It was a lifetime ago that the World was faced with an Austrian born man who wished to control the lives of all those he was able. His name was Adolph Hitler. He came to the attention of the leaders and peoples of the World when he began to turn Germany’s armed forces into his own militia. To gain momentum for his views, he looked to the Jewish population of Germany and advised the German People that the reason for Germany not being a Super-Power was because the Jews controlled the flow of money in Germany and, indeeed, in every other country. Further, the German people were told that the 1914-1918 war was brought down on them by Great Britiain. There was nothing factual in his allegations, however, the German people listened and allowed him to pursue his goals to make the Germans the Master race, the supreme race, in the World. There, then, came the Second World War.
With Germany beaten, in two World Wars, the other countries of Europe came to a conclusion that the control of coal and steel, two key materials in the making of a war machine, should be manditory . This control was brought about and the number of controlled items was further expanded by a small group of countries who advanced the proposition of a Common Market, the purpose of which was to take away the driving force of failing economies in Europe to turn to war, hence avoiding World War III. The threat of War had made the free capitals of Europe come up with a sound idea, so it seemed. However, those who had brought the Common Market (ECC) to life, in doing so, had in their minds a more grander Idea to construct a larger ecomomy, and army, to defend from the ever growing threat from emerging Russia. Their vision cumulated in rebadging the ECC as the European Union (EU). The ECC was formed in 1957 and the EC in 1973 and the UK joined the EC in 1973 and later the EC was changed to the EU without the people being asked, by referendum, if this was the route they wished to take. Not seeking to identify the peoples wishes, then, led to 50% of the Conservative MP making it known of their reservations about handing over control of the the UK reins to a group of unelected commisioneres, who now formed the governing body of the EU, Accordingly, every time a General Election was called, the leader of the Conservative Party knew that he had always an uphill struggle of attempting to win a General Election, whilst many of his MPs wanted to take back control of the reins, of the UK, from the EU
In 2016 a General Election was mooted and the leader of the Conservative Party, David Cameron, decided to attempt to draw the horns, of those MPs who were against the EU, by trying to negotiate those contentious words, in the Treaties between the EU and the UK, in an attempt to pacify those MPs who wanted to regain the control of British affairs. As the General Election came closer, Daviid Cameron was very aware that the views of Nigel Farage, were now a drumbeat across the UK. Nigel Farage had for many years advocated that the UK should leave the EU. Cameron shuttled back and forth between London and Brussels for months without any gains. It was a replay of the then Prime Minister Chamberlain of the UK, shuttling back and forward between Berlin and London, in an attempt to agree with Hitler terms to avoid a World War II. Much like Chamberlain, David Cameron was given absolutely zero by the unelected commisioners of the EU. To any reasonable person, the question would be “Why would the EU give the UK a better set of Terms and Conditions than the other now 27 countries of the EU?”. For what sane reason would the EU give an inch to someone leaving the club.
The General Election was fought and the Conservatives won easily and now David Cameron had to deliver on his promise to allow the People a referendum on whether to “Leave” or “Remain” in the EU. David Cameron clearly had in his mind that his belief that the People would vote to “Remain” in the EU. It was not a risk. He was wrong. The people voted 17.4 to 16.1 million in favour of leaving the EU. With David Cameron no longer being seen as representative of the views of the People he had to resign as Prime Minister. However, he picked his sucessor before he resigned and his sucessor had also voted to “Remain” in the EU. His successor was Theresa May a known person to the UK public On the day she took over from David Cameron she stood at the lecturn outside of No 10 Downing Stree and assured the People that she would deliver on the referedum to leave the EU. It is my conjecture that she returned to her new home, that evenng, after a very exciting an exhaustting day and discussed with her husband a very deep problem. The problem was that she had for many years supported the EU project and today she had told the People that she would work to take the UK out of the EU which was totally at odds with her belief. It is my opinion that, in the kitchen of No10 Downing Street, on the night of 13th July 2016 she made a decision to examine all the Treaties between the EU and the UK to come up with a Treaty, a form of words , that, to the People, would deliver their expectations whilst maintaning almost the status quo between the EU and the UK. In my opinion, her aim was that that she was to bring about a reversal of the Peoples referedum without the People understanding that was the reality.
Mrs May then called another General Election, almost immedialety she had taken over the post of Prime Minister.. The reality on the ground, to all MPs of all parties, was that if they did not support “LEAVE” then they would not get the support of the People and therefore their lucrative jobs would end, their carrers would end. Accordingly, it is believed that many MPs, in their hearts, were “Remainers”, however, to secure their seat in Parliament, they told their supporters that they would support “Leave”. It may be that in the future the history books will show one of the most disturbing frauds ever committed on the British People was by those people that they trusted.
In the statements and interviews of the Prime Minister, when asked about her negotations, she introduced the term “No deal is better than a bad deal”. An ambiguous statement but inferring that if the EU would not change the Terms and Condtions of the UK to a position similar to that before the Masstricht Treaty, then this would lead to the UK leaving the EU without any agreed change of relationship. It is believed that PM May coluded with the EU to write a new Treaty, known widely as the “Withdrawl Agreement” . It was at a time when PM May summoned her MPs to Lancaster House that feeling were running high both in the House of Commons and the country as a whole. She gave her MPs assuances which they accepted that her negotiations were on track. For a short time, the MPs were calmed but, then, out of the blue, she called another meeting at Chequers and, then, sacked the negotiating team and replaced the outgoing team with a team from the Civil Service, lead by Olly Robbins. and her “Withdrawal” document was launched, probably written by Olly Robins in conjunction with Mr Barnier of the EU
In parallel, in the House of Commons, the labour party, led by an out and out Communist Jeremy Corbyn with another Communist as his right hand man John Macdonnald, was manouvering to depose the Conseravative governement. What became clear was that the Labour Party MPs who were “remainers” really could not allow the people who sent them to Parliament as “pro Leave” to find they were against leaving, so they hid behind the fig leaf of being opposed to a “no deal”.
For the next three years Prime Minister May, a staunch “remainer”, would sit down with the EU team members, all staunch “remainers”, and negotiate a new Treaty to keep the UK tied to the EU in perpetuity. It was a course of action that was doomed to failure as cold eyes, in the Conservatives, with the support of Nigel Farage, began to understand the the documents that Theresa May had in her case were a sham.
PM May brough her Withdrawal Bill to the house on three separate occasions, each time with the content slightly changed in accordance with the wishes of the Speaker and the house rules. Each time, it was rejected by huge majorities comprising of MPs from all Parties. The Withdrawal Bill was seen by the hard right as not freeing the UK from all the bonds of the EU. The centre ground was made up of those who had turncoated against the Peoples wishes completely. The hard left were those leaders and MPs who were totally dedicated to bring the governement down to further of their leftist agendas. In a nutshell, only a small number of MPs actually were working to deliver the will of the people which was to “leave the EU, deal or no deal, either way it was leave the EU”. The leaders of the Parites in the House of Commons, the majority of MPs and the BBC corporation, all paid from taxpayer money, where not ever going to carry out the expressed will,of the PEOPLE which was simply to LEAVE the EU
With PM May failing to deliver the wishes of the PEOPLE her support wilted in Parlaiment and across the country. She had to resign and a new Conservative Prime Minister , Boris Johnson, was invited by the Queen to form a new Cabinet. PM Johnson made a statement to the people that the UK is leaving the EU on the 31st October Deal or No Deal. Johnson’s window of time was short and there were many roads down which he may or may drive a coach and horses carrying the wishes of the British People to cross the line outside of the control of the EU. What was clear that the number of possible roads, that Johnson may take, all had to be blocked by the Labour party, which had got itself into a total mess on exactly what it supported, what it gave the impression of supporting, whilst questioning the very leadership of the Labour party, which was communist. In one last desperate attempt to block a “No Deal” when leaving of the EU a document was hurridly drafted by the labour party and sent to the House of Lords for scrutiny and acceptance. Whilst the drafting was in hand the Shadow Prime Minister, Jermy Corbyn, a communist, was asked by PM Boris Johnson, at the dispatch box, ” I am offering you the opportunty for a General Election will you take it?.” Corbyn repied ” No, the document to stop you doing a No Deal Exit from the EU must be passed into law before I agree to a General Election” In a parallel event featuring ” Question Time”, Thornberry was asked what she would do if the Labour party was to win an election and she went to Brussels to negotiate a deal. Thornberry reponded that she would return to London, with a great deal, which would be passed by the House of Commons and then the Labour party would seek to win an Election with a mandate to cancel BREXIT. The Question Time host was stopped in her tracks and could not believe what she had just heard, so she asked for clarification, and received the same response.
Clearly, the House of Commons comprises of Labour MPs who speak with forked tongues and want to no avoid a “no deal by cancelling BREXIT altogether. The Conservative Party has a large number of MPs who also speak with forked tongues who say they are working against a no deal but are actually working to stop BREXIT, whilst the SNP simply want to Derail BREXIT, or if BREXIT were to happen then to leave the Union and stay in the EU independently.
On Monday , 9th Septemeber 2019, the House Of Commons is expected to meet and the Labour Party are expecting the Queens ascent to the BILL which is written to a) Rule out a No Deal b) Instruct Boris Johnson to travel to Brussels with a letter asking the EU to ask the EU for an extension with a date and c) should the EU not accept the date the EU can give a date which the Prime Minister of the UK must accept. Not withstanding, written into the statute, the UK will leave the EU on the 31st October. Acccrodingly, any change to that date has to be by a) the agreement of all the member states of the EU b) the agreement of the House of Commons and the House of Lords c) the Queen.
The Bottom line being that the the PEOPLE were asked to vote in a referedum to either Leave or Remain in the EU. The PEOPLE voted to Leave the EU with no mention of a deal being required to leave the EU. The introduction of the word deal by Theresa May was the first step in providing those supporting REMAIN to have a lever to sow uncertainty into the process. This lever has been used for three years to simply stall the process, in the view of corrupt politicians that by stalling the process, the will of the PEOPLE can be turned over in favour of those who lost the referendum. The Current Prime Minister has vowed that in no circumstances will he ask the EU for another extension. The EU has indicated that for the EU to allow a further extension there must be a strong reason to do so , not simply to draw out the process in favour of a result not favoured by the PEOPLE. However, in the National Press, the BBC and the independent media, there is speculation that the Prime Minister will go to jail if he does not comply with the rushed through Bill which simply hands over the UK to the EU. There is also just cause to say that the Speaker of the House of Commons John Bercow has interfered with his biased interetations of the role of Speaker and allowed several actions to stop the BREXIT process and therefore stop the will of the people.
The UK is now in very dangerous times. The People are split in their view that a) it is in the interest of the UK to stay in the EU or b) it is in the intersts of the UK to leave the EU However, by a democratic vote the PEOPLE said it is in the intersts of the UK to leave the EU . That view was the collected view of the MPs, elected before they returned to Parliament They were trusted to carry out the separation of the UK from the EU but once ensconced in the House they then dropped any pretense of carrying out the PEOPLE’s will on the basis that either they knew better or that a no deal was to hazardous. Both these posiitons are not following the PEOPLEs instruction to LEAVE the EU.
On Monday 9th September the UK will enter into a very dark place. There may well be a constitutional crisis which may paralyse the country and for which the MPs have no expereince of handling. This possibility needs to be address before it occurs and for this, Governemnts of the day, have already put in place a system and documentation that should be followed.
Before writing further let me relate events in the House of Lords on Friday 6th September which were broadcasr live on the Parliament channel
One well know Lord had introduced an amendment to the bill which was bring rushed through the Lords in order to prevent an alleged catasrophe if a “No Deal” at the UK leaving date was still the position. The amendment being discussed was to change the wording of a particular clause. The Lord introducing the amendement gave very sound reasons why the clause should be changed but, the wisdom of the majority of the Lords, was that there would be no time to make the change as the House of Parliament would be proroged the following week. A second Lord had introduced a second ammendment and in explaining the reason for the change to the clause he described those who put forward the BIll as “remainers”. Another Lord objected to the use of the word “remainers” and wanted the Lord introducung the amemndment to use the words “No dealers”. To this, the Lord introducing the amendment replied “we all know that they are remainers”. Later, in the proceedings, what I would describe as a genuine working class Lord, who had been given the role of steering the bill through the House of Lords, vented a great deal of frustration due to the poor quality and lack of care in drafting the bill. After several harsh words about the contents and about the quality he said ” this is not our job to sort this out, Sent it back to the Commons. It is their mess” . He then went on to say a very clear statement, “It is BREXIT in name only, anyway”
What has happened is that the Commons has failed to do its duty, and Senior politicians are working for their own personal needs and outcomes rather than the PEOPLEs, who they have so badly let down
Clearly, there is anger and division in Parliament and the Country but these have been stoked, to white heat, by an elite that believes their views checkmate the views of the PEOPLE. Three years of deceit, lies, counter lies and corruption have led to Monday 9th September 2019 when the safetly valve may not be sufficient to stop a very significant crisis across the UK.
There may be very just cause, on Monday 9th September, to reflect on words in the COBR documentation and associated relevent documents as folows>
Severe disruption arising from conflict situations are fundementally different from those that arise from concensual situations, whilst definitions of a disaster mention that an event, as a catalyst, but focussed explicityly on the concomitant failure of the social system to deliver reasonable condiitons of life.
Prime Minister Johnson may be faced, early in the week, commencing 9th Septemebt 2019, with an unfolding scenario where there is a disaster emerging on several fronts. He could then call a National Disaster Emergecy meeting of COBR and put into action what ever recovery measures are necessary to ensure the safey of the People and the Country of the United Kingdom
This URL is the Emergency Procedure Document on which COBR actshttps://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/192425/CONOPs_incl_revised_chapter_24_Apr-13.pdf