Great Britain off the Map of Europe?

You are here

Great Britain off the Map of Europe?

Login or Create an Account

With a account you will be able to save items to read and study later!

Sign In | Sign Up


We live in an increasingly borderless world. Consider the Internet. E-mail and Web sites transcend geographical borders and no businessperson or banker in America gives a second thought to contacting a colleague in Australia about the possibility of a massive exchange of funds between the two countries.

Transactions in our world today go far beyond the geographical limits of yesterday. This is a time marked by globalization in business and banking. So in the present climate of technology transcending geography we can understand how potentially massive changes to the European political map might become more easily acceptable to the general public. Yet political borders have by no means lost their importance.

Sometimes the most significant news stories only reach two or three national newspapers in Britain and are left off the usual wire services. This happens to be one!

The Sunday Telegraph is one of the most respected newspapers in the United Kingdom. One headline story on Sept. 3 was a real shocker. It read: "New EU Map Makes Kent Part of the Same Nation as France."

Planned transnational regions

EU plans are for Britain to be divided into five "eurozones." Inhabitants of the southeastern counties of Kent and East Sussex are projected to be part of Transmanche region joining up with Northern France. Eastern England would be "attached" to certain parts of Germany and the Nordic countries plus the Low Countries of Holland and Belgium.

The Western part of Britain would be called the Atlantic region, also including portions of Spain, France and Portugal. According to the overall scheme, Northwestern Scotland is slated to join Iceland, Greenland, Norway, Sweden and Finland.

The European Union claims that its directives call for all member states to bring their cartographic information into sync with the European Commission.

According to The Sunday Express, apparently "Article 23 of the directive gives the Commission full access to all spatial data currently held by member states, while Article 26 gives the Commission powers to create a new computer infrastructure to collect and co-ordinate data overseen by a European agency" (Sept. 3).

Further, "under the plans the EU will control and harmonise all spatial data such as place names, administrative units and maps, which names of areas, regions, localities, cities, suburbs, towns … or any geographical or topographical feature of public or historical interest will be under EU control rather than national governments" (ibid., emphasis added throughout).

Do we realize just where these plans may be leading? If this information is anywhere near to being accurate, we should all note that even the military implications of such data are frightening to contemplate should allegiances change radically in the future.

The practical implications

This radical redrawing of the map of Europe has far-reaching practical implications. For instance, its implementation would smooth the way for a European Union-wide property tax embracing all member states. British Conservative Party spokesmen commented that EU chiefs were pursuing an agenda "to undermine national identities and impose a United States of Europe by stealth" (ibid.).

Both The Sunday Telegraph and The Sunday Express published separate editorials highlighting the seriousness of the overall problem. The latter paper headlined its opinion piece with the words, "We Must Fight Europe's Bid to Take Away Our Freedom."

The text that followed stated: "A little more than 60 years ago Hitler planned to crush the British and force us into his new Nazi super-state. Napoleon Bonaparte had a similar plan a century earlier. This new threat from the EU to break Britain down into a series of five 'transnational' regions may not be made from the barrel of a gun, but it is equally unacceptable."

The editorial concluded with these sobering words: "We have fought hard for our national identity and self respect. We must never give it away."

Actually there are even greater reasons for Britain to maintain its national identity. Our Anglo-Saxon and Celtic peoples are descended from the patriarchs of Genesis and have from time to time played a significant historical role in the world beginning with the biblical accounts of the patriarchal fathers Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph.

(To understand both the history and the prophetic overtones for the future, request a free copy of the booklet The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy.)

Can Britain meet this challenge?

Whether present-day Britain can rise to the occasion is an open question. Popular commentator Mark Steyn wrote on the Western Standard Web site: "At some point soon, we're going to be asking: Who lost Britain? In the weeks after last year's tube bombing [July 2005], I doubted that the clarion call for a reassertion of 'British identity' would last, and so it proved.

"By the first anniversary, Britain was back in its peculiarly resistant multicultural mush in which the proper reaction to such unfortunate events is to abase oneself even more abjectly before the gods of cultural relativism. What matters after mass slaughter on the Underground is not the wound to the nation, but the potential for hurt feelings of certain minorities" (Aug. 28, 2006).

While Mr. Steyn's commentary wasn't written specifically in reaction to the potential redrawing of the map of Europe and Britain, the stated principles have the same broad application as if it were.

Mr. Steyn went on to comment on Melanie Phillip's new book Londonistan (reviewed in the August 2006 issue of World News and Prophecy). He called Britain "a husk of a nation in which darker forces have set up shop, and in which establishment complacency, hard-left multiculturalism and ever more Europeanized bureaucracy has made it all but impossible for the state to rouse itself" (ibid.).

Contemporary 20th-century history may also shed some light on this dilemma. Consider the following historical/prophetic scenario.

Churchill's warnings in the 1930s

After the British capitulation to Hitler's wishes at Munich, Churchill said to the House of Commons on Oct. 5, 1938: "And do not suppose that this [Munich] is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is the first sip—the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be offered to us year by year—unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour we arise and take our stand for freedom, as in the olden time."

Earlier Adolf Hitler had written the following in Mein Kampf during his imprisonment in the 1920s: "When dealing with a nation which has lost all force of character owing to its having given way spontaneously, he will be entitled to expect that his fresh but piecemeal demands will not be considered worth resisting by the nation from which they are made" (quoted by Winston Churchill, Step by Step, p. 343, section originally published March 24, 1939).

Mark Steyn concluded his commentary with the astute observation that "the British government has a strategy for southern Iraq, but not for southern England." Given this latest revelation of a revolutionary recasting of the map of Europe, his conclusions may prove highly prophetic.

Steyn continued: "Britain's language, culture, legal system and political tradition have been the greatest single force for good in shaping the modern world." This assessment may be judged a bit too generous, but a core of basic truth is still there.

He continued: "But discarding its own inheritance and yoking its future to a Eutopian pseudo-federation has left it [Britain] constitutionally (in every sense) incapable of resisting the depredations of more motivated forces. Unless things change in a big way, there won't always be an England."

Another commentator who helps us appreciate Churchill's genius is Richard Holmes. Mr. Holmes is, in the words of Mail on Sunday editor Max Hastings, "a supremely skilful military historian." His Churchill series on BBC TV proved eye-opening and illuminating.

Mr. Holmes observed that "by the time Winston [Churchill] died [in January 1965] Britain had become a land in which such a man as he would never again find room to flourish, with a popular culture increasingly inimical to his values, and likely therefore not to notice or properly appreciate his achievements" (In the Footsteps of Churchill, 2005, p. 347).

No more British leaders like Winston Churchill in time of serious national need? That's not a very comforting thought. The biblical prophet Isaiah said a time would come when God would take away the national heroes.

The problems we face today

The news has recently surfaced that "Labour [is] ready to surrender more power to Brussels" (Daily Mail, Sept. 22, 2006). "Britain is poised to surrender to another EU grab of its sovereignty in a policy u-turn, this time on law and order. The government will today begin talks on transferring control of sentencing for serious crimes, court procedures and even the rights of crime suspects." Are the principles of the Magna Carta in danger? They certainly seem so.

The editorial in that same edition of the Daily Mail firmly stated: "They never stop. They never give up. Though the EU constitution is supposedly dead, the federalists are still seeking to destroy the sovereignty of nation states."

Real reasons exist as to why these dangers to Britain's identity and sovereignty have largely escaped the attention of most of the British public. There is a rational explanation as to why Britons have not given any sustained attention to the warnings of a small cadre of journalists who, in their turn, have been crying out about these dangers for many years.

In their recent book, authors Christopher Booker and Richard North targeted the basic reasons. They wrote in the preface: "The form of government it [the EU and its predecessors] created was unique because it was designed to place the nation states which belonged to it under a 'supranational' power, unaccountable to any electorate, ruling its citizens through the agency of each country's own national authorities.

"Although the nation states [of Europe] and their institutions of government remained outwardly intact, all these institutions from heads of states and parliaments to civil services and judicial systems, in reality became increasingly subject to the decisions and laws of the new power [now called the EU] that was above them all.

"It was because the system worked from behind the scenes through the familiar landscape of existing national institutions that so few people recognised the immense scale of the change which was taking place [in Europe]" (The Great Deception: Can the European Union Survive? 2005, p. vii).

The Bible and Central Europe

If the Bible had nothing to say about end-time activities in Europe, this publication would most likely be silent as well. But both the Old Testament book of Daniel and the New Testament book of Revelation (especially when you put the two together) have a great deal to say about Europe at the time of the end. Note Daniel 2:40-43, Daniel 7:23-25 and Revelation chapters 17 and 18 in particular.

Based on these prophecies, this publication has foretold for years that the time is coming when 10 leaders of core countries will give their sovereignty to a "beast" power for a short time. Revelation reveals that the whole world will be taken in by the coming final restoration of the ancient Roman Empire—backed by a miracle-working religious individual the Bible calls "the false prophet." Today's secular concept of a separated church and state will be overcome and the two systems will for a short time join.

The whole story is clearly set out when you know and understand the prophetic information in our free booklets The Book of Revelation Unveiled, You Can Understand Bible Prophecy and Are We Living in the Time of the End? Copies are available in print or you may download them from our Web site at

The prophetic implications of what is being planned in Europe and Britain are truly frightening. Bureaucrats in Brussels don't always realize the potential repercussions of their plans and edicts. They can have dire consequences in the future, especially under a more autocratic, federal EU. It could be very important for you to request or download those free booklets today.

Just as the Britain of ancient yesteryear was enslaved to Rome, so it appears that modern-day Britain may finally lose its national identity to a major power in Central Europe—perhaps even without the firing of a shot. The actual takeover may prove far more subtle and treacherous than a military conquest. WNP