It's instructive that the Telegraph has now adopted the 'Ultra Remainers' term to describe all those establishment figures who have staked their wealth and careers on the EU bandwagon to the extent that they can't let go. With just over a year to Freedom Day, and backed by Soros billions, they will throw everything into the battle.
Of course I don't mean anything as vulgar as Brexiteers and Ultra Remainers battling on the street. Ultra Remainers don't really do streets and no ordinary Remainer I know could be arsed actually to fight for it, unlike a good proportion of Brexiteers who are rearing to go. No, Ultra Remainers slink along the corridors of power, loiter in mahogany clubs, whisper at black tie events, rat-gnaw at Euro chicken at glittering tables. They thought they governed Britain and are still smarting from the slap they got on 23rd June 2016. They are not prepared to give up power so easily.
That they are now prepared to so nakedly reveal themselves, from civil servants to their EU handlers, means either desperation or a confidence that they will not be exposed as having conspired against an elected government, will never face sanctions for their actions, will never face a stripping of their honours or a degradation of their estate. If we win this battle, I pray we prove their confidence misplaced. If we lose, I seriously fear the extent of civil disorder that will result.
32 comments:
I wish I had faith that the Brexit-voting majority would wage a campaign of civil unrest, or at the very least, civil disobedience but I'm not sure they will.
They have been too cowed by the insidious PC, Common-Purpose agenda which has taken over this country in the past few decades.
I wonder if the BBC and other "quality" media outlets are ever going to catch on that these clowns do not reflect the reality.
I felt it necessary from the comfort of my computer display to spend some time yesterday with Andrew Neill, who does have a little bit about him, but it is clear that even he takes these creatures from the Ultra Remainia far too seriously.
Even the FFC seemed to be displaying a degree of chutzpah during her intense barracking by the overgrown schoolboy Trot that is currently leading (as opposed to running) the opposition during PMQs yesterday.
And yet, the media keeps on giving these types the oxygen of publicity.
I suppose this is like Trump's "deep state", and "fake news" in action over here.
It must be all about the money that they think they are going to lose, all those EU pensions along with any graft that they can get along the way. They never thought about ordinary folk when they had their grubby digits in our pockets... still don't.
" If we win this battle, I pray we prove their confidence misplaced. If we lose, I seriously fear the extent of civil disorder that will result."
If I may amend your quote slightly - "If we win this battle, I insist that they be arraigned as traitors, tried, then executed. If we lose, then they have lost our consent to be governed. If they are intent on denying us our freedoms, then two can play that game.
I have awoken this morn feeling far more relaxed about BrexSShite than I have in a whiles. PMT.May is rushing off to meet Tusk before her speech tomorrow...I wonder why? /sarcasm
Yesterday, using the old 'good day for bad news' technique, whilst May was giving her menopausally weak 'we shall fight them on the benches, Arlene' the government admitted it had caved in to the EU about EU citizens rights in the 'transition period' (about the only thing they haven't yet conceded is that EUers rights will be regulated by the ECJ...but I expect that red line will turn a light pink soon enough).
John Major, surely the best Prime Minister we never had, gave a cracking speech, which despite his bare faced hypocrisy (he's a politician -what do you expect) will strengthen mightily the resolve of moderate or undecided-but-leaning-towards-Remain back benchers. May fears a free vote like the devil holy water.
And there was some comic relief provided by the taoiseach who seems to think tory remainers would ever vote with SF (or that SF would betray their own war dead and swear allegiance to her Maj.)
So all in all , things are looking up for the yUK.
You are scum Ketch. But keep crowing. Making you eat it will be all the sweeter.
Now Mr Ecks, please don't be so rude; he's entitled to his opinion just as you are.
The fact is, we are leaving the EU, thank goodness. But nobody voted for a particular way to do it.
Leaving is NOT an event; it is a process which will take 10 years to sort out to our best advantage. You can't unravel 45 years of integration at a stroke; it's just not possible. And there is an easy half way house we can enter, so that we leave the political EU for good, but maintain our ability to arrange mattesr as suit us best.
Making you eat it will be all the sweeter.
Will that be after the kitten heeled fat lady sings the Ode To Joy and Bojo changes his trousers...? You have to admit the sight of our For.Sec dunkirking it out of the HoC , putting the 'shite' into BrexSShite with his 'bags' full, was a pretty good indicator that those in charge of delivering BrexSShite are, like all bullies when challenged, cowardy custards.
BTW been meaning to ask for a whiles now, is the 'x' in MrX a black muslim thing?
Now Mr Ecks, please don't be so rude; he's entitled to his opinion just as you are.
I'm just as rude to him...if not the more so tbh.
Ketch: What do you care motorbike druggie? Blojo is --like you--treasonous scum who cares only about what suits him. Forget Doris Johnson.
But the 17.4 million who voted for their country back won't forget dross like you.
motorbike druggie?- Mr X
Huh? You have me confused with someone else. Motorbikes literally scare the crap out of me, even a 50CC leaves me in what Bojo would call 'a funk'.
Dear oh dear,
Such angst. We will get a terrible deal, the EU will then bully us until people realise this and then phase 2 of the exit will happen. Do not forget that the EU can also implode, the more corrupt and arrogant it becomes the more the AFD and Visograd countries increase in strength.
I expect that it will take at least ten years. By the way is it just me who thinks that no-one has to take up arms in Ireland because of a hard border? If the bombs start it will be the usual suspects throwing their weight around. This is a manufactured crisis as the EU has done work on the soft border issue and could make it work if they wished.
My own opinion would be walk out now, WTO rules, pay nothing, take control of our fishing and agriculture and then wait for EU to see sense. OK I would probably cancel the overseas aid commitments in the confusion but that would the cherry on top. However the reality will be ten years of being misrule by the EU until we have the nerve to do the job properly.
The EU want Northern Ireland for the big chunk of continental shelf it brings, and to hem the Brits in. What a pity WW2 ended before we were able to nuke Germany.
Gardener Fisher,
" Walking out" will still require every British exporter to the EU to meet the technical compliance standards as a " Third Country".
The first requirement is to appoint an EU - based representative to guarantee this to the EU authorities. The necessary documentation
will also have to be verified by EU - based standards organisations as British firms and organisations like the British Standards
Institution will no longer be valid in the EU.
This is simply the automatic effect of becoming a " Third Country" as Mrs May announced was her intention over a year ago
without any specific proposals as to how EU standards would be met in a manner acceptable. The EU has been issuing notices to stakeholders ever since. So the government is fully aware - if anybody has bothered to read them. Presumably she knew what she was doing - but her speech
was preceded by the resignation of Sir Ivan Rogers, our very experienced representative in Brussels. In his farewell letter
to colleagues, Sir Ivan reminded them of the need to speak truth to ministers, even when it was unwelcome. It seems that either speaking, listening or both have been in short supply since. The staff turnover in DExEU is four times the civil service average.
Having been through the process of joining the EEC in 1973 in a heavily affected industry, the main difference I can see is that, the
government then knew what it was doing and had a very competent civil service. Those two conditions no longer apply. We are only 13 months away from it now. I should add that I have been opposed to,our EEC/EU membership since 1972 . By late 1971 government was giving increasingly detailed guidance to affected firms. I served on a Ministry of Agriculture committee which was charged with the preparations. Now there is nothing, zilch, nada because they haven't a clue. I pray that I may be astonished by a sudden access of realistic competence by HMG but am not holding my breath
The staff turnover in DExEU is four times the civil service average.-Ed Spalton
In the theology of Brexit that sentence might be referred to as a 'mene-mene-tekel'.
There is no proposal that Britain breaks the Good Friday agreement. There is a proposal that Eire does.
Let's see what happens in Italy this weekend.
The EU's problems don't revolve around 'just' the UK, indeed their problems are far wider and far more serious than our little spat.
Between now and 2019 there would seem to be ample opportunity for the situation to degenerate into something far, far more contentious than a simple Brexit issue.
People taking to the streets in the event of a traitorous outcome would be relegated to page 4 in most papers if the situation carries on as it is.
I feel a black flag event coming on to provide the necessary 'distraction' that's needed.
Now the EU Parliament (and probably Tusk as well) has decided to play, finally, hard ball and remove any possible doubt in the minds of BrexSShiteurs that the EU places any value on us remaining, and will not allow cherry picking under any circumstances, one can only hope that May's wibbling tomorrow will be a decisive , and not just divisive, decision to either piss or get off the pot, either a full on Hard or a 360 degree BreXodus. *gets popcorn*
As Gardener Fisher said at 09:48 'the EU can also implode'. Merkel admitted yesterday that the migrants she let in aren't doing what they were supposed to be doing: boost the German economy. I had to laugh at the naivety of the dopey mare - I mean these military-age men who've been indoctrinated in the supremacy of Islam from infancy were never going to give anything back. They will just colonize towns and cities just like they're doing in England. What I'm saying is the German economy took a massive hit when she let them in and France has the same problem.
The EU will fall because it can't finance itself. Sure it will stagger on but in the end its welfare model will collapse along with its social cohesion. In his speech today Blair is warning about the financial crisis facing the EU when we leave - and he's right. Unfortunately for him its no longer our problem.
Steve
Merkel admitted yesterday -Steve
You got a linky to a German site for that, please, cos a quick google is not giving me anything except the usual Alt-right guff? I'm surprised also it wasn't on the main German news last night...bombshell it would have been.Only thing I have found so far is the row about Food Banks.
Edward Spalton said: "Walking out will still require every British exporter to the EU to meet the technical compliance standards as a Third Country." But we have to meet those compliance standards from within the EU now. I know because I worked for British exporting businesses. So what's the difference?
I would respect your position more if you made it clear that the majority of EU laws were not "technical standards". You don't. There are three main categories of EU laws: empire building laws which promote the power of the EU; laws which suit the crony-capitalist big corporations based in the EU; and real regulations based on scientific principles (often imported from outside sources such as the UN) which are worthwhile but don't need the EU to enact. Of course, Remains like to pretend that all EU regulations are in the third category.
It comes down to this: there are 196 nations in the world; 28 are in the EU and a further 4 are signed up to the EU's EEA agreement, de facto, or de jure. So 164 nations, the vast majority of the world by land area, population, trade, and GDP, are not. There is absolutely no practical or moral reason why we shouldn't join them and become the 165th.
@Edward Spalton
Has it not occurred to you that we already meet EU technical compliance standards because we're currently part of the EU? So nothing would change!
Your argument holds no water...
Is it not up to the individual companies that are exporting to find out what the technical regulations are for each country they target, and design the product accordingly ? Perhaps trade associations could help in some cases.
I don't see any reason why the government should be involved at all.
Don Cox
@Edward Spalton
Your argument holds no water... Dio
Dioclese, I have to ask; did you really read through Ed's comment because his hallmark is 'making sense' or 'holding water'? ...and I say that, incase you've missed it, as someone from the opposite side of the argument most of the time.
jack ketch said @ 14:47
'Merkel admitted yesterday - Steve
You got a linky to a German site for that, please..'
You'll get nothing from Google and even less from me. Your position on our withdrawal from the EU following the second referendum on our membership is without doubt the worst case of Sore Loser Syndrome I've ever seen on this blog. So be a good chap and fuck off.
Steve
Budgie & Dioclese
The majority of the EU's laws on health and technical standards of products now come from international/global regulators such as UNECE, ISO, Codex Alimentarius etc. The EU merely transposes them into its regulations and directives.
But, it is not sufficient that the regulations in other countries are the same. The means of ensuring compliance is either by membership of the EU/EEA where the standards are generally uniformly enforced under EU or EFTA supervision or by compliance assured at the common external frontier by inspection of product and supporting documents, to be provided by the importer's representative. . This may be assisted and augmented by things such as electronic pre-clearance, "Trusted Trader" schemes etc - the sort of things which are in the many trade agreements which the EU has with (say) the USA and China. No country, as far as I know, trades with the EU on World Trade Organisation Rules alone. Neither are countries which have free trade agreements with the EU exempt from the scrutiny but the intensity and frequency of inspections is adjusted on a statistical risk assessment. "Mutual recognition of standards "is quite insufficient and specifically excluded, for instance, from CETA the free trade treaty with Canada which is held up as a possible example for the UK to follow.
This is really rather important. When you go to the pharmacy for a prescription, the pills may come from a different country each time but you can expect them to be identical in purity and efficacy because of the very thorough system of approval and inspection which starts with safety testing of the original formula and includes inspections of the factories, sampling of the product and verification under supranationally enforced rules. The product licence number and batch numbers etc on the packet are visible tokens of a very thorough system. Of course, some free trade enthusiasts might be content in theory to leave it all to free competition between the pharmaceutical companies. The best-run companies would presumably have the largest proportion of surviving patients! But whenever I have put the question to one of them, they all preferred that their medicines should come from a strictly regulated supply chain.
With luck, Ulster will be the rock on which the brexiteer's ship will founder.
Raedwald - your blog comments are becoming infested by the "Jack Ketch" pseud/troll/puerile tit to an extent which devalues the entire blog for anyone over the age of twenty-five and with any sort of educated interest in current affairs. I'm actually contemplating an abandonment of your site, after several years, since although your own thoughts remain incisive, well informed and interesting, the JK creature battens onto them like a lamprey. Please do something terminal about him/it.
Anonymous/ Don Cox
The authorities depend on taxing economic activity for revenue, so they have an interest in facilitating it. When they change all the rules,
It is in their interest and, broadly, that of society to keep people informed so that they can prosper for their own benefit and that of what our ancestors called the commonwealth. The government is leaving the EU as part of the "common market" so it's subjects will need to understand the new dispensation of trading with it as a " Third Country" or foreign power.. This trade makes up about 12 per cent of our country's GDP.
I recorded my experiences of making the adjustment in the opposite direction in 1973 which you can Google under the heading
Edward Spalton The Miller's Tale. There is no Chaucerian bawdiness! There are four episodes and the end of episode 2 and most of episode 3 describe the transition for a modest inland animal feed mill. So I don't discuss export subsidies but they worked in a similar way to the subsidies for "denaturing" certain commodities in animal feed which I describe here and they formed a very important part of the pricing of commodities for export out of the EEC. Quite a number of senior grain and commodity traders decided to retire, as it was all too complicated for them.
But, unlike today's situation, the government took the matter in hand and explained the new system thoroughly and in plenty of time
If you have time to look,at it, I would appreciate a comment
Anon: 20-36--The only ones to be gulping saltwater are you and the rest of your traitorous pals. Still there will be time while you gargle to reflect on the evil and stupidity of being a Judas who didn't even get 30 pieces of silver for his betrayal.
jack ketch: " are, like all bullies when challenged, cowardy custards "
Magnificent example of projection and an astonishing lack of self awareness in one comment.
Well done.
Gardner Fisher: "If the bombs start it will be the usual suspects throwing their weight around."
The EU does rather have form in agitating civil unrest in foreign countries, if it thinks its own ends will be served. Viz Ukraine.
Dioclese: "so nothing would change! Your argument holds no water.."
Assuming an EU that wants a friendly relationship with its former member.
But it doesn't, it wants to punish Britain muchly, pour encourager les autres.
Post a Comment