Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings have plans to substantially change the British government, but they may be derailed by a credit crisis and global recession. From Alasdair Macleod at mises.org:
Boris and the Conservatives won the General Election with a very good majority. In truth, opposition parties stood little chance of success against the Tory strategists, who controlled the narrative despite a hostile media. At the centre of their slick operation was Dominic Cummings, who masterminded the Brexit leave vote, winning the referendum against all the betting in 2016. It was Cummings who arranged for the Tory Remainers to fall on their swords, which by removing the whip reduced the Tory ranks, making them appear vulnerable enough for the opposition parties to tear up the requirement for a supermajority and vote for a general election.
It was straight out of Sun Tzu’s playbook: “All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved.” The way the Remainers were removed was both brutal and public. On September 3, fifteen of them went for a meeting in Downing Street, obviously convinced, with Johnson only having a parliamentary majority of one, that they were in a very strong position to negotiate either for a second referendum or Brexit in name only. Dismissing them, Cummings was blunt to the point of rudeness: “I don’t know who any of you are.” And they left with nothing.
The OPCW’s Douma chemical attack lie continues to unravel. From Robert Fisk at independent.co.uk:
The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has an important role to play in ensuring people know the truth. Nothing should get in the way of that.
In the very early spring of this year, I gave a lecture to European military personnel interested in the Middle East. It was scarcely a year since Bashar al-Assad’s alleged use of chlorine gas against the civilian inhabitants of the Damascus suburb of Douma on 7 April 2018, in which 43 people were said to have been killed.
Few present had much doubt that the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which represents 193 member states around the world, would soon confirm in a final report that Assad was guilty of a war crime which had been condemned by Donald Trump, Emmanuel Macron and Theresa May.
But at the end of my talk, a young Nato officer who specialises in chemical weapons – he was not British – sought me out for a private conversation. “The OPCW are not going to admit all they know,” he said. “They’ve already censored their own documents.”
I could not extract any more from him. He smiled and walked away, leaving me to guess what he was talking about. If Nato had doubts about the OPCW, this was a very serious matter.
While the world’s attention is directed elsewhere, Julian Assange is dying at the hands of the British and US governments. From Mac Slavo at shtfplan.com:
A very “sedated” Julian Assange told a friend that he’s dying on Christmas Eve. Because of Assange’s condition during the phone call, concerns about his health have mounted. His suffering amounts to torture at the hands of government.
Assange’s “crime” was publishing the truth. He gathered information, none of which was fabricated or fake and published what the government is doing to other countries and the lengths that they’ll go to enslave the masses. For that “crime”, Assange is being tortured in what can be summed up as a Gulag. The powers that shouldn’t be don’t want someone who knows the truth to live to tell it, and that’s become painfully obvious.
American Gulag Death Of Jeffrey Epstein: Will Julian Assange Be Next?
The Deep State Is Assassinating Julian Assange
Britain’s military intelligence that deals with internal security, MI5, has been given de facto immunity for any crimes it might commit. From Finian Cunningham at strategic-culture.org:
In a landmark ruling last week, a panel of five senior British judges ruled that a secret government policy of granting immunity to its state security service was “legal”. Below is an interview with one of the human rights groups which challenged the murky policy demanding that it be banned.
First though, some background to the issue. British government policy holds implicitly that agents or informants operating for the state’s security service, MI5, are permitted to commit crimes without fear of prosecution if those crimes are committed in the line of duty to protect national security.
This is tantamount to the British state granting its agents and proxies a “license to kill”. The judges in the panel of the so-called Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) have formally recognized this hitherto secret government policy as “legal”. The panel voted by 3 to 2 in favor. The two dissenting judges expressed deep concern that the ruling was “opening the door to future abuses” of power by British state agents.
The UK leaving the EU, and Scotland and Northern Ireland leaving the UK exemplify the global devolution and dissolution trend. From Mark Nestmann at nestmann.com:
“The empire on which the sun never sets.”
That phrase was first attributed to a priest named Fray Francisco de Ugalde, uttered to King Charles I of Spain during the 16th century. It referred to the then-global extent of the Spanish Empire, which extended from the Philippines to most of what is now Mexico, Latin America, and South America.
In the 1560s, it might be the dead of night in Madrid, Spain’s capital. But in Manila or Mexico City, it would be broad daylight.
However, by the 18th century, the Spanish Empire was in serious decline. A new global contender for empire, Great Britain, had burst on the scene. Australia, Canada, Malaya, New Zealand, Singapore, the colonies comprising the original 13 American states, along with large chunks of India and Africa, all were once part of the British Empire. By the end of World War I, more than 450 million people lived under some measure of British control, amounting to about one-fifth of the world’s population.
At its largest extent, the British Empire looked like this:
You don’t ask the government you’re trying to secede from for permission to do so. From Craig Murray at craigmurray.org:
Yesterday the Scottish Government published “Scotland’s Right to Choose“, its long heralded paper on the path to a new Independence referendum. It is a document riven by a basic intellectual flaw. It sets out in detail, and with helpful annexes, that Scotland is a historic nation with the absolute and inalienable right of self-determination, and that sovereignty lies not in the Westminster parliament but with the Scottish people.
It then contradicts all of this truth by affirming, at length, in detail, and entirely without reservation, that Scotland can only hold a legitimate Independence referendum if the Westminster Parliament devolves the power to do so under Section 30.
Both propositions cannot be true. Scotland cannot be a nation with the right of self-determination, and at the same time require the permission of somebody else to exercise that self-determination.
What scares the piss out of Eurocrats is that Great Britain leaves the EU and flourishes, which would give a lot of other countries ideas. Secessionist movements are to be welcomed and embraced. From Alasdair Macleod at goldmoney.com:
Brexit will be done by the end of next month, when trade negotiations with the EU will begin. Importantly, Britain’s negotiating position has strengthened immeasurably, and the new government is not afraid to use it.
This Conservative government has a greater sense of political and economic direction than Britain has seen in a long time. Unbeknown to the public, not only will the establishment that obstructed Brexit be side-lined, but a slimmed-down post-Brexit cabinet through a network of special advisers lead by Dominic Cummings will revolutionise central government, reducing bureaucracy and refocusing resources on public service objectives instead of wasted on process.
But there is a dichotomy. While both the government and the new intake of MPs lean towards free markets, Cummings and Johnson will increase government intervention to secure their electoral advantage for the future, and to ensure a planned outcome in a world which in following decades will be dominated by new large Asian economies.
There are two wildcards which could trip the new government up. In the coming months there will almost certainly be a global credit and systemic crisis, which will have a profound impact on trade negotiations. And as far as we can tell, while this government is undoubtedly in favour of small government and free trade, there is no evidence it understands a cohesive theory of money and credit.