+ Reply to Thread
Page 32 of 63 FirstFirst 1 22 32 42 63 LastLast
Results 621 to 640 of 1252

Thread: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

  1. Link to Post #621
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU


    Irish deputy PM issues stark warning over no-deal Brexit

    PA Ready News UK By Michelle Devane and Ben Cooper, PA,PA Ready News UK

    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/irish-depu...111111223.html

    Mr Coveney maintained the backstop can be avoided by negotiation, but that it needs to be part of the Withdrawal Agreement.

    Everyone in the EU is in trouble if the new British prime minister wants to tear up the Withdrawal Agreement, Ireland’s deputy premier has warned.

    Simon Coveney said that if a no-deal outcome would be a British choice, not an Irish or an EU choice, then the future relationship with the EU could be changed.

    He also reiterated that Ireland would have to carry out checks in the event of a no-deal Brexit, but those checks would not be at the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic.

    “If the approach of the new British prime minister is that they’re going to tear up the Withdrawal Agreement, then I think we’re in trouble, we’re all in trouble, quite frankly, because it’s a little bit like saying: ‘Either give me what I want or I’m going to burn the house down for everybody’,” Mr Coveney told the BBC’s Andrew Marr on Sunday.

    He added: “The EU has made it very clear that we want to engage with a new British prime minister, we want to avoid a no-deal Brexit.”

    Mr Coveney maintained the backstop can be avoided by negotiation, but that it needs to be part of the Withdrawal Agreement.

    “The idea that we can consider moving away from something that took two-and-a-half years to negotiate given all of that complexity and compromise on both sides to try and accommodate British redlines, don’t forget, not EU redlines, we’re simply not going to move away from the Withdrawal Agreement,” he said.

    The Cork politician refuted that a no-deal was where the situation was headed.

    He said it would only happen if the House of Commons facilitated it, adding: “If the House of Commons chooses to facilitate a no-deal Brexit and if a new prime minister chooses to take Britain in that direction then it will happen but this is a British choice, not an Irish choice, not an EU choice, this is a British choice.

    “We all want to avoid a no-deal Brexit….we want to try to resolve these issues but we won’t do it on the basis of being told what will happen.”

    Mr Coveney reiterated that checks would have to be carried out on the island of Ireland in the event of a no-deal Brexit, but he said those checks would not be at the border.

    “We have to protect relationships and peace on the island of Ireland, and we are not going to create a security risk by putting a border in place on the border, but we also have to make sure that there are verification mechanisms to ensure what the EU knows what is coming into its single market,” he said.

    He added: “There will need to be checks somewhere. We are working out with the European Commission how that will work.”

    But he said such a scenario would “fundamentally disrupt” the all-island economy.

    Writing in the London edition of The Sunday Times, Mr Coveney warned that a no-deal Brexit would “devastate” Northern Ireland’s economy.

    “If Britain decides to leave without a deal it would cause huge damage to us all,” Mr Coveney wrote.

    Northern Ireland would be the hardest hit in such a scenario, he added.

    “A no-deal Brexit will devastate the Northern Irish economy with tariffs and rules that will fundamentally disrupt the all-island economy upon which so much progress has been built.”
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019)

  3. Link to Post #622
    UK Avalon Member Matthew's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th July 2015
    Location
    South East England
    Language
    English
    Age
    51
    Posts
    4,138
    Thanks
    25,644
    Thanked 36,187 times in 4,071 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    Remainers didnt know what they were voting for (Brexit News)

    Majid Majid gives his account of seeing how the EU politics of Brussels works, or rather not seeing it work. Harsh words of disillusionment
    https://youtu.be/EQrWkMLOadU


  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Matthew For This Post:

    avid (22nd July 2019), Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), greybeard (22nd July 2019)

  5. Link to Post #623
    UK Avalon Member scanner's Avatar
    Join Date
    18th March 2010
    Location
    Sea level UK ( I must move )
    Posts
    485
    Thanks
    388
    Thanked 2,000 times in 370 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    So, under BATNA, have we reached our walk away point? My concern, which no MSM has asked Farrage et al. About his background, Farrage liked to point our political leaders backgrounds in detail. Let's spotlight Farrages background. Multi millionaire, worked in the City of London, is an ex Con-seritive and pulled a rabbit out of his hat with his new Brexit party at some ones huge expense. One has to question, his and all his cronies motives.

    I'll be upfront, I voted to leave, not because of anything our Political leaders said, including Farrage et al. But, from my own research. Coming to the conclusion, it was just a dictatorship, and we'd just be a vassal state. Already having many acts and statutes forced upon, the British people, by unelected dictators from the EU parliament. Well, I call it a parliament, just a huge office really, business as usual.

    The can, will be kicked down the road, yet again. Under the guise, can it wait until after the general election. I fear Corbin et al. Will receive the reins of power, keeping us in the EU, no matter what. So much for voting and doing the PEOPLES bidding. You can see the strain it is having on the Worlds politicos. Braking down under the pressure, Merkel, Macron and May all visible to see.
    Am I one of many or am I many of one ? interesting .

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to scanner For This Post:

    avid (22nd July 2019), Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), greybeard (22nd July 2019), Matthew (22nd July 2019)

  7. Link to Post #624
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    LONDON (Reuters) - Britain's anti-Brexit Liberal Democrat party named lawmaker Jo Swinson as its new leader

    https://news.yahoo.com/britains-anti...161639321.html

    on Monday,


    as the party looks to translate a surge in voter support for its pro-European Union agenda into influence in a deadlocked parliament.

    Swinson, 39, won just under 48,000 votes, beating her rival Ed Davey who was backed by 28,000 in a ballot of party members, taking the reins of the centrist party which has 12 seats in the 650-seat parliament at a critical juncture in British politics.

    Britain's governing Conservatives are expected to name Boris Johnson as leader and prime minister on Tuesday - a man who has pledged to take the country out of the EU on Oct. 31 "do or die".

    But, the future of Brexit hangs in the balance, without a clear majority in parliament behind Johnson and deep division over how, when, and even if, Britain should follow through on its 2016 referendum decision to leave the EU.

    Swinson, the party's first female leader, has built her campaign around cementing the Liberal Democrats as the rallying point for those from across the traditional political spectrum who are opposed to Brexit.

    "We believe the UK's best future is as members of the European Union, and that's why, as your leader, I will do whatever it takes to stop Brexit," she said after the result.

    Polls show support for the Liberal Democrats has rebounded in recent months as Britain's political crisis over leaving the EU enters its fourth year.

    In May, the party came second in elections to the European Parliament and earlier in the same month gained hundreds of elected local government posts, largely at the Conservatives' expense.


    (Reporting by William James and Kylie MacLellan, editing by Elizabeth Piper)
    Last edited by greybeard; 22nd July 2019 at 16:44.
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    avid (22nd July 2019), Bill Ryan (25th July 2019)

  9. Link to Post #625
    UK Avalon Member Matthew's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th July 2015
    Location
    South East England
    Language
    English
    Age
    51
    Posts
    4,138
    Thanks
    25,644
    Thanked 36,187 times in 4,071 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    Quote Posted by scanner (here)
    So, under BATNA, have we reached our walk away point? My concern, which no MSM has asked Farrage et al. About his background, Farrage liked to point our political leaders backgrounds in detail. Let's spotlight Farrages background. Multi millionaire, worked in the City of London, is an ex Con-seritive and pulled a rabbit out of his hat with his new Brexit party at some ones huge expense. One has to question, his and all his cronies motives.

    I'll be upfront, I voted to leave, not because of anything our Political leaders said, including Farrage et al. But, from my own research. Coming to the conclusion, it was just a dictatorship, and we'd just be a vassal state. Already having many acts and statutes forced upon, the British people, by unelected dictators from the EU parliament. Well, I call it a parliament, just a huge office really, business as usual.

    The can, will be kicked down the road, yet again. Under the guise, can it wait until after the general election. I fear Corbin et al. Will receive the reins of power, keeping us in the EU, no matter what. So much for voting and doing the PEOPLES bidding. You can see the strain it is having on the Worlds politicos. Braking down under the pressure, Merkel, Macron and May all visible to see.
    Thanks for your thoughts!

    When MP's got rid of a no deal option they showed how inept they are at negotiations, or alternatively that they wanted to let the European Commission have the upper hand.

    Without keeping no deal as an option, a fair negotiation can't happen. But that was meant to be the point I think, either maliciously or through laziness or both

    The things I hear from The Brexit Party have made sense to me. But I don't believe in heroes, or voting in the right person because I don't believe that exists. I can't wait to vote people out of power, and that's all I care about.

    If I can vote down a growing, crass, aspiring empire, like the European Commission, I will revel in it, and laugh all the way.

    Likewise if I can vote in proportional representation, which The Brexit Party have on their manifesto, I will be putting my humble vote to that. And then I will look forward to voting them out of power, if they get in


    Majid Majid, from my post above, seems like a sincere, well meaning guy. He's a strong remainer, which is very different to my own opinion. I like his refreshing honesty about what he sees in the EU parliament. Whether remain or not, if we had more like Majid Majid, I think that would be a good thing. I'm not going to hold my breath though, but I wish the guy the best of success and respect him for saying difficult truths

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Matthew For This Post:

    Ba-ba-Ra (22nd July 2019), Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), greybeard (22nd July 2019)

  11. Link to Post #626
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    Borris has won by almost twice the number of votes that Jeremy got.
    Chris
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019)

  13. Link to Post #627
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    Boris Johnson is going to be our next prime minister
    Ross McGuinness
    Yahoo News UK23 July 2019


    Boris Johnson has been named Britain’s new prime minister.

    As expected, he finished ahead of his rival, foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt, in the Conservative Party leadership contest.

    Mr Johnson was announced as the winner at the Queen Elizabeth II conference centre in Westminster. About 160,000 Conservative Party members voted.

    Mr Johnson will officially become prime minister on Wednesday.

    The result was announced by Dame Cheryl Gillan, from the backbench Conservative 1922 Committee.

    Mr Johnson won 92,153 votes compared to Mr Hunt’s 46,656. The turnout was 87.4%.

    Theresa May congratulated her successor on Twitter.

    The outcome follows weeks of campaigning in which the country has been given a glimpse
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  14. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), Franny (24th July 2019), Rosemarie (23rd July 2019), Tintin (23rd July 2019)

  15. Link to Post #628
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    The three major Brexit problems Boris Johnson is going to face
    Yahoo News UK Ellen Manning,Yahoo News UK 4 hours ago

    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/three-majo...115650623.html


    He has promised to take the UK out of the EU on 31 October ‘do or die’, but new Prime Minister Boris Johnson will face many of the same issues as his predecessor Theresa May.

    Revolts loom from different sides of a warring Tory party, the EU is doubling down in its refusal to reopen negotiations and resurgent Lib Dems threaten to hoover up Remainer votes.

    Mr Johnson promises a ‘can-do spirit’ to tackle the Brexit deadlock, but will that be enough?

    Here are the areas he’ll have to deal with:-
    The European Union
    European Commission in Brussels
    The EU could prove a bit of a problem for Boris

    Mr Johnson has vowed to try and secure a new Brexit deal by the deadline of October 31 and, if that fails, take the UK out of the European Union with no deal.

    But EU negotiators have repeatedly said that the Withdrawal Agreement is not up for renegotiation, including the backstop.

    Michel Barnier, the EU's chief Brexit negotiator, has said Mrs May’s agreement is the “only way to leave the EU in an orderly manner”.

    Even if the EU is prepared to renegotiate some points, Boris’s stance has hardened.

    He has declared the backstop ‘dead’ and said it should be removed from any deal.

    That means even if some concessions are offered to help grease the wheels on a possible deal, they might not meet the new PM’s demands.

    Another issue is the fact that Boris Johnson has already rubbed a few people in the EU up the wrong way.

    In a recent Panorama programme, the EU Commission's First Vice-President, Frans Timmermans criticised Johnson’s approach to Brexit negotiations from when they began.

    He said: "Perhaps I am being a bit harsh, but it is about time we became a bit harsh. I am not sure he was being genuine.

    "I have always had the impression he is playing games."
    His own party

    The irony of David Cameron calling a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU to heal the divide in the Conservative Party has not escaped anyone.

    Arguably, the past three years have seen the Tory party at its worst, and there remain clear and deep divisions over Brexit.

    Mr Johnson has made his feelings clear on the issue - we’ll leave no matter what by October 31 - but there are plenty in his party who disagree.

    Like Theresa May before him, there is no way Johnson will be able to please everyone. Hard Brexiteers are unlikely to vote for a version of Mrs May’s deal, while vocal critics of a no-deal Brexit like Philip Hammond are expected to try to block it from happening.

    It’s believed that Mr Hammond and his fellow no-deal opponents including David Lidington, David Gauke and Rory Stewart will be frozen out of the top jobs and find themselves on the backbenches.

    Some speculate Mr Johnson has made conflicting promises to different camps in a bid to win their support, telling ERG supporters like Mark Francois that he would leave without a deal, whilst also winning support from the likes of Matt Hancock, who is against a no-deal Brexit.

    In June Tory grandee Ken Clarke said he would vote to bring down the next Prime Minister rather than allow a no-deal Brexit to go ahead, saying it would be "totally incompatible with everything the Conservative party has stood for" over decades.

    His comments, which came alongside suggestions that he would be prepared to see Jeremy Corbyn take the helm if it meant avoiding a no-deal Brexit, were echoed by Tobias Ellwood who said other Conservative colleagues would be willing to back a vote of no confidence in any leader who tried to take Britain out of the EU without a deal.

    In an interview with the BBC’s Newsnight last week, Margot James - who resigned as culture minister so she could vote against the government for the anti-prorogation amendment - said “quite a number” of ministers would leave the government if Boris Johnson became PM and join the campaign to block a no-deal Brexit.


    It comes as no surprise that Labour is planning a vote of no confidence in the government in a bid to bring down Boris Johnson.

    The party has reportedly been in talks with Tory rebels about the best time to call the vote.

    Conservatives could try to bring down Boris by joining the Liberal Democrats, wiping out his majority and potentially triggering a snap election.

    As the party that aligned itself with a Remain agenda, the Lib Dems will undoubtedly try to block any kind of Brexit pursued by Johnson, as will other parties in favour of staying in the EU.
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  16. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), Franny (24th July 2019), Johan (Keyholder) (24th July 2019), Valerie Villars (24th July 2019)

  17. Link to Post #629
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    Four cabinet ministers resign ahead of Boris Johnson becoming Prime Minister

    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/three-cabi...123841464.html

    Four cabinet ministers have resigned ahead of Boris Johnson becoming Prime Minister.

    Chancellor Philip Hammond, International Development Secretary Rory Stewart, Justice Secretary David Gauke and de facto deputy Prime Minister David Lidington all handed in their notice after Theresa May’s final Prime Minister’s Questions.

    Hammond, Stewart and Gauke had already said publicly they could not serve under a Prime Minister who supports a no-deal Brexit.

    The resignations are largely symbolic. Mr Johnson, who will announce his new cabinet later today, would have sacked the three ministers and replaced them with his own supporters anyway.

    Mr Hammond led the exodus, and said it had been a ‘privilege’ to serve as Chancellor under Theresa May.

    The Chancellor has been a constant critic of leaving the EU without a deal.

    Speaking at the weekend he told the BBC’s Andrew Marr: “Assuming that Boris Johnson becomes the next prime minister, I understand that his conditions for serving in his government would include accepting a no-deal exit on the 31st October and it’s not something that I could ever sign up to.

    “It’s very important that the prime minister is able to have a chancellor who is closely aligned with him in terms of policy and I therefore intend to resign to Theresa May before she goes to the palace to tender her own resignation on Wednesday.”

    Confirming his resignation on Twitter, former leadership candidate Rory Stewart posted an image of Sky News reporting his departure with an upside down smiley emoji.

    Mr Gauke thanked Theresa May and reiterated his opposition to no deal.

    He said: “Given Boris’s stated policy of leaving the EU by 31 October at all costs, I am not willing to serve in his Government.

    “I believe I can most effectively make the case against a no deal Brexit from the backbenches.”
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  18. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), Franny (24th July 2019), Rosemarie (24th July 2019), seko (25th July 2019), Valerie Villars (24th July 2019)

  19. Link to Post #630
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    Boris Johnson just became Britain’s Prime Minister
    Andy Wells
    Freelance Writer
    Yahoo News UK24 July 2019

    Queen Elizabeth II welcomes newly elected leader of the Conservative party Boris Johnson during an audience in Buckingham Palace, London, where she invited him to become Prime Minister and form a new government.

    Boris Johnson has officially been appointed Prime Minister after meeting Queen Elizabeth II at Buckingham Palace.

    Mr Johnson accepted the Queen’s invitation to form a new Government.

    Earlier, Theresa May gave her final PMQs where she told Labour leader Jeremy Corby that he should quit his post as his “time was up”.

    She later gave a short farewell speech outside Number 10, saying she wanted a Brexit "that works for the whole United Kingdom".
    Theresa May congratulated Mr Johnson during her farewell speech outside Number 10 (PA)

    A lot is happening in the first 100 days of Mr Johnson's premiership (PA)

    Mrs May also gave a supportive message to Mr Johnson, adding: "I repeat my warm congratulations to Boris on winning the Conservative leadership election.

    "I wish him and the government he will lead every good fortune in the months and years ahead.

    "Their successes will be our country's successes and I hope that they will be many."

    Mr Johnson is now starting work on appointing his Cabinet that ‘reflects modern Britain’ to help him deliver Brexit by October 31.

    Chancellor Philip Hammond, Justice Secretary David Gauke and International Development Secretary Rory Stewart all resigned from their posts just hours before Mr Johnson became PM, while Deputy PM David Lidington also handed in his notice.

    They will now fight a no-deal Brexit from the backbenches, giving Mr Johnson an early headache in his reign.

    Eurosceptic Priti Patel is expected to be named Home Secretary in Mr Johnson’s Cabinet, while Vote Leave campaign mastermind Dominic Cummings is set to be named senior adviser.

    MPs applaud as Prime Minister Theresa May leaves following her final Prime Minister's Questions in the House of Commons, London.

    Theresa May was given a standing ovation as she left Parliament following her final PMQs (PA)

    Mr Cummings clashed with officials and politicians while he was an adviser to Michael Gove in the coalition government, but Mr Johnson clearly believes his forthright style will help steer Brexit through.

    His appointment will be controversial given that earlier this year he was found to be in contempt of Parliament for refusing to give evidence to a committee of MPs investigating "fake news”.'

    He is also less than impressed with the calibre of Brexiteer MPs, describing a "narcissist-delusional subset" of the European Research Group (ERG) as a "metastasising tumour" that needed to be “excised".
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), Franny (24th July 2019)

  21. Link to Post #631
    Avalon Member Carmody's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th August 2010
    Location
    Winning The Galactic Lottery
    Posts
    11,389
    Thanks
    17,597
    Thanked 82,316 times in 10,234 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    the first mistake was leaving Germany in charge of the basket of currencies that made up the EU.

    Which means the hidden power factions of Germany and such, is what really runs the EU.

    But that was the intent from the beginnings of the EU.

    The history of the EU goes back to the plans written up by the Nazis for the financial and commercial empire they were trying to build or create.

    The EU follows that original Nazi plan to almost a perfect letter. Yes, the Nazi's made up the EU on paper, in approx 1940. Really. Seriously. It's on the record books. Look around.

    Just think about that for a few minutes. What the heck is really going on here?

    the plan for a second racial destabilization and a new EU from the ashes of a racial war? 3.5ths time is the charm! (to wipe out the middle east finally, as a side order of desirability).

    What a mess.

    Does the power faction of the UK desire to not be brought along for the ride, anymore, (they HAD to know, it would be impossible to not know)...as the Euro-GErmanic faction has too much power and is making it uglier than it has to be, so they can finally...neuter the UK at the same time?

    War among the killers and oligarchs, I guess.

    Can't even agree on and order a sandwich -while sitting at the same desk.
    Last edited by Carmody; 24th July 2019 at 15:38.
    Interdimensional Civil Servant

  22. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Carmody For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), Franny (24th July 2019), Matthew (24th July 2019), seko (25th July 2019), Valerie Villars (25th July 2019)

  23. Link to Post #632
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    Ministers ousted from Government as Boris Johnson begins brutal Cabinet cull
    Yahoo News UK Matilda Long,Yahoo News UK

    https://uk.yahoo.com/news/three-cabi...123841464.html

    Boris Johnson has kicked off a brutal cull of Government ministers, ousting a number of top Tories from their posts shortly after officially becoming Prime Minister.

    The major overhaul saw allies of Theresa May and prominent backers or leadership rival Jeremy Hunt pushed out of the door.

    The changes so far include:

    SACKED: Penny Mordaunt, Defence Secretary

    SACKED: Liam Fox, International Trade Secretary

    SACKED: Greg Clark, Business Secretary

    RESIGNED: Chris Grayling, Transport Secretary

    SACKED: Damian Hinds, Education Secretary

    SACKED: James Brokenshire, Housing Secretary

    SACKED: Karen Bradley, Northern Ireland Secretary

    Ms Mourdant, who was a prominent backer of Jeremy Hunt in the Tory leadership race, tweeted: “I’m heading to the backbenches from where the PM will have my full support, as will my successors at @DefenceHQ & @WomenEqualities.”

    Mr Fox made it clear he was pushed out of the door against his will, saying: “Sadly, I will be leaving the Government. It has been a privilege to have served as Secretary of State for International Trade these past 3 years.”

    Mr Clark, who was also fired, said: “I warmly congratulate Boris Johnson on becoming Prime Minister. He is right to appoint a new team for a new premiership and I wish him and them well for the vital work ahead.”

    It came after four cabinet ministers resigned from the Government today ahead of Boris Johnson’s reshuffle.
    Three cabinet ministers resigned ahead of Boris Johnson's coronation as PM (PA Images)
    Philip Hammond, David Gauke and Rory Stewart all resigned ahead of Boris Johnson's coronation as PM (PA Images)

    Chancellor Philip Hammond, International Development Secretary Rory Stewart, Justice Secretary David Gauke and de facto Deputy Prime Minister David Lidington all handed in their notice after Theresa May’s final Prime Minister’s Questions.

    Hammond, Stewart and Gauke had already said publicly they could not serve under a Prime Minister who supports a no-deal Brexit.

    The resignations were largely symbolic. Mr Johnson, who will announce his new cabinet later today, would have sacked the three ministers and replaced them with his own supporters.

    All will continue to work as MPs and are likely to cause trouble for the new Prime Minister from the backbenches.
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  24. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    avid (24th July 2019), Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), Franny (24th July 2019), seko (25th July 2019), Tintin (25th July 2019), Valerie Villars (25th July 2019)

  25. Link to Post #633
    UK Moderator/Librarian/Administrator Tintin's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd June 2017
    Location
    Project Avalon library
    Language
    English
    Age
    54
    Posts
    5,442
    Thanks
    64,660
    Thanked 46,592 times in 5,410 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    Aside from the certainly inferred (very likely) Zionist content of his selected cabinet, more transparent to those of us who have perhaps dug a little deeper, what we are seeing unravel gradually is the long-planned US/UK/Israel axis being gradually further developed.

    It's now becoming a lot more transparent.

    Register of Members' Financial Interests - elected parliamentarians are required to record any financial interests they may have, which could come from a variety of individuals, or organisations, which could comprise, for example, any one of a number or combination of, say, tax-exempt foundations, publishers, the pharmaceutical industry, aerospace and defence and weapons contractors, healthcare industry, to cite but a few.

    It certainly gives one an idea of who they may be lobbying for. - who is effectively bribing them. Whitehall is replete with lobbyists leveraging their interests through the theatre (charade) of a democratic institution (parliament). And then there are propagandists in the Admiralty. Quite a well oiled machine.

    If you scroll through this document and find Boris Johnson, do please have a read through his recent donors. It's more than interesting. Before the Conservtive members voted him in as leader/proxy PM he had acquired something to the tune of £235,000 in donations, and interestingly from one of the wealthiest families in Britain. Do see here:

    - The Reuben Foundation: https://www.reubenfoundation.com/global-initiatives/
    - Companies House (beta): https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/c...81304/officers

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Craig Murray has some typically very sensible observations to make on the personnel now on-board Boris Johnson's new Cabinet. It really helps in putting things into a rather stark perspective.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Johnson’s Westminster Cabinet is Far to the Right of Thatcher

    Source: https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archi...t-of-thatcher/

    25 Jul, 2019 in Uncategorized by craig
    ________________________________________

    I can only imagine that the media people who are saying this is the most right wing cabinet since the 1980’s were not sentient in the 80’s. Thatcher never had a Home Secretary remotely as illiberal as Pritti Patel, never had a Foreign Secretary remotely as xenophobic as Dominic Raab, never even had a Chancellor as anti-State intervention as Savid Javid (though came closer there) and never had a Defence Secretary as bellicose as Ben Wallace.

    Even Thatcher’s final and most right wing Cabinet contained figures like Ken Clarke, Chris Patten, John Major, Virginia Bottomley, Douglas Hurd and William Waldegarve. All Tories with whom I have fundamental disagreements, but every single one of them is far, far to the left of virtually all of Johnson’s appalling cronies.

    Thatcher deliberately and cruelly wrecked the social democratic society in which I grew up, with the aim of destroying any ability for working people to be protected against the whims of the wealthy. But Thatcher never introduced privatisation into the NHS or state schools – that was her acolyte Blair.

    She maintained free university education in England and Wales. That was destroyed by Blair too. We should be more rigorous than to accept Thatcher as the definitive most right wing government possible. It is not only lazy, it obscures the fact we now have the most right wing British government since 1832.

    Pritti Patel is a Home Secretary who admires the approach to law and order of Benjamin Netanyahu and voted against a measure to prevent pregnant asylum seekers being slammed into immigration detention pending hearing. Savid Javid is a Chancellor who materially caused the problems of British Steel by, as Business Secretary, vetoing in Brussels tariffs against dumped Chinese steel. Dominic Raab is a foreign secretary who negotiated a deal with the EU then resigned because it was so bad.

    This is the biggest political shock to hit the UK in my lifetime and it is potentially worse than Thatcher. Here in Scotland, we need to move immediately for Independence. The time for talking really is behind us.
    Last edited by Tintin; 25th July 2019 at 13:02.
    “If a man does not keep pace with [fall into line with] his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” - Thoreau

  26. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Tintin For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), Cara (25th July 2019), Constance (26th July 2019), greybeard (25th July 2019), Valerie Villars (25th July 2019)

  27. Link to Post #634
    France Avalon Member araucaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Posts
    5,400
    Thanks
    12,061
    Thanked 30,977 times in 5,003 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    It is a good while since I made a forum post. I shan’t go into why, beyond what can be inferred from this one exception (two posts). The conjunction here of three great Avalon minds, Greybeard, Ulli, and now Carmody, incites me to express a... diverging viewpoint. The fact that we can have this friendly disagreement at all is a sign that we westerners have come a long way after a long time. The British-German clash is the hardest one to get over: after winning the war, joining the EC was seen as a moral defeat or climbdown. The French-German relationship has had more time to mature and envisage a fresh approach whereby we should be done with war. For example, 150 years ago, leading French artists were fighting or fleeing the Prussians. Frédéric Bazille might have become the best of them all. He could easily have dodged the draft, but no, he decided he couldn’t. In his very first action, to evacuate civilians from a battlefield, he got killed, and that is why you might not even know who I am talking about. In the first half of the 20th century, things got so much worse, and I am exceedingly grateful to have been able to get through my lifetime trying to develop my talents along with millions of others, instead of becoming more cannon fodder. All these talents must not be wasted; they are the one tool that we have now that we badly needed then and that was destroyed.

    Quote Posted by ulli (here)
    Found this the other day, from a friend on FB:

    “I was asked the following question in response to a comment I made about the EU:
    “Oh dear! As a convinced Leaver, please explain why leaving the EU is a good idea. And please don't say 'to take back control' or 'to regain our sovereignty', since we hadn't lost them. Please come up with a rational reason.”

    Here is my answer:

    “You seem to have shut down the key issues before they started. I’m not surprised - Remainers only want to debate on issues they think they can win.
    Ok - I’ll play anyway.
    1. Because it’s the will of the people. The majority of those who cared enough to vote.
    Do I need to say anymore?
    I will anyway.
    2. The History and the lies behind it tell a significant story.
    - Edward Heath (paedophile and therefore a blackmailed puppet of those who wield the hidden power) sold us out with lies many decades back
    1942 - the Nazis first came up with the term EEC
    1943 - Redhouse Report in Strasbourg.
    In 1943 German industrialists and Nazis realising the certainty of military defeat devised an economic plan to implement the dominance of the 4th Reich
    Who is the greatest benefactor of the EU?
    I am in favour of as little government as possible.
    The vast corruption (not unique to EU but characteristic of all government as it gets larger and larger)
    The vast waste of money on expenses, gravy trains, first class or business class travel. These are just a few examples of the consequences.
    Attempting to create litigation and regulation that somehow applies equally to 28 countries - one size fits all is a proven disaster in any field in which it is applied.
    Rich countries subsidising poor countries - socialism has never ever worked.
    Unelected decision makers. Do I need to say more?
    The influence of Soros within the EU. Again nothing more needs to be said.
    The evident weakness of the single currency which has stayed alive precipitously thanks to Central Bank shenanigans. It is in a perilous position.
    Britain wisely rejected this option.
    Laws not being enacted fairly. Compare Italy and France when related to debt as a percentage of GDP and how much is allowed. France receiving favourable treatment. There are numerous examples of this from small regulations to the big diktats.
    The imposition of social engineering - the Eu seeks a monolithic culture where immigration in vast numbers is a requirement. This is having appalling consequences across the EU - Germany, Sweden to name but two. We are not bringing in the kind of people who integrate and contribute. Unlike say the Caribbean and Sub continent communities who contribute and integrate. Enriching our culture. Cultural uniformity is where it’s headed.
    Nationalism - i am proud to be a white nationalist and yet the term has been vilified by the media.
    So what is nationalism?
    “identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations”
    I love my country. I put it first. Many who have entered the U.K. in recent years patently do not love the U.K. I do not personally choose to exclude other countries or damage them, only simply to prioritise England. Above all I am a galactic citizen. But I am British. Uniquely English. I am fighting peacefully, patiently and relentlessly for my country, it’s values and it’s culture.
    I could continue for hours and hours - there really are that many more obvious reasons to reject this abomination.
    There’s a really good test. Whatever the media push and advocate is to the advantage of the Elites and the owners of the media and those who seek their influence. It should be inherently mistrusted and questioned - their track record is entirely dubious.
    Unregulated globalism is the EU scaled world-wide. One world government is the goal. Regulations world wide. Global taxation and control on energy usage and carbon Emissions. It’s happening on so many levels.
    I’m truly amazed anyone can’t see it. Most people I would venture oppose Brexit for various reasons but high on every one’s list is their personal economic circumstances and the promise that it will be a disaster if we leave. This is a fear and that fear has been fanned by the media and those who are already well off and comfortable while the working class and many of the increasingly pinched middle class derive no benefit from the EU while the fat cats lap up the expenses and look after their own. This is the perception and in many cases the reality for vast swathes of Europeans whose voice is minimalised while the chattering classes pump out and devour BBC propaganda and debate the stupidity of the masses in Islington or wherever.
    So tell me why is it you are prepared to tolerate all this?
    Afraid of the future?
    Afraid of receiving less money?
    Afraid of the EU bullies who sound remarkably like those who call us Brexiteers stupid in their arrogance.
    Relax. You lost. It’s going to happen. The EU experiment is over.
    Trump, Putin, Xi and a widening alliance are bringing down the whole globalist house of cards. The Central Banks are the big target but first we clean house and bring to account, incarcerate and execute those who’ve committed crimes beyond your comprehension. Crimes that make policemen weep. Crimes of staggering corruption and arrogance.
    Politicians are blackmailed after they are entrapped by the globalist machine. The bankers, the pharmaceutical industry, the secret services etc. Once Ted Heath commits paedophilia and is recorded doing so (by elements within MI5 or whomever) then those who wield the power from behind the curtain can influence political decision making across the board.
    I hope this at least partially answers your question.
    You say we’ve not lost our sovereignty or control. And you’d rather I didn’t bring that up. We are not even being allowed to enact the mandate of the people by the arrogance of Tusk and Juncker et al. Are we in control?
    Juncker - drunker than a pirate on payday. It’s quite extraordinary that you’d allow such a man in the building let alone initiate and instigate policy that effects 28 nations. Who elected him? That would be no one - he was selected.”
    Obviously discussion alone is not enough, because the facts are always more numerous and complex than any one person’s knowledge of them; things that are not untrue can take on a different light. I do see what Ulli’s friend sees, but there really are two sides to this whole question. The EU is far from ideal, that goes without saying. But it is like the Dalai Lama was saying in New York you go for paedophile priests, but you don’t want to destroy the Catholic Church in the process. It doesn’t have to be deliberate either. There are also money-grabbing false positives which make the numbers look even more dreadful. There was a case in the UK a while back in which I know for a fact at least one character witness was never heard, and the jury was not to be told that the plaintiff was a convicted fraudster. The Catholic Church is not all bad and the judicial system is not all good. Europe is not all good either, but when the end aim is some kind of world government, which is a prerequisite for greater things ahead but which we all rightly fear because our politicians fall so woefully short of what is required, a European federation is one small step towards that goal that we don’t want to destroy or walk away from. To see it as an abomination is to go way beyond Brexit, and, let’s face it, desire its destruction. This is Manichean thinking and just another form of warfare. War is binary action, a one-thing-at-a-time approach to a complex reality. The “Allies” defeated the Axis in WWII, and then turned on each other; which is not how simultaneous realities work. And now there is a civil war of words going on in and over the UK.

    The Brexiters won the referendum, says Ulli’s friend. Take the voting system that voted for Brexit. I remember commenting on the appalling chaos at some UK polling station in a video I saw. In France, you have separate tables with four people checking exactly 100 envelopes at a time, with the general public breathing down their necks. The counted envelopes are immediately placed in larger envelopes and put back in the urn. It is clear for all to see that such an organization at least has a decent chance of working fairly. The chaos is already a sign that vote-rigging would be that much easier. But I have no hard info, so I will just state that the UK polling system seems less rigorous than elsewhere, and a close-run campaign is more vulnerable to tampering, and leave it at that.

    Referenda with binary Yes or No answers may or may not be democratic but they are a problematic form of public consultation because it is so easy to answer the wrong question. As I wrote at the time, I think many people heard the question, “Who’s in charge?” and answered “We the people”. Which is technically the correct answer to an exam question (the wrong situation), and in practice, the wrong answer with regard to the current state of affairs – both before and after the poll, the people were not and are not in charge. There is an extra dimension to the argument that has been overlooked. Like in the above criminal case, the jury needs to be told the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Both Yes and No are emotional responses to an issue that calls for clear-headedness. Clear-headedness has never been a British quality: the Brits are on the whole incredibly muddle-headed and Boris Johnson, whatever else he is, is muddle-headedness in spades, so of course people will vote for that. My whole education was about getting over this hurdle. I worked for 25 years translating tons of legal briefs, from crystal clear French into a language that is simply not made that way. This is often the actual cause of international misunderstandings in the first place and has certainly characterized the last wasted three years, not to mention the campaign for PM: you just cannot muddle through and think everything will work out all right. The fine print does matter. And historical fact is the fine print of current affairs. Facts do still exist.
    (I now learn from Ulli in a PM that Sir Harold Evans, former editor of the Sunday Times and the Times, talks about "fog" ).


    Regarding the people mentioned: you need to take this further. Trump is his own man? Maybe so, he was saying the same things forty years ago, so he definitely has a spine. Johnson on the other hand is an empty spineless buffoon: ask a serious question, there is no one at home. Johnson working with Trump? I don’t think so, although Trump doesn’t seem to have noticed yet.

    Next, Juncker is a drunk? Well, not long ago, Wade Frazier was talking about he and Brian O’Leary having a drink problem, saying it came with the territory. We don’t want to dismiss Brian, or Wade, though, do we? And what about Johnson’s idol, Churchill, a notorious alcoholic? When a woman told him he was drunk, he replied, “Yes, and you’re ugly; but I’ll be sober in the morning”. But of course he wasn’t, or not for long. So maybe Juncker’s problem comes with his territory, which would be understandable, would it not?

    Now Heath: he was a paedophile and did what his handlers told him? Sure, but Heath was just the first PM to come after the demise of General De Gaulle, who had been rejecting British membership for years. Heath and his sexual proclivities had nothing to do with that process. And lastly, if you are criticizing the man who brought about EC entry, you cannot not take into account the mastermind of the exit. Johnson is definitely not his own man; his handlers are by definition not on the same wavelength as Avalonian-type idealists. Their Brexit is not your Brexit.

    Now the Nazi connection. Europe may have been mooted in Nazi Germany, a useful way to discredit the idea, but the concept dates back at least to Aristide Briand in the 1920s, based on the thinking of some Austrian. The idea was to organize the European wing of the League of Nations as a peacekeeping force, already 27 nations back then. The war obviously interrupted this process. And the UK was just one of several cogs: when they joined, Ireland and Norway also joined, and the Six became the Nine. Back in the fifties, Macmillan wanted France and Germany to give up the whole idea, because he thought it would lead to war. Which perversely inspired De Gaulle to like the idea, because he disagreed with the Brits, i.e. thought it would lead to peace.

    Macmillan was wrong: we have had over seventy years of peace. So with the benefit of hindsight, he was right to change his mind. At that stage it was Groucho Marx in reverse: Britain wanted to join a club that wouldn’t have it as a member. When you make war, both sides lose out; when you make peace – active peace, not just an uneasy truce – all sides can win out. That means cooperative trade, not competitive trade trying to make a rip-off. One of the obstacles to British entry was the Commonwealth, formerly the Empire. (The other objection to British entry was the USA; I’ll come to that.) Empire too can have its advantages, but its main characteristic, as opposed to commonwealth, is unbalanced, competitive trade. The EU idea or ideal was of a geographical commonwealth among equals. To be sure, this ideal is still very much a work in progress, but still very much worth pursuing.

    Why that would be is fairly obvious: the eastern countries are prospering? perhaps no bad thing, as they suffered badly and are no longer bolstering the Cold War Soviet pseudo-threat; Germany is prospering? perhaps because Germany is a country with many qualities; France is also prospering, and for instance any removal from the common agricultural policy would be disastrous. And half of the UK must be prospering, to the extent that they see what damage a no-deal would do to them. Ideally, everyone should be prospering, but clearly that is not the case – not yet. This is true notably for Italy, Greece, and... the other half of the UK. It would seem that areas like northern Britain are suffering more at the hands of London than Brussels and are unable to separate the two; not because they are stupid, but because they are politically disenfranchised and economically underprivileged. In other words, what is wrong with the UK is a microcosm of what is wrong with Europe. The government is blind to that fact and to the fact that by putting its own house in order, it can contribute to making Europe a better place as well. That is the inconvenient truth that Brexit is trying to brush under the carpet.

    France is ambiguous: they want Britain to remain, but also understand with plenty of hindsight where De Gaulle was coming from, and will say good riddance. It could well be (but I am not sufficiently informed) that Brussels is fed up with the City of London and needs to cut it off, in which case it is Brussels following Trump, not the Brits. One sign of this is the idea being floated right now of setting up several Singapore-style tax-free zones, “structures that have the potential to facilitate money laundering”, someone was saying, and someone else they “facilitate large-scale criminality”. All the signs I am seeing point to Brexit being the elite’s backlash to Trump, although that was probably not the original intention. David Cameron timed his referendum to coincide with a Clinton regime, coming after Obama, who was to tell him to get in the “queue” (an interesting Englishism for him to be using). Note how Johnson had to do a U-turn on Trump. I hardly think Trump came into the picture at all early in 2016, unless Cameron was being advised by a Simpsons fan... If you abhor the Clinton administration that never happened, this has to be part of that nightmare.

    The idea of revolution is “to come a full circle”, back to where you started. Hence revolution is essentially reactionary. And the UK position is revolutionary in that reactionary sense: a return to Commonwealth and America. But America has changed (and so has the Commonwealth); it is literally in a different place, because the Earth comes a full circle round the Sun, but as the Sun is moving round the galaxy, we never come back to the same spot, we move on all the time. That means the EU is here to evolve; it is a problem we have to solve: it is not going to dissolve away. A chemical solution is no solution: dissolve salt in water, the salt only appears to disappear.

    There is a qualitative difference between Yes and No. No is blanket negativity and only an adequate reaction in the face of some kind of abuse when all else fails. Is the UK, a major world power, in an irretrievably abusive relationship? Really? Yes on the other hand is not blanket positivity but a nuanced response to a richly complex proposition. When one marries, Yes does not mean signing up for abuse. The joke Aisle, Altar, Hymn – I’ll alter him! – means taking the rough with the smooth but also accepting there is a basis for smoothing out the rough. This lack of nuance I am seeing is clear in the analogies we use, the bad apple being a favourite negative one. “One or two bad apples” is equatable with “all rotten”. What is bad is the analogy itself, based on incompetent husbandry. The correct way to store fruit is to prevent any contact. Apples growing on a tree mostly do this naturally; a healthy tree will survive a few worm-eaten apples. Other apples rot when they hit the ground; this is the normal process whereby the fruit is designed to bury the seed and enrich the soil at the point where the seed can grow. All other apples are surplus to immediate requirements and can be traded with other life forms (humans, birds, mammals, and yes worms). This is called symbiosis: a tree is not an island. What it gets in return is richer soil in which to thrive. Even the rotten apples have a part to play in that.

    The apple-tree itself will not suffer from a few worms producing bad apples, but from its own specific diseases. One such is mistletoe, which does not live symbiotically but parasitically, draining the nutrients from the branch. Mistletoe grows in a tree the way a tree grows on the soil. The cure has nothing to do with worms: no use picking off grain by grain. Surgical removal, traditionally with a golden sickle, was followed by hanging the mistletoe in the house at Christmas and kissing under it as a symbol of immortality and bringer of good luck! Effective husbandry, and a little bit more besides.

    So the apple analogy is a lot more complex than it looks, and the EU is likewise a lot more complex than it looks. Brexit is the wrong remedy for the wrong disease. For one thing, after decades among all these bad apples, the British apple itself is going to be pretty rotten; it is too late to be isolating it. And in any case, the problem is structural, not superficial. Brexit is like taking aspirin for appendicitis: it removes the feverish symptoms for a time but does nothing to save a generally valuable institution. The structural issue is that the European Community is being parasitized by a foreign organism, namely imperialism. The problem is not with individual Eurocrats but the branches to which they have become attached. It can only be solved by talking to Brussels with an authoritative voice, i.e. from within the EC to change the EC.


    Last edited by araucaria; 25th July 2019 at 14:23.


  28. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to araucaria For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), Carmody (25th July 2019), PurpleLama (21st October 2019), Valerie Villars (25th July 2019)

  29. Link to Post #635
    France Avalon Member araucaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Posts
    5,400
    Thanks
    12,061
    Thanked 30,977 times in 5,003 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    It is a good while since I made a forum post. I shan’t go into why, beyond what can be inferred from this one exception (two posts). The conjunction here of three great Avalon minds, Greybeard, Ulli, and now Carmody, incites me to express a... diverging viewpoint. The fact that we can have this friendly disagreement at all is a sign that we westerners have come a long way after a long time. The British-German clash is the hardest one to get over: after winning the war, joining the EC was seen as a moral defeat or climbdown. The French-German relationship has had more time to mature and envisage a fresh approach whereby we should be done with war. For example, 150 years ago, leading French artists were fighting or fleeing the Prussians. Frédéric Bazille might have become the best of them all. He could easily have dodged the draft, but no, he decided he couldn’t. In his very first action, to evacuate civilians from a battlefield, he got killed, and that is why you might not even know who I am talking about. In the first half of the 20th century, things got so much worse, and I am exceedingly grateful to have been able to get through my lifetime trying to develop my talents along with millions of others, instead of becoming more cannon fodder. All these talents must not be wasted; they are the one tool that we have now that we badly needed then and that was destroyed.

    https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1301654

    Obviously discussion alone is not enough, because the facts are always more numerous and complex than any one person’s knowledge of them; things that are not untrue can take on a different light. I do see what Ulli’s friend sees, but there really are two sides to this whole question. The EU is far from ideal, that goes without saying. But it is like the Dalai Lama was saying in New York you go for paedophile priests, but you don’t want to destroy the Catholic Church in the process. It doesn’t have to be deliberate either. There are also money-grabbing false positives which make the numbers look even more dreadful. There was a case in the UK a while back in which I know for a fact at least one character witness was never heard, and the jury was not to be told that the plaintiff was a convicted fraudster. The Catholic Church is not all bad and the judicial system is not all good. Europe is not all good either, but when the end aim is some kind of world government, which is a prerequisite for greater things ahead but which we all rightly fear because our politicians fall so woefully short of what is required, a European federation is one small step towards that goal that we don’t want to destroy or walk away from. To see it as an abomination is to go way beyond Brexit, and, let’s face it, desire its destruction. This is Manichean thinking and just another form of warfare. War is binary action, a one-thing-at-a-time approach to a complex reality. The “Allies” defeated the Axis in WWII, and then turned on each other; which is not how simultaneous realities work. And now there is a civil war of words going on in and over the UK.

    The Brexiters won the referendum, says Ulli’s friend. Take the voting system that voted for Brexit. I remember commenting on the appalling chaos at some UK polling station in a video I saw. In France, you have separate tables with four people checking exactly 100 envelopes at a time, with the general public breathing down their necks. The counted envelopes are immediately placed in larger envelopes and put back in the urn. It is clear for all to see that such an organization at least has a decent chance of working fairly. The chaos is already a sign that vote-rigging would be that much easier. But I have no hard info, so I will just state that the UK polling system seems less rigorous than elsewhere, and a close-run campaign is more vulnerable to tampering, and leave it at that.

    Referenda with binary Yes or No answers may or may not be democratic but they are a problematic form of public consultation because it is so easy to answer the wrong question. As I wrote at the time, I think many people heard the question, “Who’s in charge?” and answered “We the people”. Which is technically the correct answer to an exam question (the wrong situation), and in practice, the wrong answer with regard to the current state of affairs – both before and after the poll, the people were not and are not in charge. There is an extra dimension to the argument that has been overlooked. Like in the above criminal case, the jury needs to be told the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Both Yes and No are emotional responses to an issue that calls for clear-headedness. Clear-headedness has never been a British quality: the Brits are on the whole incredibly muddle-headed and Boris Johnson, whatever else he is, is muddle-headedness in spades, so of course people will vote for that. My whole education was about getting over this hurdle. I worked for 25 years translating tons of legal briefs, from crystal clear French into a language that is simply not made that way. This is often the actual cause of international misunderstandings in the first place and has certainly characterized the last wasted three years, not to mention the campaign for PM: you just cannot muddle through and think everything will work out all right. The fine print does matter. And historical fact is the fine print of current affairs. Facts do still exist.
    (I now learn from Ulli in a PM that Sir Harold Evans, former editor of the Sunday Times and the Times, talks about "fog" ).


    Regarding the people mentioned: you need to take this further. Trump is his own man? Maybe so, he was saying the same things forty years ago, so he definitely has a spine. Johnson on the other hand is an empty spineless buffoon: ask a serious question, there is no one at home. Johnson working with Trump? I don’t think so, although Trump doesn’t seem to have noticed yet.

    Next, Juncker is a drunk? Well, not long ago, Wade Frazier was talking about he and Brian O’Leary having a drink problem, saying it came with the territory. We don’t want to dismiss Brian, or Wade, though, do we? And what about Johnson’s idol, Churchill, a notorious alcoholic? When a woman told him he was drunk, he replied, “Yes, and you’re ugly; but I’ll be sober in the morning”. But of course he wasn’t, or not for long. So maybe Juncker’s problem comes with his territory, which would be understandable, would it not?

    Now Heath: he was a paedophile and did what his handlers told him? Sure, but Heath was just the first PM to come after the demise of General De Gaulle, who had been rejecting British membership for years. Heath and his sexual proclivities had nothing to do with that process. And lastly, if you are criticizing the man who brought about EC entry, you cannot not take into account the mastermind of the exit. Johnson is definitely not his own man; his handlers are by definition not on the same wavelength as Avalonian-type idealists. Their Brexit is not your Brexit.

    Now the Nazi connection. Europe may have been mooted in Nazi Germany, a useful way to discredit the idea, but the concept dates back at least to Aristide Briand in the 1920s, based on the thinking of some Austrian. The idea was to organize the European wing of the League of Nations as a peacekeeping force, already 27 nations back then. The war obviously interrupted this process. And the UK was just one of several cogs: when they joined, Ireland and Norway also joined, and the Six became the Nine. Back in the fifties, Macmillan wanted France and Germany to give up the whole idea, because he thought it would lead to war. Which perversely inspired De Gaulle to like the idea, because he disagreed with the Brits, i.e. thought it would lead to peace.

    Macmillan was wrong: we have had over seventy years of peace. So with the benefit of hindsight, he was right to change his mind. At that stage it was Groucho Marx in reverse: Britain wanted to join a club that wouldn’t have it as a member. When you make war, both sides lose out; when you make peace – active peace, not just an uneasy truce – all sides can win out. That means cooperative trade, not competitive trade trying to make a rip-off. One of the obstacles to British entry was the Commonwealth, formerly the Empire. (The other objection to British entry was the USA; I’ll come to that.) Empire too can have its advantages, but its main characteristic, as opposed to commonwealth, is unbalanced, competitive trade. The EU idea or ideal was of a geographical commonwealth among equals. To be sure, this ideal is still very much a work in progress, but still very much worth pursuing.

    Why that would be is fairly obvious: the eastern countries are prospering? perhaps no bad thing, as they suffered badly and are no longer bolstering the Cold War Soviet pseudo-threat; Germany is prospering? perhaps because Germany is a country with many qualities; France is also prospering, and for instance any removal from the common agricultural policy would be disastrous. And half of the UK must be prospering, to the extent that they see what damage a no-deal would do to them. Ideally, everyone should be prospering, but clearly that is not the case – not yet. This is true notably for Italy, Greece, and... the other half of the UK. It would seem that areas like northern Britain are suffering more at the hands of London than Brussels and are unable to separate the two; not because they are stupid, but because they are politically disenfranchised and economically underprivileged. In other words, what is wrong with the UK is a microcosm of what is wrong with Europe. The government is blind to that fact and to the fact that by putting its own house in order, it can contribute to making Europe a better place as well. That is the inconvenient truth that Brexit is trying to brush under the carpet.

    France is ambiguous: they want Britain to remain, but also understand with plenty of hindsight where De Gaulle was coming from, and will say good riddance. It could well be (but I am not sufficiently informed) that Brussels is fed up with the City of London and needs to cut it off, in which case it is Brussels following Trump, not the Brits. One sign of this is the idea being floated right now of setting up several Singapore-style tax-free zones, “structures that have the potential to facilitate money laundering”, someone was saying, and someone else they “facilitate large-scale criminality”. All the signs I am seeing point to Brexit being the elite’s backlash to Trump, although that was probably not the original intention. David Cameron timed his referendum to coincide with a Clinton regime, coming after Obama, who was to tell him to get in the “queue” (an interesting Englishism for him to be using). Note how Johnson had to do a U-turn on Trump. I hardly think Trump came into the picture at all early in 2016, unless Cameron was being advised by a Simpsons fan... If you abhor the Clinton administration that never happened, this has to be part of that nightmare.

    The idea of revolution is “to come a full circle”, back to where you started. Hence revolution is essentially reactionary. And the UK position is revolutionary in that reactionary sense: a return to Commonwealth and America. But America has changed (and so has the Commonwealth); it is literally in a different place, because the Earth comes a full circle round the Sun, but as the Sun is moving round the galaxy, we never come back to the same spot, we move on all the time. That means the EU is here to evolve; it is a problem we have to solve: it is not going to dissolve away. A chemical solution is no solution: dissolve salt in water, the salt only appears to disappear.

    .../...


  30. The Following User Says Thank You to araucaria For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019)

  31. Link to Post #636
    France Avalon Member araucaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Posts
    5,400
    Thanks
    12,061
    Thanked 30,977 times in 5,003 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    There is a qualitative difference between Yes and No. No is blanket negativity and only an adequate reaction in the face of some kind of abuse when all else fails. Is the UK, a major world power, in an irretrievably abusive relationship? Really? Yes on the other hand is not blanket positivity but a nuanced response to a richly complex proposition. When one marries, Yes does not mean signing up for abuse. The joke Aisle, Altar, Hymn – I’ll alter him! – means taking the rough with the smooth but also accepting there is a basis for smoothing out the rough. This lack of nuance I am seeing is clear in the analogies we use, the bad apple being a favourite negative one. “One or two bad apples” is equatable with “all rotten”. What is bad is the analogy itself, based on incompetent husbandry. The correct way to store fruit is to prevent any contact. Apples growing on a tree mostly do this naturally; a healthy tree will survive a few worm-eaten apples. Other apples rot when they hit the ground; this is the normal process whereby the fruit is designed to bury the seed and enrich the soil at the point where the seed can grow. All other apples are surplus to immediate requirements and can be traded with other life forms (humans, birds, mammals, and yes worms). This is called symbiosis: a tree is not an island. What it gets in return is richer soil in which to thrive. Even the rotten apples have a part to play in that.

    The apple-tree itself will not suffer from a few worms producing bad apples, but from its own specific diseases. One such is mistletoe, which does not live symbiotically but parasitically, draining the nutrients from the branch. Mistletoe grows in a tree the way a tree grows on the soil. The cure has nothing to do with worms: no use picking off grain by grain. Surgical removal, traditionally with a golden sickle, was followed by hanging the mistletoe in the house at Christmas and kissing under it as a symbol of immortality and bringer of good luck! Effective husbandry, and a little bit more besides.

    So the apple analogy is a lot more complex than it looks, and the EU is likewise a lot more complex than it looks. Brexit is the wrong remedy for the wrong disease. For one thing, after decades among all these bad apples, the British apple itself is going to be pretty rotten; it is too late to be isolating it. And in any case, the problem is structural, not superficial. Brexit is like taking aspirin for appendicitis: it removes the feverish symptoms for a time but does nothing to save a generally valuable institution. The structural issue is that the European Community is being parasitized by a foreign organism, namely imperialism. The problem is not with individual Eurocrats but the branches to which they have become attached. It can only be solved by talking to Brussels with an authoritative voice, i.e. from within the EC to change the EC.

    What follows is a response to what I see as a confusion that also affects our friend Carmody’s post, https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1306403 namely between an ideological abstraction (Nazism) and a concrete geographical term (Germany). As we know the worst Nazis fled to the Americas, so if Nazism has a geographical, and more importantly political, basis, it is not primarily located in mainland Germany. It has moved on. This will become clearer if we link this to the above-noted issue of the parasite of imperialism.

    There is a current Avalon thread on the end of production of the Volkswagen, the “people carrier” that put people first and the car itself literally took a back seat with the revolutionary rear-mounted motor. It proved so popular because of its practicality. German efficiency, 50 miles per gallon, etc. (actually 26.2 in 1954, now less, but you get my point, relatively cheap to run back then). To dismiss it as Nazi technology would be to destroy something merely useful, but entirely useful, by smearing it with ideology: this backfires like the proverbial excrement hitting the proverbial fan. You might as well argue that the French preference for the “traction avant”, the front-wheel drive, was an ideological difference. No; such pragmatic considerations need to be treated with pragmatism. Speaking pragmatically, this small family car might be less than ideal for anything larger than a small family; a growing third child would soon find it a bit of a squeeze in the middle of the back seat.

    German efficiency in the arts. Beethoven wrote some sublime sonatas, quartets, symphonies, without so much as a tune. 50 miles per gallon artistry. Ah, but then came Wagner, with his huge operas, his mythological gods, his Bayreuth festspiele extravanganzas. 50 gallons per mile. We don’t hear too much about German inefficiency, but here’s another example: the Tiger tank was a superb piece of military machinery, except that it... kept breaking down.

    So Germany was/is not one elementary thing: it is a full spectrum with opposite extremes. As so often, we easily get the wrong end of the stick. Likewise “Nazi Germany” conflates two separate things, Nazism and Germany. Again, National Socialism is two things. Socialism in the 1930s was not a cause for conflict. In addition to socialist Russia, you had the Front Populaire in France in 1936, and the Labour movement in the UK. What could lead to conflict was the “National” bit: “Socialism in one country” as opposed to “International Socialism”. We are talking about politics of, by and for the people, way to the left of American-style “leftist” liberalism. So what went wrong? The movement of the people was hijacked, in Russia by Stalinism, in France by kowtowing to Germany, and in Germany? In Germany, it gets interesting, because you see the same explosive mixture of two ingredients that we are seeing now in Johnsonian England: populism harnessed by aristocratic entitlement. It is a matter of extreme concern to me that Johnson’s hero should be the wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill.

    Modern warfare is precisely what results when populism is harnessed by aristocratic entitlement. It dates back at least to the Battle of Agincourt in 1415, when Henry V told his peasant archers to actually shoot to kill the French nobility. It was not supposed to happen that way: normally the peasants killed each other and the aristocracy were captured and ransomed. Just a game for some, but very real for others; sounds familiar? Henry V is a still well-loved medieval Boris Johnson who was annoyed when the French king suggested he should stick to playing tennis.

    German expansionism came from the lack of an empire. Spain once had South America, Britain had the British Empire, and France extended her influence in Africa and elsewhere. Aristocratic entitlement was frustrated and only really got going by introducing the populist version of Lebensraum (living space). The lack of living space in a world of just 2.5 billion people when European populations were much lower is an idea we need to look at closely. How much space you need depends on who you are. Some aristocrats and plutocrats think they need several large mansions, when lesser mortals are confined to tiny spaces. This was the major area of convergence become two unlikely allies. While everyone wanted more space, the major reason for fighting was not over working-class housing but because the large mansions were no longer enough. Geography is a major component in this equation: like the fifth passenger in a Volkswagen, Germany is “hemmed in”, say between Russia and France. Imperial powers have always relied on their navy. The proposed solution was by extermination to reduce to zero space the Slavic and Jewish populations, themselves hemmed in between Russia and Germany, and also break out to the French Atlantic coast. The fact that the surviving Jews were later transplanted to the Middle East, hemmed in again, did little to improve their plight. Basically there is no longer anywhere for anyone to go.

    Since migration is no longer a solution, the European Union has been an exercise in living together without jostling for position. There are more people in the world than back then, so all things considered, we are doing all right. It was never going to be easy. One of the positives of being geographically closer together is that as we become physically closer we may become psychologically and emotionally more intimate. So how much space do we really need? Well, we can get by for a while in a rush-hour commute, provided we have a home to go to. That home is the new space we are trying to build out of the old. And succeeding: I remember forty or fifty years ago, many smaller towns that are now exciting hives of activity were completely dead.

    Of course, if a country wants to go off and do its own thing, that would be perfectly acceptable. But, seen in the above light, going back to the American dream is a fool’s paradise. The American dream was all about Lebensraum, until that country filled up too, notably with Germans fleeing Nazis, then with Nazis fleeing Germans: individual solutions to a collective problem. A rush to the west coast; the tide turned, a rush eastwards to fill in the gaps. Now they want a wall. The American dream is well and truly dead.

    The specifically Nazi solution to overpopulation was and is totally ineffective. The weakness lay in having to entrust the extremely aristocratic Wehrmacht to Corporal Hitler and his Nazi rabble: two groups of total incompetents relying upon each other and at each other’s throats. These groups are the ones at war, while anyone with any sense (competence) is at peace. WWII produced the baby-boomers – some depopulation! And before WWII was over, plans were being made for a bigger, better, nuclear WWIII. Since this has not only failed to materialize in 75 years, but the danger has been receding since 1962, it is a prime example of German inefficiency. And incidentally it shows that the planners were not in Germany, which was right in the firing line.

    There is a biblical story of overpopulation caused by counting the people and finding there are too many. The census at Bethlehem meant that the whole town was fully booked: “no room at the inn”. The birth of Christ was a counterintuitive solution to the problem of overpopulation: one more head to count and mouth to feed, but quality is more important than quantity.

    One final thought. Sometimes seemingly unrelated things need to be connected. If Brexit is the wrong end of the stick, what would be the right end? The other day I was reading Marie Louise von Franz retelling of Jung’s story of the rainmaker who stayed in a village suffering from a drought until it rained, and even snowed.
    Quote ”You see it was like this – throughout the drought the whole of nature and all the men and women here were deeply disturbed. They were no longer in Tao. When I arrived here I became also disturbed. It was so bad that it took me three days to bring myself into order.” And then he added, with a smile, “Then naturally it rained.” (Psyche and Matter, p. 161)
    Perhaps there is a connection between Johnsonian politics and the current major heatwave, which is the meteorological equivalent of illegal immigration from the south. Given the scale of the phenomenon, it will take a few Taoists to chill out on behalf of the rest of the population.


  32. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to araucaria For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), Carmody (25th July 2019), greybeard (25th July 2019), PurpleLama (21st October 2019)

  33. Link to Post #637
    UK Avalon Member Matthew's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th July 2015
    Location
    South East England
    Language
    English
    Age
    51
    Posts
    4,138
    Thanks
    25,644
    Thanked 36,187 times in 4,071 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    The EU ruling laws were a great disruptive force to the UK in the early days, but the European Commission itself needs the disruptive force now; it's so ambitious in such a hurry, and surreptitious in it's methods. Remainers can have strange logic, like have a second referendum until they get the desired result. It's happened in other countries previously, as the EU was growing
    Last edited by Matthew; 25th July 2019 at 13:17. Reason: Retainers become remainers

  34. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Matthew For This Post:

    avid (25th July 2019), Bill Ryan (25th July 2019)

  35. Link to Post #638
    Scotland Avalon Member greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Inverness-----Scotland
    Language
    English
    Age
    78
    Posts
    13,355
    Thanks
    32,618
    Thanked 68,860 times in 11,838 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    Thanks for the compliment and the post araucaria
    Cant help but think that Boris trying to sound like Winston Churchill.
    Time will tell--very rapidly--where this is going.

    I could make a good case for leaving and I could make a good case for staying.
    Fortunately Im 73 and settled in retirement-- just enough of a State pension to get by.
    Basically looked after by the state in a council house.
    So no complaints.
    However I have concern for younger people.
    The picture painted by many regarding leaving without a deal is far from rosy.
    If Boris pulls of a deal he will be very popular if not--I would not like to be in his shoes.

    Cant, in honesty, see how he can get anything he has promised through Parliament.

    Chris
    Be kind to all life, including your own, no matter what!!

  36. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to greybeard For This Post:

    avid (25th July 2019), Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), Valerie Villars (25th July 2019)

  37. Link to Post #639
    France On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,763
    Thanks
    60,315
    Thanked 95,891 times in 15,481 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    Johnson’s Westminster Cabinet is Far to the Right of Thatcher 90

    by craig in Uncategorized
    25 Jul, 2019

    I can only imagine that the media people who are saying this is the most right wing cabinet since the 1980’s were not sentient in the 80’s. Thatcher never had a Home Secretary remotely as illiberal as Pritti Patel, never had a Foreign Secretary remotely as xenophobic as Dominic Raab, never even had a Chancellor as anti-State intervention as Sajid Javid (though came closer there) and never had a Defence Secretary as bellicose as Ben Wallace.

    Even Thatcher’s final and most right wing Cabinet contained figures like Ken Clarke, Chris Patten, John Major, Virginia Bottomley, Douglas Hurd and William Waldegrave. All Tories with whom I have fundamental disagreements, but every single one of them is far, far to the left of virtually all of Johnson’s appalling cronies.

    Thatcher deliberately and cruelly wrecked the social democratic society in which I grew up, with the aim of destroying any ability for working people to be protected against the whims of the wealthy. But Thatcher never introduced privatisation into the NHS or state schools – that was her acolyte Blair. She maintained free university education in England and Wales. That was destroyed by Blair too. We should be more rigorous than to accept Thatcher as the definitive most right wing government possible. It is not only lazy, it obscures the fact we now have the most right wing British government since 1832.

    Pritti Patel is a Home Secretary who admires the approach to law and order of Benjamin Netanyahu and voted against a measure to prevent pregnant asylum seekers being slammed into immigration detention pending hearing. Savid Javid is a Chancellor who materially caused the problems of British Steel by, as Business Secretary, vetoing in Brussels tariffs against dumped Chinese steel. Dominic Raab is a foreign secretary who negotiated a deal with the EU then resigned because it was so bad.

    This is the biggest political shock to hit the UK in my lifetime and it is potentially worse than Thatcher. Here in Scotland, we need to move immediately for Independence. The time for talking really is behind us.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  38. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), greybeard (25th July 2019), Tintin (25th July 2019)

  39. Link to Post #640
    UK Avalon Member Matthew's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th July 2015
    Location
    South East England
    Language
    English
    Age
    51
    Posts
    4,138
    Thanks
    25,644
    Thanked 36,187 times in 4,071 posts

    Default Re: The UK Brexit vote to leave the EU

    Quote Posted by YoYoYo (here)
    The British people had a say, in an epic and historical referendum. The referendum was about leave or stay. The way the European Commission has negotiated it's as if the British people voted for a new deal. We didn't, we voted to leave. No-deal Brexit was meant to kick in if the European Commission couldn't understand what 'leave' meant. (It's only remainers who complain Brexit wasn't clearly represented by the way, not Brexiteers.)

    ...
    I just want to echo what I said here, those months ago.

    When Scotland finally leave the UK (more correctly to say if, but what I hear in conversations with Scottish friends makes me think it's simply a matter of time and patience, but is inevitable), Scotland would expect to leave. I would hope their vote to leave would be respected in the spirit they voted for.

    The way Boris is talking, it sounds like Tories know they have Farage hot on their heals. I'm looking forward to seeing how the next few months go

  40. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Matthew For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (25th July 2019), greybeard (25th July 2019)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 32 of 63 FirstFirst 1 22 32 42 63 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts