LoneStarr Apophenius

BREXIT

98 posts in this topic

The PLAN is to have NO PLAN  ;)

 

They did this with Ireland and ultimately the Irish fell into line

 

 

Twice. I suspect neither are legal. Though they remain unchallenged. I also suspect the second treaty on the second vote, was rigged. Ballot boxes are not very secure in Ireland. 

 

The Irish Taoiseach at the time, Bertie Ahern was on the radio today or yesterday, saying that the Irish voted on a different treaty technically the second time but was corrected by a expert in these legal matters to say no that is to the case. It's damage limitation for the very PRO EU establishment in Ireland. 

Rerunning the same referendum in Ireland is not meant to be done within the terms of the constitution as they did it, as in so close in time.

 

It takes serious money to really challenge things via the courts in Ireland, it can however change government policy of the day overnight as can EU rulings but it's hugely and prohibitaivley expensive.

Ireland and the UK are deeply linked for all the wrong and right reasons. The UK is Ireland largest European export market, while Ireland is the highest iMporter in the EU of UK goods. In theory Ireland might be better in pegged to the Pound but free sweeties, i.e. European central banker money was to good to resist it seems to keep the party going.

In conclusion, I see no way the UK will run the same question every gain, they are pushing reframing it and pushing vote on a different aspect but in truth I think the people of the UK are not for turning, as Thatcher might have said once. 

Check out the comments at the bottom of this article, the mood is in no mood for games. 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/684527/EU-referendum-voters-changing-their-minds-Leave-Remain-Bregret-Brexit-European-Union

 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://henrymakow.com/2016/06/brexit-what-is-the-globalist-game.html

 

Brexit- What is the Hidden Globalist Game?

June 26, 2016

 

 

Boris Johnson's stepmother Jenny, the second wife of his father Stanley, is the stepdaughter of Edward Sieff, the former chairman of Marks & Spencer

 

 

The prompt acceptance of the narrow referendum win should make you suspicious. Brexit is supposed to be a blow to the masonic Jew World Order. But all the usual suspects including the mass media supported it. What trick do the globalists have up their sleeve?

 

bj-wall.jpeg

 

"Brexit is pure political theatre for the gullible masses and nothing more...Throughout the campaign, Brexiters lamented how the establishment was ranged against them, but in truth the reverse was the reality."

 

 

By Northsider

Brexit- Another Jewish Dialectic?

(henrymakow.com)

 

There is great rejoicing in much of the so called alternative media over the "Brexit" result in yesterday's British referendum on membership of the European Union. If more proof were needed that the alternative media is often misinformed and credulous, this is it.

 

Alternative types, from David Duke to David Icke, have of course been insisting for months that the Brexit movement represents a mighty blow against Zio-globalism. There may be some excuse for Duke to believe this guff: he is, after all, an American and presumably relies on British "white nationalists" for information about such matters. There is little or no excuse for British white nationalists themselves, or for British critics of Zionism like Icke, to be so deceived.

 

bj-handshake.jpeg

(l. Borris and his buddy in Masonic handshake)

 

Unless they have been paying very scant attention indeed, they should have noticed that the Brexit movement is overwhelmingly dominated not just by common or garden variety Zionists, but by hard-core Zionist ultras of a particularly toxic variety. For example, Boris Johnson, the part-Jewish de facto frontman for Brexit, describes himself as "a passionate Zionist" and supports with an equal passion both the corrupt City of London and mass migration to Europe.

 

But compared to Michael Gove, the other leading Tory Brexit spokesman and senior British cabinet member, Boris is a veritable peacenik. Gove has never seen a Zio-war he didn't like. A former journalist with the Zionist London Times newspaper, he once penned the following excruciating line about war criminal Blair: "I can't help myself! I love Tony!".

 

 

It's worth pointing out, by the way, that Johnson, and more especially Gove, are close personal friends of British Prime Minister David Cameron, which makes it, therefore, more than plausible to suggest that their dispute over Brexit is pure political theatre for the gullible masses and nothing more.

 

gove.jpeg

 

Chris Grayling, another senior Tory Brexiter, is a member of British Israel Communications and Research Centre (BICOM), a Zionist lobby group. When he was secretary of state for Justice and Lord Chancellor, Grayling declared war on "extremists", the working definition of which, he made clear, amounted to anyone who criticized Israel or the War on Terror.

 

Theresa Villiers, the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, and Brexiter, is an "officer" of the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) and ardent Zionist.

 

Iain Duncan Smith, a long standing supporter of Brexit, who resigned recently from his senior ministry in the Cameron government, also belongs to the CFI, as indeed do nearly all the leading Tory Brexiters.

 

r-LIAM-FOX-ELECTORAL-COMMISSION-large570

 

Then there's Liam Fox, left, another Neocon ultra, who was forced to resign from his job as Secretary of State for Defence, after it was revealed that billionaire Israeli arms dealer, Poju Zabludowicz, was funding his jet setting playboy lifestyle, and that of his erstwhile "adviser" Adam Werrity.

 

It isn't just on the Tory side where Brexit goes with passionate Zionism. One of the small handful of Labour Party Brexit supporters was Gisela Stuart, a German born Zionist, and a member of the Neocon "Henry Jackson Society". Stuart received lavish media coverage throughout the campaign - courtesy of her Zionist friends at the BBC. Other Labour Brexit supporters like Kate Hoey and Frank Field, also strongly support Israel.

 

THE ZIONIST-CONTROLLED MEDIA

 

 

Then there's the media: Murdoch's soft-porn rags have fervently advocated for Brexit since well before the vote was called. Ditto the soft core porn Daily Mail, and the Daily Express, owned by Zionist hard-porn baron, Richard Desmond. The Telegraph is if anything even more Neocon than the Murdoch press, and likewise took a strong pro-Brexit stance. Even those media one might normally expect to be pro-EU adopted a distinctly ambivalent approach to the issue.

 

mail.jpeg

 

For example, the Guardian and the Independent published many articles in support of leaving the EU. By the same token, in one of the key televised debates on the Brexit issue, the BBC slanted the panel three to two in favour of Brexit. One of the two pro "spokespersons" ... was Eddie Izzard, a buffoonish and widely despised transvestite "comedian" who appeared on the panel with bright red lip stick, mascara, nail varnish and clad in a woman's jacket and blouse, and a pink beret. Not exactly an advocate designed to appeal to the undecided voters of  middle England...

 

 

(Julie Burchill of The Guardian, draped in Israeli flag, part of the pro-Brexit Pressitute corps.)

 

When it comes to individual journalists, the roll call of pro-Brexiters in general corresponded to the leading names in "Zio-presstitution": Julie Burchill, Douglas Murray, Charles Moore, Julia Hartley Brewer, Matthew Parris, Toby Young, Janet Daley, and even Peter Hitchens - who in spite of his stated reservations about western invasions around the world, always can be relied upon to stoutly defend the Israeli state. 

 

Throughout the campaign, Brexiters lamented how the establishment was ranged against them, but in truth the reverse was the reality. Indeed, ironically enough the corporate media eagerly spun the Leave campaign meme of the referendum as a David and Goliath contest between the plucky Brexit underdog and the nasty pro-EU ruling elite. Moreover, unlike the case of the Scottish independence referendum two years ago, there were very few corporate celebs rushing to support the pro-EU side.

 

In the Scottish referendum, almost anyone who was anyone in showbiz - Mick Jagger, Paul McCartney, Kate Moss, et al - put their name to a letter calling on Scotland to stay in the United Kingdom. No such closing of celeb ranks took place against Brexit - which in itself goes a long way to refuting the notion that Brexit was an anti-establishment cause.

 

THE ZIO GAME?

 

So if the Zio-globalists favoured Brexit, what was their game? Not for the first time, the Russians seemed to have got closer to the reality than many of the western alternative media did.

 

 

Last week Putin suggested that Cameron had called the referendum in order to "blackmail" the rest of Europe. The evidence for this theory is compelling. It should be remembered that for all their self-serving chauvinistic rhetoric, the British Neocons don't dislike the EU on account of its control by corrupt transnationals and even more corrupt bankers: au contraire they want it to be even MORE controlled by these forces than it already is. 

 

- See more at: http://henrymakow.com/2016/06/brexit-what-is-the-globalist-game.html#sthash.Sab1BG7q.dpuf

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Brit (who voted Leave) I have to take issue with parts of the Henry Makow piece.

 

In the run upto the vote there was plenty of evidence that support for Leave was running somewhere between 65% and 80% thanks to independant online polling, including at one point that mainstream corps like AOL.

All of the polls were ingored by all of the press including all of those listed in his piece.

I was particularly annoyed, in the run upto the vote, that the news papers which sit, and have sat for many years, on the anti-EU side completely failed to lead the battle against those news organisations which have typically been pro-EU.

About 3 days before the vote a single begrudging piece was written by a Telegraph journalist in favour of exit, but the rest of the paper was heavily pro-corporate interests whichof course was anti-Leave.

The day after the Sun (murdoch owned) came out as pro-Leave which was the first paper to officially do so.

The Daily Mail, The Express all occupied the central ground and pretty much everyone else was pro-Remain.

So, quite alot of the assertions about media supporting Leave pre-vote is rubbish.

 

Post vote, has been equally interesting.

The 4m people petition for a 2nd referendum, now shown to be fraudulant has been heavily pushed as legit by most of the media organisations with a few suprises.

The Guardian and Mirror, two traditionally pro-EU outlets challenged the petition, the Telegraph managed to ignore it.

The Daily Mail and Daily Express, post vote have switched to pro-leave.

The fake BBC driven upsurge in racism post-vote has only been challenged in alternative media.

Coverage of the Labour party attempted coup on Corbyn with the intention to replace him with someone who wants to challenge and block the referendum (something most MP's of both main parties want) has been almost non-existant. They even failed to ponder why Cameron (when he challenged Corbyn) as leader of the Tories would want Corbyn to go

 

The best analysis I've read has been by Brandon Smith (I think his name is) over at Alt-Market, he has a couple of things I don't agree with but largely I think its bang on.

Incidentally, I've often thought we should invite him to post over here as he's very perceptive, very thought provoking in the same way most of you (who post) are when you post things I simply would not have thought of.

8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

192496-7-34ff6.jpg
 
Contrary to the boastful claims of Nigel Farage, UKIP was not the originator of the referendum it has just won. The decision was imposed on David Cameron by the members of the Conservative Party.
 
Just as Margaret Thatcher never hesitated to destroy British industry in order to transform her country into an international financial centre, in the same way the Conservatives did not hesitate to open the door for the independence of Scotland and Northern Ireland - and thus the loss of North Sea oil - in order to transform the City into the primary off shore financial centre for the yuan.
 
Contrary to what the European Press claims, the City of London is not directly concerned by the Brexit. Because of its particular status as an independent state placed under the authority of the Crown, it has never been part of the European Union. Of course, it will no longer be able to shelter the head offices of certain companies which will retreat back into the Union, but on the contrary, it will be able to use the sovereignty of London to develop the yuan market. Already in April, it obtained the necessary privileges by signing an agreement with the Central Bank of China. Besides which, it may develop its activities as a fiscal paradise for Europeans.
 
http://www.voltairenet.org/article192607.html
 


Acknowledging that the European Union is "being severely put to the test," Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Jean-Marc Ayrault said the bloc was challenged by a series of crises to its south and east while economic growth was on a slow recovery path. Work on the paper began before Britain voted on Thursday to quit the EU.

 

To this end they proposed three initiatives:

 

1. A European Security Compact, under which:

- The EU should establish agreed strategic EU priorities for foreign and security policy and promote an integrated EU policy in these areas.

- Those EU member states willing to establish permanent structured cooperation in the field of defense should be able to do so in a flexible manner.

- If needed, EU member states should consider establishing standing maritime forces or acquiring EU-owned capabilities in other key areas.

 

2. A common European asylum and migration policy.

 

3. Fostering growth and completing the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU).

 

The document in question is widely quoted and distributed via Reuters but nowhere to be found in it's entirety as of yet.

EDIT---Here it is:attachicon.gifDokumentUE-2.pdf

 

Enter: John Kerry

 

arton192610-f79f2.jpg

 

On Monday 27 June 2016, the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, and the NATO Secretary-General, Jens Stoltenberg, met at Brussels. The two men have put the finishing touches to the final details of the Nato Summit that will take place on 8 and 9 July at Warsaw and more importantly, the European Council Summit on 29 June.

 

Indeed, President Obama ensured that Mr Stoltenberg was invited to the European Council, which will debate the reactions to Brexit. Washington is seeking to avoid at all costs that the UK’s departure from the European Union triggers its exit from Nato.

 

“Nato has become even more important as a platform for cooperation between Europe and North America but also for cooperation on defense and security between Nato’s European member states. Nato-EU cooperation has always been important, but it is even more important today after the decision taken by the United Kingdom.” So declared Jens Stoltenberg.

 

http://www.voltairenet.org/article192610.html

 

 

UK has no written constitution, and so the UK government “wings it” on matters such as determining when a public vote in a referendum (such as Brexit) is actually final.

 

The petition to Parliament for there to be a revote has already received over four million signatures, and it notes that “Parliament considers all petitions that get more than 100,000 signatures for a debate,” which means that even if only one-in-forty of those signatures are valid, and there are no additional signers, Parliament will take up the debate.

 

At that time, the fact that the referendum on Brexit was only “advisory” and not at all obligatory-to-be-adhered-to by the government, will be put forth in Parliament, again and again, as reason why the 52%-to-48% Brexit vote shouldn’t necessarily be considered to be final.

 

Furthermore, the petition’s point might also find majority support amongst Parliamentarians, that “We the undersigned call upon HM Government to implement a rule that if the remain or leave vote is less than 60% based a turnout less than 75% there should be another referendum.” There is no fixed rule on these matters in UK, because there is no written constitution.

 

But rights and wrongs do not make policies and laws; power does, and the international corporations possess it, the public unfortunately do not. Consequently, there will probably be a revote, because the owners of international corporations want there to be.

 

And, so, UK will very likely remain in EU; democracy will probably be irrevocably dead in UK, from that time forward; the major stockholders in international corporations will then rigidly control the country. UK’s unwritten constitution will then, without any practical challenge, be whatever the major stockholders in international corporations want it to be. And, as far as other countries in EU are concerned, all of which do have written Constitutions, those Constitutions will become less and less effective over time, as the EU’s international-corporate dictatorship will increasingly take precedence, in the emerging United States of Europe. It will be the Bilderbergers’ dream, the Trilateralists’ dream, the Davos dream: international dictatorship, by the international aristocracy. The words might superficially sound pleasant, but the outcome will be hell.

 

The message of that, if all of this comes to pass, will be, from the masters: Welcome to the future; it belongs to me and my children, not to you and your children. We own it, you don’t. Just get out of our way.

 

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/06/will-probably-second-referendum-brexit.html

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry LoneStarr, your first sentence isn't correct.

 

Both Labour and Conservatives have elements that are anti-EU and have pushed for some sort of realignment or entire disengagment.

The public had latched onto this and for several general elections i.e. several 4 yer cycles, a referendum was part of both parties election manifesto but, as is typical around the world, as soon as the party got in the referendum would be ignored.

 

UKIP during this period was gradually building itself in Europe but failed to have any impact on UK parliamentary elections.

All that changed in the 2015 general election when UKIP, whilst gaining virtually nothing seat wise, made a critical breakthrough in terms of voting mass gaining 12.5% of the vote or 3,881,000 votes which nationally put them 3rd nationally with three times as many votes as the SNP who (as a reasult of the election) end up controlling Scotland.

 

Analysis showed that much of that support came from disaffected Tories and Cameron with other Tory grandees realised they needed a plan or risk the party getting ripped apart in future polls.

They hatched a cunning plan to steal UKIP's thunder.

UKIP had for many years made their position clear, the UK needed to come out of the EU, so the Tories decided a great way to spike UKIPs guns would be to take that and run with it, simultanously meeting their long standing manifesto commitment.

The agreement was only made because polling had consistently shown Leave support at around 35% and as such it was felt that it would be a risk free endevour.

And so Brexit came about.

 

As you can see, if either of the main parties had wanted to give us a referendum they could have done in any of the previous governements but they didn't, that only changed when UKIP threatened the status quo and as such needed to be dealt.

So really all of this is to do with UKIP's resilience over the years, and in particular Farage's drive.

 

I should end this by saying I'm not a member of any political party, principally because as we all know politicians are owned and apply corporate interests.

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also, please see my previous post (or do your own research on Zero Hedge, Jim Stone etc....) on the petition for a 2nd referendum vote.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry LoneStarr, I should be doing all of this in a single thread.

 

As someone who works for an Investment Bank in the City I can tell you they were worried about Brexit.

We were all pretty much told to vote Remain, our Chairman even sent out two reminders stating the Banks official position on the vote.

 

I do agree with your position on a revote, you can see with the Labour parties attempts to oust Corbyn that our democratically elected representatives don't intend to honour a democratic result.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand the petition for a revote. First, as I understand, it was started by a pro-Leave person a month prior to the Brexit vote. That's the only way the petition makes sense to me. Otherwise, moving forward on that petition would mean that they would implement a post hoc rule concerning the outcome. Certainly, that is not within the spirit of the goals of the referendums.

Also, since a referendum isn't binding and so many people want a do-over, why don't the people in charge simply decline to follow it?

I still find the events around it all very strange.

Also, the FTSE has rebounded today above pre-Brexit vote levels. And the pound has improved some as well.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still find the events around it all very strange.

 

It seems pretty clear to me this has all been designed to create a lot of confusion for the masses and subsequent discussion in the media and government halls for months to come.  

 

Makes me wonder what is really going on behind the scenes or what is being hidden by these events.  What is it masking.

 

I bet it has nothing to do with the Britain or the EU, maybe not even money...

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boris Johnson: I'm Not Running For Leadership

June 30, 2016

 

 

"There are gasps as Tory MPs and journalists are left stunned by the former London mayor's revelation that he will not be standing.

 

Boris Johnson has ruled himself out of the race to be the next Tory leader and Prime Minister saying, "that person cannot be me".

 

Mr Johnson, who was the bookies' favourite to succeed David Cameron and was expected to throw his hat into the ring, made the shock announcement after fellow Brexiteer Michael Gove put himself forward as a leadership contender.

 

His decision to bat for the Leave campaign was seen by many as a political gamble which, if successful, would have seen him replace his former Eton chum as Prime Minister.

 

In a news conference just moments before the midday deadline for nominations, Mr Johnson said the next Tory leader would have to unite the party and country.
 
Citing his own credentials, Mr Johnson said he was immensely proud of what his team had achieved in the capital at City Hall.
 
He said the UK's Brexit vote was a chance for the country's next leader to "restore Britain's standing as an independent sovereign" and "our moment to stand tall in the world".
 
But then he added: "My friends, you have waited for the punchline of this speech."
snip
5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a brit, I can tell you that no one who I have spoken to who voted leave regret it.

I can also say that the remainers have been manipulated into believing the leavers are racists, yet they can not see their opinions are racist.

Likewise, I have heard rumours from Germany than the common folk want an end to Merkel, they see her as reason we voted out.

The common person in EU all hate the EU, NOT the people of Europe. Which has been suggested.

For my entire life the British government have blamed the ill state of the uk on EU.

Nigel Farage and UKIP is the only reason we have a referendum, or should I say the fear of him becoming electable. The tories only promised an referendum as they didn't expect to win the Last general election. They expected another coalition government and expected the referendum to be the stumbling block on the coalition.

But they won and had no choice.

Leave won due to Camerons miserable attempt to get changes. Merkel inviting the migrants over. And uk's dislike of being ruled by others.

We will leave the EU, if they try not to, there will be blood on British Streets, we will revolt. We will take back our country.

10 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fingers Crossed Jeremy Corbyn stays alive. I'm surprised be it's still in opposition.

The scum that is media is trying to take him down.

They have been trying the Anti-Semitic route for months. Which I still find rather contradictory.

Finally I see remain as project fear, and there predictions also have not been realised, but i don't see any of that in the news or in anything.

I hope i haven't been hoodwinked, I hope brexit is actually a blow to tptb.

To connect two unrelated threads is this the reason for Mandela effect, trying to change the people gaining free will.

11 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol. Last post 11.11 that was by no means planned.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fingers Crossed Jeremy Corbyn stays alive. I'm surprised be it's still in opposition.

The scum that is media is trying to take him down.

They have been trying the Anti-Semitic route for months. Which I still find rather contradictory.

Finally I see remain as project fear, and there predictions also have not been realised, but i don't see any of that in the news or in anything.

I hope i haven't been hoodwinked, I hope brexit is actually a blow to tptb.

To connect two unrelated threads is this the reason for Mandela effect, trying to change the people gaining free will.

 

 

Hey Myth, great overview of Uk media and also pointing out what was in plain sight, the voting mood of the day was there for all to see. Yet the media constructed a totally different narrative. You have vindicated what I was seeing post results.

I'll say you were not hoodwinked if you understand it's all power play. As a voter you don't really have any power other than the formalised ritual. 

 

The way I view it in this scenario is since the Sovereign is the Crown in this equation, (in this instance the Queen). I believe, there was a move to protect the Crown. Since that is what must be protected, the Sovereignty.

So do you think those who are not sovereign i.e. the subjects, will be allowed threaten that? Give it away as such.  

Yea there was a vote, was it for optics and a political platitude. Yes most certainly. it was a "festival of democracy", meanwhile power worked away in the background which never get coverage and can only be detected I believe post events, foresncailly and tangentially.

 

It's not all that fantastic but it required layers of subterfuge. When you look at what happened in a military sense, the element of surprise won the day tactically. To continue the military analogy. This was but one victory, in what might be a long war. Those who are trained to win wars know how to act in such times but they've taken the advantage for now. 

I think it's a narrative of old fashioned loyalty and protection. 

 

Now let's think about that really odd retort when the alleged Killer was asked his name on his first apprecen in a London court and replied;

 

"Death to traitors, freedom for Britain"

 

I originally thought maybe this was a psy-op to associate a crazed event and act of violence with the leave side and thus give people an easy way to dissociate and vote remain.  However it still struck me as a truly odd statement. Considering he's probably a patsy. The follwoing day I believe he was more himself. It was almost like it' trigged off a embedded repose. Hypnotists use these techniques all the time to get people to perform to key words or gestures and such. 

Now I see it as an encoded message, from those loyal and entrusted with protecting the Sovereign who have eyes and ears to see.  

Seems much clearer now don't you think?

 

I believe the Blair government made Treason no longer a capital punishment. Perhaps there is a a deeper more clandestine group who have a different view on that matter and moved to at the end of the day, protect the Sovereign at all costs. 

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How Boris Johnson was brought to his knees by the 'cuckoo nest plot'

Gordon Rayner

July 1, 2016

 

 

"Sir Lynton Crosby, Boris Johnson’s campaign manager, was making final preparations for the formal announcement of Mr Johnson’s Tory leadership bid when his phone rang at 8.53 on Thursday morning.

 
“Hi Lynton, it’s Michael Gove here,” said the voice on the other end. “I’m running.”
 
“Running what?” Sir Lynton replied.
 
“I’m running for the leadership myself.”
snip
Sir Lynton was stunned. With two hours to go until the launch of Mr Johnson’s leadership bid, Mr Gove, the man who was supposed to be making up the “dream ticket” with him, had not so much stabbed him in the back as run him through with a pikestaff. 
 
The Telegraph understands that Sir Lynton asked Mr Gove whether he had told Mr Johnson. He had not, but said he intended to. The call, however, was never made.
 
By noon, Mr Johnson, the front-runner for the Tory leadership, was no longer a runner at all, ousted by what was being called a “cuckoo nest plot”. Having been comprehensively stitched up by his running mate and several other “supporters”, he threw in the towel, his ambitions in ruins.
snip
'Gove is a ----!'
 
Perhaps Mr Johnson should have seen it coming. The history of the Conservative Party is, after all, littered with the shattered careers of leadership front-runners who were knifed by their colleagues: Maudling, Heath, Heseltine, Clarke, Portillo, Davis.
 
Mr Johnson’s most loyal friends were apoplectic. One described Mr Gove’s behaviour as “utter treachery”, and suspicions quickly surfaced that Mr Gove had intended all along to use the popular Mr Johnson to win the referendum vote before ambushing him at the last moment."
snip
 
 
6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brexit supporter Nigel Farage resigns as UK Independence Party leader

July 4, 2016

 

 

"Brexit campaigner and MEP Nigel Farage has announced he is stepping down as leader of UKIP.

“I have never been and I have never wanted to be a career politician,” he said in a speech on Monday morning."
 
video - more at link
 
Tx Reddwolf
5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also, please see my previous post (or do your own research on Zero Hedge, Jim Stone etc....) on the petition for a 2nd referendum vote.

 

I didn't see your posts as I was busy writing my own, as you can see from the time stamps, so I had not seen you excellent points of interest when I posted. I also concede that a French national is probably not the best source of information regarding Brexit :-)

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else agree it is strange that a large chunk of the main players are all leaving the theatre ...

 

Cameron

Boris

Farage

 

This smells like a well executed plan nearing completion of stage 1...

 

Time will reveal the next set of players I assume soon enough.

8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I do find it strange. And they're not even trying to hide it. The explanations these folks are giving for leaving don't pass the smell test. You have to wonder how they were each give the incentive (read: forced) to leave.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just gonna quote myself on this one point...

 

 

It's not all that fantastic but it required layers of subterfuge. When you look at what happened in a military sense, the element of surprise won the day tactically. To continue the military analogy. This was but one victory, in what might be a long war. Those who are trained to win wars know how to act in such times but they've taken the advantage for now. 

It really does look like a militarily executed plan in terms it's effectiveness at creating a wide sweeping list of physical and political casualties that has gotten longer since I posted my last few posts. It may or may not be the source but if the analogy fits. As to who.. I still don't know, Murdock & Co?... I don't know. Draw up a shortlist. one or a combination. It's what it tells us about the future and where things are heading. 

I feel wheels within the wheels can turn freely of the larger ones as they please and we never get to fully see the internal power plays that eventually manifest outwardly.

The only way to discern is continually look at the reaction and indirect consequences of events, if they don't make sense then they point to something else that has to, so what is that hidden but driving force? 

I will note my comment were before even Nigel had resigned. On one level his reasoning is plausible but everyone together, unprecedented, but so too is the vote unprecedented so we don't really have a comparable template., other than WAR!

 

So Fog of War and all that. Time will tell.

 

My feeling is Britain may have already begun the process of costing in some of the hard economic and fincnail shocks and thus pain early. yes it will be  rough now but give it a few more weeks and months and the wider scheme of global inequities will swamp that story for larger more precarious events.

Britain basically may have gotten a head start in dealing with the serious bad which is inevitably coming to most of the rest of the developed financial world economies. (Swiss Bonds are trading negative for 50 years!)
 

If Deutsche Bank doesn't fall in a CONTROLLED FINANCIAL (shut down) DEMOLITION (DB Frankfurt HQ = Twin Towers!...you heard it here first!) then I'd be amazed it wouldn't be something else. So while the world grapes with that and maybe fractures open up around the EU, Britain will have weathered the storm somewhat early. 

2324958878_61dda25a94_o.jpg

I think the UK is in a sense now sitting at the table of the LONG GAME, with a stronger and developing hands and thus odds along side the Chinese, the rest are running around in circles confused by their own madness or their ideological blindness leading to madness either way!!!!

 

It's all about POWER and the PLAY is on and there is now a HUGE POWER VACCUM in the UK, that will be filled to deal with what's coming I guess. Maybe that was the plan all along. Who knows.  

Interesting times indeed! 

9 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surprise,surprise. BREXIT is delayed

 

Britain could leave the European Union toward the end of 2019, instead of early that year as expected by some politicians, reported the Sunday Times.

 

The UK voted to leave the EU on June 23, but Prime Minister Theresa May has said she will not invoke "Article 50", the two-year formal process for divorcing the bloc, this year as the country needs time to prepare for negotiations.

 

Elections in France in May, and Germany in September, could also push back the timing of Britain triggering Article 50, reported the newspaper.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-timing-idUSKCN10O0Y9?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=57afa79d04d30179e16c76b5&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Theresa May vows to trigger Article 50 by March and be out of the EU by early 2019

 

May confirms repeal of 1972 European Communities Act

PM: 'Let's show this country we mean business'

Davis: 'At moment we leave, Britain must be back in control'

Telegraph View: The Great Repeal Bill is a bold move by the PM

 

​What is Article 50 - and what does it mean

Britain must look beyond Europe for economic success, the Prime Minister said on Sunday as she said there would be no deal on immigration to keep the UK in the single market.

 

Setting out a detailed blueprint for Brexit for the first time, Theresa May said that the UK will become “truly global” as she listed eight international nations including China, India and Singapore prepared to sign major free trade deals with Britain.

 

Addressing Conservative conference for the first time since becoming Prime Minister, Mrs May made clear that border controls are a red line in the Brexit negotiations, saying that “we are not leaving the European Union only to give up control of immigration again”.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/02/theresa-may-brexit-boris-johnson-david-davis-liam-fox-live/

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backtracking IMF admits UK is fastest growing G7 economy, despite post-Brexit recession warning

October 4, 2016

 

 

 

"The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has backtracked on its gloomy post-Brexit forecast for Britain, now saying the UK will boast the fastest-growing major economy in 2016.

 


In its new report, the IMF predicts the UK’s gross domestic product (GDP) will grow by 1.8 percent this year ahead of the US, Germany, Japan and other members of the G7.

 

Prior to the June referendum, the IMF claimed a Brexit would plunge the UK into recession. It has now conceded that those warnings proved to be overly pessimistic.

 

However, it forecast a sharp slowdown in 2017, claiming the economy would eventually suffer from the shock of the EU referendum result. It said expansion next year would be just 1.1 percent, lower than expected in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote.

 

The IMF’s economic counsellor, Maurice Obstfeld, said the Brexit vote left the future of UK’s trade and financial relations with the other 27 EU member states unclear.

 

“Alongside economic anxiety and other factors, the Brexit vote reflects a resentment of cross-border migration that has fueled nationalist sentiment in Europe and called into question the way forward for EU integration,” he said.

 

The IMF also cautioned that economic data since the referendum had been limited and said the fall in sterling would prompt inflation to rise from 0.7 percent this year to 2.5 percent in 2017."

snip


 

Seems Nigel was correct after all.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now