Monday, 18 March 2019

What Is May Up To?

It seems puzzling, doesn't it? Theresa May has made some pretty unequivocal statements about Brexit, Leave means Leave, we will leave on March 29th (108 times in parliament), carry out the democratic will of the people etc. But here we are, on the cusp of handing actual and real control of the UK to the EU. In, but with no say - which is what her 'deal' supplied for her by the EU, is actually about.

So what is May, clumsy, incompetent, weak? Let's look at what happens through the process and not what she says. Article 50 is triggered with no deal as a the legal option. She appoints a Brexit minister, who turns out to have no say or role at all in the process. May threatens her cabinet and surprises them with the EU's stich up deal. It is binned.

 May sticks with it. May says it is the best deal possible, which is probably true from her perspective, but not if you are supporting the UK side. She sacks any Brexiteer for any reason; four of her cabinet ignore the whip and it has no consequence whatsoever, because they are Remainers. One even resigns from his Conservative Association, but is treated as a faithful soldier.

May allows stupid little (bleating) votes of no consequence and then agrees to be bound by them, which she was not obliged to do. Because they disrupt leaving?

So what does all this point to? Only one thing. From the outset May has had no intention of delivering Brexit, doesn't care a fig for parliamentary protocol, the good of the country, business, the economy or democracy. She cares about the EU. Why would you be moved by the aforementioned list, when the EU, being a dictatorship, doesn't give a hoot for these things and being an acolyte of this institution, nor does she. Political power trumps all.

If her constituency party was run by people of character, courage and decency, they would recall her and have a by-election with the stated aim of getting rid of the embarrassment she represents to party and country. But I don't suppose they are Conservatives, either.

I suspect she called a General Election because she hoped that it would see more Brexit backing MP's lose their seats, more than she worried about her majority. She finally put the lid on any kind of real victory when she lurched to the Left, copying Corbyn's 'ideas'. Yep, she is a serial loser.

Thursday, 14 March 2019

Disgraceful; A Laughing Stock

Well, many parliaments around the world are based on the British model, but it showed just how bad it can be when stocked almost exclusively by self-impressed morons. Last night was a disgrace and will have made Britain and British politics the laughing stock of the world. Trump hasn't even come close to the haughty, hubristic tantrums on display here.

Here is the background. In the early Seventies, a Conservative(!) Prime Minister, Edward Heath, lied to the electorate about joining something called the Common Market. He told us it was a trading bloc and would make Britain a stronger country (we were, as all EU members are when joining, broke).

He knew though, as recently released government documents show, that the (then) EEC was a political project to unite all the individual countries of Europe into a single superstate, with a central government, and all the attendant structures such as tax, policing, military, laws, currency etc.

The EU has had as its abiding principle since its inception between the World Wars, that it should operate in secret and not reveal its objectives. Have you ever heard a debate about 'Europe'? Has its way of working ever been explained to you, at school, university, on TV? No. And that is very important to its success.

The EU is run by unelected bureaucrats, often referred to as technocrats, and has a pretend parliament to confuse the people of the various countries as to its operation. The MEPs can and do vote on laws proposed by the bureaucrats and can put forward amendments, but they will get the same law come back endlessly until they approve it. You can only imagine that when the single government is finally achieved this little farce will be deleted.

There is no common culture across Europe, no common language. We have different traditions and laws. Only the French and German traditions of attempting to subjugate Europe are permitted going forward though, with for instance, the (German) currency crushing the economies of the Southern European countries. There is no demos, but some politicians want an empire, so Europe will be balkanised.

Can you think of any example of a country, taking over several other countries and running them from a central government, which controls everything through laws and regulations? Yes, the USSR. How did that go?

Something even as fundamental as the law divides us. In Britain, a traditionally strong, inventive and industrious nation, we evolved laws that constrained absolute monarchs and placed the law in the hands of the people. We vote for people to represent us in parliament and if they don't do what we want, they are chucked out at the next election.

In the EU, where the law is dominated by the French, the State owns the law and the people do what they are told. A short summary of this would be, in Britain everything is legal unless we decide to make it illegal, in the EU everything is illegal unless the State allows it.

This comes from the militaristic, empire building tradition of not just France, but Germany also. The French see themselves as the finest administrators in the world and so should run the EU, but need German money so tolerate them as a 'partner'. Germany think they should run it, because they pay for it and tolerate French input because there would be another war if they didn't.

So, with some inkling that the EU was too different, too bureaucratic and not functioning very well and with a suspicion as to what they were up, what came next, the British voted to leave the EU. The largest turnout ever saw 17.4 million people issue this instruction.

Parliament had pledged almost unanimously to action the result. Both Labour and Conservative candidates ran on a manifesto to honour that pledge. Parliament voted overwhelmingly to trigger Article 50, the mechanism by which a member informs the EU that they are leaving.

However, ignoring 17.4 million people, their own election manifesto pledges and in many cases actually defying the majority of their constituents, MP's decided that no one tells them what to do. Most MP's are 'Remainers' and want to stay in the bureaucrats paradise, the EUSSR. So they started wrecking the process.

The analogy that the Remain MP's are acting like children having a tantrum at not getting their way, is in fact so accurate it is beyond parody. Using a typical Marxist trick (all of them, even the 'Conservatives') the Remainers try to create a false narrative. They say that the Leavers have lied incessantly, blocked progress and want a 'hard Brexit'. That the referendum only voted Leave because of the campaign of lies by vote Leave.

Let's examine that. Leave MP's have consistently insisted and voted to support the will of the people, being the proper role of parliament, and have only blocked attempts to thwart that, which cannot be characterised as 'blocking progress'. The Leave campaign was not massively funded, but may have made some technical mistakes in using the funds, on occasion, that didn't amount to a hill of beans.

Remain however, had enormous resources; the UK government pumped money into it, as did foreign individuals of high net wealth and of course, the EU. Massive collusion and misuse of funds took place, which the Electoral Commission have no problem with, because they choose only to investigate Leave.

As to lies, currently Britain should be in a recession, at least 600,000 people should have lost their jobs in 2016 and the pound should be on the floor. This is what Remain promised would happen if we dared to vote to leave. In fact, there are at least 700,000 more in work, the economy is growing (faster than the EU) and the world is knocking on our door looking for trade deals.

The media is almost all on the side of Remain, so there is no proper analysis (phew, says the EU) and the BBC fanatically so.

Consequently the world is treated to the spectacle of a bunch of immature, entitled bigots acting as if they alone possess the knowledge and wherewithal to understand the blindingly simple concept of leave means leave. (Ask if they would like some money, they know the answer to that!).

Here is another question for you; Remain also tell us that we trade so much with the EU that we will be destroyed if we leave (they never go any further by way of explanation, you will notice). This presupposes that the EU will not buy anything from us after we leave. But how about this; the EU is possibly the most over-regulated, risk-averse structures in the world. How much stronger and bigger would the UK economy be now, if we had never joined, never been held back by the EU?

And to the final point. Remainers, like all children assert ridiculous things to confirm their position. May lost a vote yesterday (by 4 votes) and so now she is 'morally' obliged to take No Deal off the table. No mention of how the moral authority of 17.4 million people stacks up with those 4 MP's (or even the maybe 500 Loser, sorry Remainer MPs).

But here is the thing. There are common laws and there are Constitutional laws. When Tony Blair decided in his supreme arrogance to abolish the position of Lord Chancellor he was informed that it was a Constitutional position and not within his gift to have any say on. (And there was Tony thinking he was either an absolute ruler of perhaps a god).

This throws up a slight flaw in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland joining the European Union (and they do call it joining, even though they mean the UK to be subsumed) By handing the power to make laws in the UK and indeed to change the very nature of our law-making, the government was handing authority to a foreign power - a Constitutional act and something that is not within their power.

Edward Heath wasn't just lying to make you think wrongly of the EU, he had to hide that we were signing away sovereignty, because to admit that would be to admit its illegality.

Technically, we have never been in the EU because it was impossible to 'join' such an organisation. (And the EU is an organisation just like the UN, or NATO or any other international body -except they don't get to run our country!)