The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

[greybeard]

You will never defeat the NWO--elite- illuminate- through negative emotions--anger- frustration- this has been on going since forever and none of that has come even close to getting rid of the "enemy"

When the human race commits, seriously, to spiritual principals then there will be the equality, the peace that people really want.
Till then its same old, same old.

Once this Brexit is done with then there will be something else. Unless!!!
Not condoning--not avoidance- not doing nothing--- but coming from a place of spiritual energy.

The Book by the late Dr David Hawkins "Power vs Force" spells it out--worth a read.
Meanwhile normal craziness continues.
Chris

[sunwings]

All the latest second referendum polls have suggested that Britain wants to remain in the EU, by a comfortable margin.

A collation of the latest polls by academic Matthew Goodwin reveals a firm pro-remain voting intention in Britain.

Looking at the polls an election is a complete waste of time. Leave and remain camps would have 45% of the votes each, leaving the DUP to be the decider.

Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg said at the start of this process "We could have two referendums. As it happens, it might make more sense to have the second referendum after the renegotiation is completed."

People, are divided by Johnsons deal or no deal or remain. A secondary referendum would allow for closure on a very sad chapter in British politics. I believe people are now informed on the consequences of Brexit and deserve to be heard again. Any other route I feel will cause a massive rift within Britain.

[Matthew]

Here's a post in this thread - link about another poll (published a few days ago) with slightly different results

[scanner]

I find it intriguing and confusing, how they have turned a leave vote, into lets have a three-year debate about a second referendum deal vote, very clever on their part. I'm not coming from any of those 3D emotions Chris, the spiritual is all that matters. The 3D construct will still be around when I've moved across. I, for my part, in the 3D have tried my best to help others as much as possible. But as the saying goes, you can take a horse to water etc.

[greybeard]

Brexit: Public turning against Boris Johnson’s deal and blaming him for latest delay, poll finds
The Independent Rob Merrick,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-pub...085441156.html



The public is turning against Boris Johnson’s deal and blaming him – rather than Labour – for the latest Brexit delay, a poll has found.

Only 19 per cent of voters believe the surprise agreement struck with Brussels last week is a good deal and only 3 per cent described it as “very good”.

The proportion not knowing enough about it to offer an opinion has fallen from 45 per cent to 34 per cent – with most who have made up their minds refusing to give their endorsement.

Furthermore, the survey suggested the prime minister has failed in his strategy of pinning the blame on Labour for the failure to deliver on his “do or die” pledge to leave the EU by 31 October.

One in five said that Mr Johnson and the Conservatives would be most responsible when Brexit fails to happen on Halloween, more than the 13 per cent who will blame Jeremy Corbyn’s party.

Over half the public blamed “MPs on all sides” suggesting the Tories will struggle to make the controversy a vote-winner in a general election.

Nevertheless, the poll, by YouGov for The Times, shows the Conservatives are maintaining their huge overall lead, holding out the promise of a Commons majority if the election is held.

It found 36 per cent of people planned to support the Tories, while only 23 per cent would back Labour, 18 per cent the Lib Dems and 12 per cent Nigel Farage‘s Brexit Party.

The election would also be dominated by Brexit, it seems, with 59 per cent citing leaving the EU as a priority in deciding how to vote, followed by health on 37 per cent and the economy on 29 per cent.

However, it appears unlikely to go ahead on 12 December, as Mr Johnson demanded, with opposition parties set to block a trigger motion on Monday.

A two-thirds majority is needed in the Commons to overturn the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, which stipulates no election before May 2022 – meaning Labour has an effective veto.

The poll found that 28 per cent of voters consider the deal to be bad, up five points from last week, while 20 per cent thought it was neither good nor bad, up from 15 per cent when the agreement was struck.

Only 23 per cent cited leaving the EU on Mr Johnson’s terms as their preferred Brexit outcome, against 20 per cent wanting no deal and 37 per cent backing Remain.

But only 29 per cent said parliament should reject the deal, while 40 per cent thought MPs should vote to implement it.

YouGov questioned 1,634 voters between 24 and 25 October

[greybeard]

As usual Andrew Marr BBC1 9am Sunday will be watched--he does not give an inch--good questions.
Jo Swinson will be on.
chris

[greybeard]

Brexit referendum should never have been called, say majority of voters
[The Guardian]
Toby Helm
The Guardian26 October 2019

Twice as many people now think it would have been better never to have held a referendum on Brexit than believe it was a good idea, according to the latest Opinium poll for the Observer.

Asked to consider the difficulties the government has had in reaching an agreement, 57% of UK adults surveyed said that they believed it would have been better not to have had a public vote in June 2016.

This compares with 29% of voters who believe it was right to hold the referendum on whether the UK should stay in or leave the EU.

The findings reflect a growing sense of public weariness about arguments over Brexit, which have paralysed British politics and divided the country. People who voted to remain in the EU are overwhelmingly of the view that the referendum should not have taken place, with 87% agreeing and only 7% saying it was a good idea.

Those who voted to leave, however, still have a majority view – although a decreasing one – that it was right to have put the question to the people; 57% of this group said that they believed it was the correct decision, against 32% who now think the reverse.

Despite this, the poll gives the Tories under Boris Johnson, who led the campaign to leave, a commanding 16-point lead over Labour, which opposed leaving the EU in the referendum. As Johnson prepares to push for a 12 December general election in a Commons vote tomorrow, the Conservatives are up three points compared with a week ago, on 40%. Labour is unchanged on 24%, while the Liberal Democrats are down one point on 15%. The Brexit party is down two on 10%, the SNP up one on 5% and the Greens down one on 3%.

The Brexit deal that Johnson struck with Brussels 10 days ago is regarded by more people as bad for their own financial prospects and those of the UK economy than the proportion who think it will be beneficial. Around 40% of voters think it will be bad for the UK economy as a whole, compared with 26% who think it will be good.
Boris Johnson in Brussels, 17 October 2019.
View photos
Boris Johnson in Brussels, 17 October 2019. Photograph: Thierry Monasse/Getty Images

With the Brexit deadlock continuing in parliament, opinion among the public is divided on what should happen next. The most popular option, although only by a very narrow margin, is to hold a general election to sort out the impasse. This is backed by 31% of people as the best way forward; 42% of Conservative voters back a general election, compared with 31% of Labour voters who support this as the next step.

The next most popular option is to allow the House of Commons the necessary time to pass the Brexit legislation; this is backed by 27% of all voters, including 41% of Tory supporters and 24% for Labour.

The option of another referendum is supported by 23% of all voters. Only 5% of Tories support a second vote, against 35% of Labour voters who back one.

If there were to be another referendum, the poll suggests the result would be on a knife edge, with 43% of all voters saying they would back remaining in the EU, against 42% who would vote to leave.

Adam Drummond, head of political polling at Opinium, said that the latest results showed support for the Tories had continued to grow, although support for Johnson’s deal pointed to a more complex set of views on Brexit. “The Conservatives have hit the symbolically important 40% mark for the first time since before missing the [original] Brexit deadline back in March, and the reaction to Boris Johnson’s deal appears to be that the public are divided on whether it will be good for them and the economy.

“To the extent that there is a way out of the impasse, a general election is the most popular individual outcome, but if Johnson’s deal were put up against the option of remaining in the EU in a binary referendum, the country remains just as evenly split as it was last time we asked.”


"Seems the Liberal Democrats are tabling a motion to have a General Election at an earlier date than the one proposed by the Government.
An hour a long time in politics--me thinks"
Chris

[greybeard]

Lib Dems offer Johnson route to December election
The Guardian Michael Savage and Toby Helm,The Guardian

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/pm-says-la...213307338.html

Boris Johnson has been offered a route to securing the pre-Christmas election that he has been seeking, through a plan that would only require the support of a simple majority of MPs.

With most Labour MPs still against the idea of a snap election, the prime minister looks set to lose his bid to secure a December poll on Monday in a vote that requires the backing of two-thirds of MPs. Other parties are also opposing an election until the EU has granted a three-month Brexit delay, although the DUP hinted on Saturday it could back the move.

However, in a sign that the coalition opposed to an election is under strain, the Liberal Democrats have drawn up a plan allowing Johnson to secure a December poll with a simple majority of MPs, with the support of Jo Swinson’s party and the SNP.

Under the one-page Lib Dem bill, the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act would be amended to state that the next election would take place on 9 December, three days earlier than under Johnson’s plans. It states that the new election date would be cancelled should the EU fail to grant a three-month Brexit extension.

The party is asking Johnson to adopt the bill and guide it through parliament between Tuesday and Thursday of this week, before dissolving parliament. It believes the timing of its plan means the prime minister would not be able to bring back his Brexit deal to the Commons before the election campaign starts – which he is currently threatening to do.

Swinson said last night: “Boris Johnson has missed his ‘do-or-die’ deadline and is now asking parliament to give him a general election and time for him to ram through his Brexit bill through parliament. That is a bad deal, and Liberal Democrats will not vote for it. We need to get Boris Johnson out of office, unlock the gridlock in parliament and give people the chance to vote to stay in the EU.

“A general election on our proposed timetable would take no-deal off the table, and give the public the chance to elect a Liberal Democrat government who will revoke article 50 or increase the number of MPs who support a People’s Vote.”

Party officials concede that the plan’s success lies in whether Johnson takes up the plan. However, it is a move that sees the Lib Dems shift support more clearly behind agitating for an early election.

Ian Blackford, the SNP’s leader in Westminster, gave his blessing to the plan on Saturday night. “I’m very keen that we work together on a mechanism, whether that be with Jo’s bill that we will support or any other mechanism – such as a vote of no confidence – to bring parliament to a speedy end and have an election as early as is possible,” he said.

The Lib Dems and SNP are also writing to Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, calling on Brussels to offer Britain a Brexit extension to the end of January next year.

The news comes with an Opinium poll for the Observer suggesting the Conservatives have a 16-point lead over Labour, which is split over an election.

Jeremy Corbyn said on Saturday that his party would “be very happy to fight an election once all vestiges of a no-deal exit from the EU have been taken off the table”. However, it remains unclear how that can be achieved. Figures on the left of the party are pushing to go to the polls, but Nick Brown, Labour’s chief whip, has warned Corbyn that scores of MPs would disobey any order to vote through an election.

Johnson repeated his demand on Saturday night for Labour to back his Brexit deal and vote for an early election and suggested that Brexit could drag on well into next year. He called on Labour to say how much more time it wanted to scrutinise his Brexit bill.

“Instead of grabbing this great new deal with both hands and helping move our country forward, parliament chose to ask for more tunnel,” said Johnson. “They agreed the deal but then they threw out the timetable. Unbelievably, Jeremy Corbyn then handed over the decision on what happens next to Brussels, so parliament’s delay could take us to 31 January at least.

“My worry is this parliament will just waste the next three months like it’s wasted the last three years.

“Parliament cannot hold the country hostage any longer. Millions of businesses and people cannot plan their futures, this paralysis is causing real damage and the country must move on in 2020.”
Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson.

[Matthew]

I read on the BBC here Lib Dem and SNP are sanctimoniously calling for an election on the 9th Dec.

This means it finally looks like we will get our (much avoided) general election.

Lib Dems and SNP trying to counter Boris' already called for election on the 12 Dec: Lib Dems and SNP arguing the toss to bring it forward a few days fools no one, since Boris has called for several general elections already, and Lib Dem and SNP blocked them.


Here's Jeff Taylor again, 4 days to Brexit day

Brexit Boris Strengthens Poll Lead!

Much to the alarm of Remainer MPs, Boris Johnson continues to strengthen the Tory lead in the polls.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=-uaDZRD7fuw

[greybeard]

Im almost sorry for politicians-- the situation changing so rapidly that if they seem to change their mind they get reminded of what they had said.
The Labour poiticions dont really want to say anything in case they contradict--policy which is changing moment by moment.
Liberal Leader Jo Swinson, is going to defend her Scottish seat rather than going for a safe one--she might regret that the way SNP are gaining ground in Scotland.
Chris

[greybeard]

Corbyn needs to be brave and tell Leavers they are wrong – Sadiq Khan
PA Media: UK News By Patrick Daly, PA Political Correspondent,PA Media: UK News Sat, 26 Oct 13:25 BST

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/corbyn-nee...120802239.html

Sadiq Khan said it is time for Jeremy Corbyn to be “braver” and start telling Leave voters they are “wrong” on Brexit.

The London Mayor was an early advocate for a fresh referendum, a position now backed by his party’s leader.

Yet there are frustrations with Labour’s attempts to appeal to both Remain and Leave voters, with critics voicing concern that the on-the-fence stance is losing them votes on both sides of the Brexit debate.

Mr Corbyn narrowly won a vote at conference last month, with members backing his policy of renegotiating a Brexit deal with the European Union and putting it to a public vote should he be victorious at the next election.

Remainers in the party had wanted Labour to ditch talk of supporting even a Labour-negotiated Brexit deal and come out in favour of staying in the European Union.

Mr Khan, in an interview with Italian newspaper La Repubblica, said it was time for Mr Corbyn to “provide leadership” on the issue and stop trying to be “all things to all people”.

He said, having seen the terms of Boris Johnson’s deal and analysis of a no-deal exit, that “all forms of Brexit are worse than remaining in the EU”.

A Remain stance would likely assist the former minister in his bid for re-election next year, given Londoners voted overwhelmingly to remain in Europe during the 2016 referendum.

“I’d like the Labour Party to be braver and provide leadership on this issue,” said Mr Khan, who will be vying for a second term at City Hall in May.
Jeremy Corbyn
Jeremy Corbyn wants the chance to renegotiate a Brexit deal if he becomes prime minister (Commons/PA)

“Sometimes, saying to people who may want to leave the EU, ‘Listen, I respect you, but let me explain to you (why) I think you’re wrong and why I think we should campaign to remain in the EU.

“’Let me explain to you why the problems you’re having with your school, with your health care, with your children’s education, with housing, is not because of EU’.

“It’s in fact because we’ve failed or not done enough. That’s the conversation we should be having rather than trying to be all things to all people.”

Mr Khan said he recognised that his party leader had been on a “journey” when it came to Britain’s relationship with Europe, having for decades been a Eurosceptic.

But he added: “I think he should go a bit further and be unequivocally pro-Remain and explain to those who are Brexiteers why he disagrees with them and have the argument.”

On Labour’s switch to back a referendum, the former MP said: “Better late than never.”

[greybeard]

General election: Boris Johnson reveals ‘plan B’ to force pre-Christmas poll if he loses Commons vote
The Independent Rob Merrick,The Independent

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/general-el...161032566.html

The chances of a pre-Christmas general election are rising after Boris Johnson revealed a “plan B” to send the UK to the polls, if he suffers his expected defeat in the Commons on Monday.

For the first time, Downing Street said it is ready to explore “all options” – including new legislation – to persuade MPs to back a snap ballot, even if that means abandoning its own Brexit deal.

The shift came after the dramatic move by the Liberal Democrats and Scottish National Party to back an early election, provided the Withdrawal Agreement Bill is shelved and the threat of a no-deal Brexit removed.

Ministers rejected the Lib Dem-SNP proposal, a bill to trigger an election on 9 December, as a “gimmick”, but Downing Street later revealed it was warming to the idea of its own legislation.

“We will look at all options to get Brexit done, including ideas similar to that proposed by other opposition parties,” a No 10 source said.

Unlike Monday’s apparently doomed attempt to overturn the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, a bill would require only a simple majority in the Commons – not the support of two-thirds of MPs.

The prime minister had rejected putting forward a bill for fear of wrecking amendments, including an expected push to give the vote to 16- and 17-year-olds.

But the Lib Dems and SNP have now pledged to reject any amendments. “We need to pass this as it is drafted,” said Jo Swinson, the Lib Dem leader. “We do need to resolve this issue.”

Moving straight to an election could yet run into opposition in the cabinet, where some ministers want to bring back the withdrawal bill and give parliament the proper scrutiny it is demanding.

Nevertheless, the developments left Labour isolated in holding out against an early election – which Tony Blair and many others fear will end in a crash-out Brexit at the end of 2020.

MPs will be locked in a race against time to pass a bill for a 9 December election – three days earlier than Mr Johnson has proposed – because it would need royal assent by 31 October.

The latest Brexit dramas also saw:

* Philip Hammond, the former chancellor, call for the UK to stay in the EU customs union – increasing the chances of the bill being sabotaged, if it is brought back.

* The Lib Dems face Labour accusations of having “given up” on a Final Say referendum – after Chuka Umunna said it was now “quite clear” the Commons would not vote for it.

* Mr Blair suggest a simultaneous general election and a second referendum, saying: “You can deal with them both on the same day if you want.”

* Labour’s Diane Abbott suggest it would accept a no-deal Brexit was off the table if Mr Johnson would “categorically give parliament an undertaking” – despite repeatedly dismissing him as a liar.

All the opposition parties, except the Democratic Unionist Party, are still poised to inflict defeat on the government’s attempt to overturn the fixed-term parliaments on Monday.

Mr Johnson had threatened to bring back the vote every day – something John Bercow was unlikely to allow anyway – but switched tack after the Lib Dem-SNP proposal changed the debate.

The No 10 source said: “We can’t allow parliament to waste 2020 the way it has wasted 2019 – the country wants Brexit done so we can move on and focus the public’s priorities.

“Tomorrow MPs will vote on an election on 12 December so we can get a new parliament.

“If Labour oppose being held to account by the people yet again, then we will look at all options to get Brexit done including ideas similar to that proposed by other opposition parties.”

[Bill Ryan]

To those who may have totally lost the picture of what's happening in the UK, this may be helpful.

• https://bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46393399

Brexit: What happens now?
24 October 2019

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said he will seek an early general election on 12 December. MPs have already twice rejected an election and are now expected to vote again on Monday.

Under the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, two thirds of all MPs - 434 in total - have to back an early election for it to take place.



If MPs vote for an election, Mr Johnson has said they would be given more time to consider the Brexit bill. They would have until Parliament dissolved shortly after midnight on 6 November.

Some MPs have already complained it's not much more time than was being offered before, when they rejected the government's proposed timetable.

It's also been pointed out that, legally, the prime minister could choose a different election date after MPs had voted.

If MPs vote against having an election, the government will not bring its Brexit bill back for MPs to debate.

The EU is expected to agree to the UK's request for a Brexit delay although it remains unclear whether the new date will be 31 January 2020.



If MPs agreed to an election and if they also passed the Withdrawal Agreement Bill, which brings the Brexit deal into UK law, then Brexit could still take place before an election.

However it would be after the 31 October deadline that Mr Johnson was previously committed to. He said the UK would leave by then "do or die".

If MPs agree to the election but the bill doesn't get through all its stages before 6 November then the election would take place anyway - with the result influencing how Brexit was resolved.

• What is the Withdrawal Agreement Bill?
• What is Boris Johnson's new deal with the EU?
• What are the PM's election options?

Extension request

The EU is currently considering the UK's extension request. All 27 EU nations must agree to it. If they agree to an extension until 31 January 2020 that will become the new date for Brexit.

If the EU proposes a date other than this, even a short "technical extension" of a few days, the prime minister must approve it unless a motion is put before MPs and they decide not to pass it.

If the EU refuses to grant the UK a delay then Brexit will happen on 31 October at 23:00 GMT.

Leaving without a deal (or withdrawal agreement) means the UK would immediately exit the customs union and single market - arrangements designed to make trade easier.

• How would another Brexit delay work?
• What is 'no-deal Brexit'?

Vote of no confidence



At any point the opposition could call a vote of no confidence in the government. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has previously said he would table such a motion.

If more MPs vote for the no-confidence motion than against it, there would then be a 14-day window to see if the current government - or an alternative one with a new prime minister - could win a vote of confidence.

If no-one does then a general election would follow.

• What is a vote of no confidence?

Another referendum

There could also be another referendum although it would certainly require a Brexit delay and, most likely, a change of government first.

The referendum could have the same legal status as the one in 2016. It would be advisory, and the government would have to decide how to respond once the result was known.

An alternative would be to hold a so-called "confirmatory" referendum. That would be between a particular Brexit deal and remain - or possibly with no deal as an option. The result of this kind of referendum would be legally binding.

Either way, the new referendum would require legislation to be held. There would also have to be time for the Electoral Commission to consider the question wording - especially if it's a referendum with more than two options.

Experts at the Constitution Unit at University College London say it would take a minimum of 22 weeks.

Cancel Brexit

There is also the legal option of cancelling Brexit altogether by revoking Article 50.

But clearly, this is not something the current government is contemplating - so it's only really possible to imagine this outcome after a change of government.

The Liberal Democrats have said that if they won a majority in the House of Commons they would revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit.

• Can the UK revoke Article 50?

[greybeard]

EU agrees to postpone Brexit until January 2020 in blow to Boris Johnson
Yahoo News UK Yahoo UK Staff,Yahoo News UK

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/brexit-ext...092850418.html

The EU has agreed to delay Brexit until next year.

Donald Tusk announced that European leaders have agreed to Boris Johnson’s request for an extension until January 31, 2020.

The decision is a blow to the Prime Minister, who has said in the past he would prefer to be “dead in a ditch” than miss the October 31 deadline.

The focus now turns back to the prime minister’s attempts to get his Withdrawal Agreement Bill - the legal proposition that aims to put his Brexit deal into law - through Parliament.
So what happens next?

The announcement by the EU comes ahead of a vote by MPs on whether to back a December general election.

Mr Johnson has said he will give MPs until November 6 to debate his EU exit Bill – possibly providing enough time to pass it – but only if they agree to grant an election on December 12.

The Prime Minister’s election bid on Monday, to be made under the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act (FTPA), requires a two-thirds Commons majority – 434 MPs – to agree to a snap election.

Labour is expected to vote down Boris Johnson's request for a snap election on Monday (Andrew Milligan/PA Wire)

Labour’s lack of support for the proposal means it is likely to be defeated when voted upon on Monday evening.

The PM will likely fail to secure “super majority” support for a December election – but knows he will require 100 fewer MPs to grant the same request just 24 hours later.

Mr Johnson has already had two requests for an election refused, but the Liberal Democrats and Scottish National Party have offered Mr Johnson a way out of the deadlock.

Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson and the SNP’s Westminster leader Ian Blackford have put forward a tightly-drafted Bill that would grant an election on December 9 – three days earlier than the PM’s suggested polling date – as long as the European Union grant an extension until January 31.

The draft law, currently scheduled for Tuesday’s sitting, would require a simple majority of 320 MPs to support it in order to dissolve Parliament – 114 fewer than under the FTPA “super majority” rules.

[araucaria]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
The first 11-12 minutes of this video, posted by kfm27917 here, could be ALL about Brexit. It's very, very good indeed.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=nQRzxEobWco

This excellent interview comes as a necessary response to my last post, thank you Bill. Man is facing extinction, yes, but while there’s life there’s hope.

My problem lies with the analogies used. It is not an evolution, he says, more of a kind of metamorphosis. The individual caterpillar is dying, and about to become a butterfly, but how did the caterpillar turn from being a species that ate and then died into one that gave back? Extinction is dying taken to the level of a whole species, and what we need to do is INVENT the next step. But where do we begin? And so on. Or he talks about a phase shift. Water has three, or apparently four, phases (see “The Fourth Phase of Water, beyond solid, liquid, and vapor” by Gerald H. Pollack). These are states of the same substance, H²O, with different properties. Is that where we are heading? Has water always had this 4th phase? Does it have it yet; or are we waiting for its “embodiments”, as they say in the language of patents? And might it have a 5th phase?...

My own thoughts take me away from analogy to hard science – the problem being… I am not a scientist. With that proviso, let’s see how far we can go with this while staying on topic on a Brexit thread! Actually I have two science-based lines of thought I shall split into two posts.

In Dolores Cannon’s four “Convoluted Universe” books, instead of reverting to past lives, her clients regress to various states of being that seem to be out of synch with Einstein’s famous equation establishing a relationship between mass and energy. There might be an overall theory whereby E = mx, where x is variable, and so E = mc² would be just one formulation of that. To take an extreme case, someone recalls having been pure energy, and the equation breaks down altogether (E=m x 0, therefore E=0). Other ethereal beings would appear to express this equation with fairly low values of x. E = mc², where one unit of mass is equivalent to 90 billion units of energy, would be at the other extreme. In this familiar situation, with so much energy crammed in, not only do we have barely stable (radioactive) material making it easy to make bombs, but ALL matter is potentially explosive. Being ourselves also made of this matter, we are all literally human bombs, as waves of terrorism, large and small, are proving every day.

The most massive concrete example of where this leads lies in the research of the astronomer, Thomas van Flandern. After working on satellite debris, he took the orbits of all comets, asteroids etc. in the solar system, taking them backwards in time, only to discover that some ten million years ago, they were all in the same place, between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter, exactly where Bode’s law predicts a planet should be that we don’t have today. Did such a planet exist, only to explode? There is quite a bit of circumstantial evidence: flood myths, showers of live fish (see Charles Fort), the demise of Mars, which was presumably too close, and also to this day the life-threatening menace of near-earth asteroids. Since there is no natural explanation for this, we fall back on malevolent artificial use, involving knowledge of scalar physics and weaponry...

Hence my conclusion is that our human experience on planet Earth (the rest of the universe seen from here being some kind of optical illusion) is at the very limit of what is possible at the material end of the scale. Everything is volatile in the extreme, and it has nothing to do with humans per se, except inasmuch as we have signed up to test these extreme conditions. This is one reason why we are, none of us, doing too well, and need to refrain from criticizing anyone. We seem to be in one of the very densest of all possible universes. Although ourselves made of and using the lighter elements (carbon, oxygen…), we are mesmerized by the heavier atoms and molecules such as gold and diamond, uranium and plutonium. No wonder we have such a sense of doom and gloom: in one direction there is nowhere to go, just the void.

At this point, I will offer a lightish-hearted analogy of my own: the universe as one of many possible cocktails. Imagine energy is Evian water (E’) and matter is malt whisky (m’). A man may take half as much water as whisky: E’ = m’/2. He might give his old mother something weaker: E’ = m’ x 10; weaker still for the kids: E’ = m’ x 30. And if, heaven forbid, he puts a couple of drops in the baby’s bottle, you might get E’ = m’ x 90 thousand. So, reverting to Einstein’s equation, the universal cocktail contains only a homeopathic dose of the hard stuff, one part in ninety billion (c²): much less than the pollutants in the baby’s bottle. However, in my cocktail universe, man the materialist animal (m’’) sees only matter (m’’ = m’), so his experience as an alcoholic is like trying to drink himself under the table with 15 pints of this homeopathic preparation. This is not binge drinking, or a cocktail party, more like a meeting of Alcoholics Anonymous.

Scientists maintain that they can only detect 4% of the stuff of the universe: this is hopelessly optimistic: like the couple of beers in your fridge when a hard drinker calls by, it is not going to last! So, counter-intuitively, in the face of imminent catastrophe, all of a sudden the problem facing humanity becomes minute: all that is required is that we skip the occasional drink, or add some water, have a coffee instead. If we could get that equation down just a little bit, the world would be our oyster. On the other hand, we don’t want to bring it down too far, because the value of the experiment we are in – the tastiness of the cocktail, if you will – lies precisely in the amount of energy that can be squeezed into matter. The opposite positive analogy would therefore be lacework; it takes many hours to embroider just a square inch of mostly holes, but the end result makes it extremely worthwhile, provided of course one is able to appreciate the work that was put in – to many it will just look vanishingly small and insignificant.

What does all this mean in concrete terms? That we become – ever so slightly – angelic beings. If that is still too hard to understand or aim for, it just means being just a tiny bit nicer and more tolerant towards our fellow human beings – empathy. And feeling a tiny bit lighter, less depressed, less bogged down. If you have ever emerged from depression and wondered how things could have been so bad, you will know that it takes next to nothing. What changed? A little burst of energy and effort after the apathy and inactivity. Hard work is easy and rewarding with a little practice. The shift that is about to happen (if it happens) is that easy (and that difficult), yet so unbelievable…

…And yet so finely poised. The alternative of course is to stick with our current understanding of Einstein’s equation, solely as it relates to matter. What you have to remember here is that it applies not just to the destructive force of the bomb. What happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was much worse than that. The chain reaction did not stop with the bomb: it spread to the whole city centre; every building and human being was caught up in the process. People’s shadows were caught on camera when they were already gone; worse than vaporized, they themselves were turned into lots more destructive energy, as were the buildings. Each of us has this hugely powerful human vehicle we simply must learn to drive. Like trying to reverse engineer a UFO, we need to start by realizing it is powered by the mind.

They say this is a planet of choice. Amid UK talk of a second (third?) referendum, the only valid referendum is the last (first?): are we collectively serious about this human experiment, or are we just playing around? At the moment, the outcome may be too close to call. One more extension would be helpful, but we need to get this done!

[araucaria]

The other idea is based on the ‘many worlds’ theory of an infinity of parallel universes being created every time we make a choice: the choice we don’t make here is taken and explored in this parallel reality. This theory is generally regarded as being conceptually hard to get one’s head around, but I think it is worth the try.

The ‘many worlds’ theory has a little evidence to confirm it: sometimes people appear to switch for a while with some other self. The ‘Mandela effect’ might also fit in here. Some of Dolores Cannon’s clients talk about parallel realities. She also reports on the exceptional case of some starving native Americans who hunted and ate a strange other-worldly beast, whose skull they kept as proof. However, such interactions are rare, and this last instance may possibly be based on the life-threatening situation. The question then arises, how this might work in the event of large-scale human disaster? Dolores Cannon is well known for her Two Earths concept, which she tentatively places within this many worlds theory – but I don’t intend to go that far here. What I am interested in is more to do with how these worlds are interrelated.

We usually consider many choices to be important affairs: there is a wiser option and a not so wise one, which is why such things are not decided by the toss of a coin (as in the novel The Dice Man). Staying on topic here, many smaller choices depend on the outcome of bigger choices. An unwise major choice will lead to endless predicaments of the I-wouldn’t-have-started-here type. In other words, poor choices tend to increase and multiply, as do good ones.

So there has to be one world where every poor choice we have ever made in ours is reversed. As such, it must be quite an idyllic place, and there will be many more slightly different ones we might aspire to as well. We need to see things from their point of view. These places have got into the habit of making judicious choices, and their discarded options are being played out somewhere else – in places where everything goes from bad to worse: places like our own reality! Our version of reality is so close to the bottom of the pile that it may disappear altogether at some stage, having become totally unviable. But before we start looking at how we can transport our consciousness to one of the other worlds, or alternatively clean up this reality – there is a huge choice to be made right there – we need to take a look at the overall situation.

There would appear to be some kind of sorting experiment going on, to find out what works best, carried out without discarding anything overhastily, no doubt to allow for the possible effects of enantiodromia, Jung’s term for when something flips over to take on the opposite value. For example, a bad choice might serendipitously turn out to have a positive outcome; this presumably is being explored in detail in the average middle-of-the-league universe where you win some, you lose some. What works best is presumably a world where everyone works efficiently together as a unit: none of your 1% lording it over everyone else. But of course in the greater scheme of things, you may say, such ideal worlds will be turning into an elite of their own, with other realities of their making such as ours being left behind. If we start making good decisions, doesn’t that mean that bad ones are going to emerge somewhere else? Better keep the bad stuff fenced off somewhere?

Such an attitude might indeed be the rationale or excuse for bad behaviour on this planet – a kind of antikarmic calculation – I can do what I want because it will all come out in the wash. But it fails to take into account the greater wisdom of more advanced realities where it is understood that we are all in this together across multiple universes. This is not a closed system with mechanistic consequences such as white automatically produces black. (What we are seeing currently are situations where neither choice is positive.) It is an open system where all of the parts evolve together. This means in concrete terms that even the less advanced worlds get to up their game. They do this by removing the element of choice altogether when one of the outcomes is too negative. For example they stop asking themselves: do we declare war? do I kill this man or not? It becomes second nature to live and let live. We develop finer instincts – which is what is actually what is being done on more successful worlds than ours: they are helping us along, not leaving us behind. We have to remember that these alternate realities involve the same personnel as ours: they are us! The people that know you best are not your family here and now, they are your other selves out there. So we know we can do better: we already are doing better.

So what does this means in practical terms? Yes, we do the things Daniel Schmachtenberger recommends in the video: we practise all the accumulated wisdom, we avoid karma and antikarma, we treat the Earth as a better place than it looks, and that is what it will become. We make major choices, like deciding that anyone who has a karmic debt towards us, doesn’t: we wipe the slate clean and wish them no harm. This is what I meant by forgetting. We weed out the cruder choices altogether. The Brexit referendum being one of the more egregious examples. It’s NOT the economy stupid: it’s about building up a human community, where for example we can forget about krauts and sons of Nazis and interact peacefully with the mostly nice Germans. We look for positive signs that things are indeed improving, and we find them.

[sunwings]

"Nobody voted for this mess. I blame the charlatans who peddled the falsehoods that Brexit would be easy, it would be cost free. I wouldn't trust them to run my bath, let alone the country." - Betty Boothroyd, former Speaker

[greybeard]

I cant help but think that Boris and friends through all the manoeuvring have actually ruined the chances of any form of Brexit.
In-spite of this the Conservatives seem likely to win the next General Election.
Dr David Hawkins said that the collective consciousness of a nation dictates--brings about the conscious level of their Government--so a caring society brings about a caring Government
Be care-- full what you wish for.
Chris

[Chester]

Caring can be expressed in many ways. For example, caring can be expressed by refusal to continuously enable another in their efforts to avoid personal responsibility.

I find it terribly difficult to admit to myself when what I think is "helping" another is actually enabling them in this way. Life is tricky.

[sunwings]

As UK heads into third Brexit extension, country looks forward to another three months of bickering, amateur dramatics and absolutely nothing being achieved before asking the EU for another one.