Tomorrow's history today

Reported in the Sun, the Mail (no link) and the Telegraph today is a story about the plans by the EU to create a common European history textbook.

A common history book could contribute to a common European identity and knowledge about what is important for European culture and history," said a German education ministry spokesman.

Well, that's just fine and dandy. I wonder who will write the blasted thing? The idea is based upon a textbook that already exists called the Franco-German Histoire Geschichte which was the brainchild of the Franco-German youth Parliament. Of course there is a problem in that they can only produce a history book that deals with post war history. That way they don't have to mention the war, or the one before that, or the Franco Prussian war or in fact they don't have to mention history at all, because as we all know, history started in reality a mere 50 years ago with the signing of the Treaty of Rome.
What utter tripe. Here we have a line from the text,

"Through its willingness to co-operate with the Third World, its attachment to multilateralism, its dialogue with other regions, the EU appears as a model on the international scene,"

In a small postscript, you might notice that the lead commentator on this story is one Graham Brady, the Tory's shadow minister for Europe. The fellow must think it is Christmas. There he is quietly going about his business and journalists start phoning him up for comments, and sure enough in go the quotations. It's just that he has absolutely no idea what the journalists are talking about.
Why do I know this? Because I happen to know that the story was picked up in the German magazine Focus last week by the UK Independence Party team in Brussels. They gave it to the media as a story, and the media promptly phoned the utterly unaware Brady for comment.

So in the Telegraph, Farage makes a comment under Brady's little bit, in the Mail there is Tom Wise the UK Independence Party education spokesman and in the Sun, after the first edition which at least mentioned the work UKIP had done on the story they were airbrushed out of the later editions leaving dear Graham as the sole defender of British history. Of course the Today program did a piece on the story, and who was the speaker, you guessed it.
At times it makes me spit.