is that the light produced by them is so poor that people have difficulty seeing where they are going - let alone being able to see well enough to read or work."

Edward Heath in 1974 [GETTY]

According to the book, European Commission vice-president Viviane Reding crystallised "Hitler's dream, Hitler's words" earlier this year when she "called for a 'true political union' and a campaign for the European Union to become a 'United States of Europe'."

A Liberal Democrat spokesperson said: “People have been peddling outlandish myths about the EU for decades and this book is an example of that. Some of the suggestions made are completely ludicrous. Winston Churchill called for a “United States of Europe” and I doubt the author would call him a Nazi.

“The Liberal Democrats want Britain to stay in the EU because we are fighting for a stronger economy – fighting to defend millions of British jobs which are linked to our trade with the EU.

"Being in Europe gives us more strength when negotiating trade deals with global players on the world stage.”

It is not the first time the EU has been described as a German plot to take over Europe.

In 1990, Cabinet Minister Nicholas Ridley - a close ally of Margaret Thatcher - was forced to resign after he described proposed Economic and Monetary Union as "a German racket designed to take over the whole of Europe" and said that giving up sovereignty to the European Union was as bad as giving it up to Hitler.

RELATED ARTICLES
‘I’m going to Auschwitz...kisses, your Heini’: The chilling love notes of Heinrich Himmler
Are these classified FBI files proof ADOLF HITLER escaped by SUBMARINE to Argentina?

[TonyGosling]

As the EU bails out Germany, we should thank God we left
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/07/27/eu-bails-germany-should-th ank-god-left/

In this crisis, like ever other, the bureaucrats in Brussels have prioritised the interests of Berlin above all else
Ross Clark 27 July 2022 • 2:14pm

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen addresses a media conference at EU HQ

We hear plenty of people blaming Brexit for travel delays, shortages in the shops and many other ills. But how often do they stop and ponder some of the things which would now be going wrong if we were still members of the EU? Yesterday, EU members agreed to cut their gas consumption by 15 per cent in reaction to yet another cut in gas supplies from Russia – only 20 per cent of the gas flowing through the Nord Stream 1 pipeline in February is still flowing now. The cut in gas usage has been forced upon member states which don’t even import much gas from Russia, but may now be forced to ration gas for homes and order factories to suspend production in an effort, effectively, to bail out Germany for its short-sighted policy of relying on Russian gas.

Were we still in the EU, this agreement would have involved Britain, too. The Government would today be scrambling around for emergency cuts in energy usage. That could have involved scheduling blackouts as in the Three Day Week in the 1970s or ordering factories and other plants to scale-down production. The option we are trying to pursue, of trying to maintain supply by upping North Sea production and increasing imports of liquified natural gas from the US and Qatar, would not have saved us, since under the EU agreement we would have had to cut usage by 15 per cent regardless of how well we were able to substitute Russian oil and gas imports with fuel sourced from elsewhere. While there are exceptions for Ireland, Cyprus and Malta, which are not connected to the European grid which sources gas from Russia, every other member state has come under political pressure comply. Yes, it is technically voluntary, but isn't it telling that only Hungary is so far holding out against the agreement?

The EU’s response to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine – indeed, since the annexation of Ukraine in 2014 – has been an embarrassment. Germany signed the deal for Nord Stream 2, which further engrained its dependence on Russian gas, a year after Crimea. After the Ukrainian invasion, there was grand talk of ending energy imports from Russia, but the oil and gas continued to flow. It is Vladimir Putin, not the EU, who is now dictating EU energy policy, by forcing it to go without Russian energy well ahead of the schedule drawn up by EU nations.

Europe is in this situation partly as a result of a misconceived environment policy. EU nations have been merrily decommissioning their own oil and gas production in the name of working towards net zero carbon emissions (a target, I should add, which Germany has set for 2045, five years ahead of Britain’s own over-ambitious target). Imports of Russian oil and gas were seen as a stopgap on the way towards this nirvana, a way of getting fossil fuel production off Europe’s carbon accounts while continuing to keep the lights on. Geopolitical considerations didn’t come into it at all, in spite of the obvious signs of Putin’s aggression.

The result is that the EU faces a winter like that endured by Britain under Sir Edward Heath: with energy rationed, perhaps through planned outages. For fans of the EU Sir Edward has long been a totemic figure: the Prime Minister who took us into the bloc without bothering to ask the people in a referendum. How ironic that the EU’s energy policy is now leading it down the same road as Heath’s Britain.