If Brexit goes through, ordinary British people may get the idea that they, rather than the Deep State, should be deciding how they’re governed. By George Callaghan at theduran.com:
In 2016 the British people voted for independence. This was despite the despicable threats of the EU elite
Decades ago the British deep state hatched a nefarious plot against the British people. The elite wanted to foist European unity on an unwilling populace. The notion of the conceited Whitehall elite was that the peasants were stupid and the mandarins knew best. In late 1940s the United Kingdom politely declined offers to join the proposed European Coal and Steel Community. This was an embryonic European Economic Community. As Churchill said ‘we are with Europe but not of it.’ One Labour MP sagely said of joining the European project ‘the Durham miners won’t wear it.’ Those were the days when MPs quaintly cared about serving their constituents.
Harold Macmillan sought British accession to the European Economic Community. The French President de Gaulle rightly rejected the British application. De Gaulle was doing the British a favour. He correctly surmised that the United Kingdom would never be fulling committed to the EEC and that the bulk of the British people were adamantly opposed to such a venture. Charles de Gaulle was a visionary perhaps 70 years ahead of his time. He said that if the UK were admitted it would be forever sticking its oar in. These were prophetic words!
In the late 60s Harold Wilson’s Labour Government sought British membership of the EEC and was again rebuffed. In the early 1970s Edward Heath’s Conservative Government applied to the EEC for a third time. On this occasion Heath’s efforts were crowned with success. It only succeeded through subterfuge of the grossest character. Heath was warned by civil servants that the United Kingdom would have to sublimate itself to European sovereignty. Nevertheless Heath would not let the truth get in the way of his vaulting ambition. He released an official statement that ‘this involves no loss of essential national sovereignty’. Edward Heath did that in full knowledge of this being an outrageous falsehood. The public were assured that the idea there would one day be a single currency was a preposterous scare mongering tactic. In 2002 Heath was asked whether in the early 1970s he had envisaged the UK joining a single European currency. ‘Yes, of course’ he chortled.
People do not realize the information, including the content of phone calls and emails, that governments have about them, even high government officials who should know better. From Craig Murray at craigmurray.org.uk
Theresa May almost certainly sacked Gavin Williamson not just on the basis of a telephone billing record showing he had a phone call with a Telegraph journalist, but on the basis of a recording of the conversation itself. It astonishes me that still, after Snowden and his PRISM revelations, after Wikileaks Vault 7 releases, and after numerous other sources including my own humble contribution, people still manage to avoid the cognitive dissonance that goes with really understanding how much we are surveilled and listened to. Even Cabinet Ministers manage to pretend to themselves it is not happening.
The budget of the NSA, which does nothing else but communications intercept, is US $14.2 billion this year. Think about that enormous sum, devoted to just communications surveillance, and what it can achieve. The budget of the UK equivalent, GCHQ, is £1.2 billion, of which about 10% is paid by the NSA. Domestic surveillance in the UK has been vastly expanded and many taboos broken. But the bedrock of the system with regard to domestic intercepts is still that legal restrictions are dodged, as the USA’s NSA spies on UK citizens while the UK’s GCHQ spies on US citizens, and then the information is swapped. It was thus probably the NSA that harvested Williamson’s phone call, passing the details on. Given official US opposition to the UK employing Huawei technology, Williamson’s call would have been a “legitimate” NSA target.
A fortuitous, for the US government, string of legal technicalities may allow it to throw Julian Assange in jail. From Caitline Johnstone at medium.com:
Isn’t it interesting how an Ecuadorian “asylum conditions” technicality, a UK bail technicality, and a US whistleblowing technicality all just so happened to converge in a way that just so happens to look exactly the same as imprisoning a journalist for telling the truth?
Following the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, top UK officials all began simultaneously piping the following exact phrase into public consciousness: “No one is above the law.”
“This goes to show that in the United Kingdom, no one is above the law,” Prime Minister Theresa May told parliament after Assange’s arrest.
“Julian Assange is no hero and no one is above the law,” tweeted Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt.
“Nearly 7 years after entering the Ecuadorean Embassy, I can confirm Julian Assange is now in police custody and rightly facing justice in the UK. I would like to thank Ecuador for its cooperation and @metpoliceuk for its professionalism. No one is above the law,” tweeted Home Secretary Sajid Javid.
Is Angela Merkel pulling Theresa May’s strings on Brexit? From John Petley at politicalite.com:
With contributions from Dr Niall McCrae, John Ashworth, Ariane Loening and Lawyers for Britain.
Cast your mind back to summer last year. The Cabinet gathered at the Prime Minister’s country retreat of Chequers, on the sylvan Chiltern downs. There was very important business: Theresa May, flanked by senior civil servant Olly Robbins, presented the draft agreement for Britain’s departure from the EU. For the first time, ministers (including Brexit secretary David Davis and foreign secretary Boris Johnson) saw the proposed terms – and the extent to which May would abide by her pledge of ‘Brexit means Brexit’. The chief whip instructed that nobody could leave without consenting to the Withdrawal Agreement, unless they resigned – and must then find their way home without ministerial transport.
For Leavers in the Cabinet, it was a shocker. Scarcely anything appropriate for a renewed sovereign nation could be found in this document, which seemed an abject surrender to Messrs Barnier and Juncker. For Brexit voters, it was hard to believe that their government would consider such punitive clauses; their faith in Theresa May, until then buoyant, was shattered. And this document, we were told, was only the initial negotiating stance – it could get worse. In the morass since the referendum on 23rd June 2016, this has been the most significant subsequent event to date.
Are the rulers of Britain ready to tell British voters their votes mean nothing? From Mark Angelides at libertynation.com:
Dark rumblings in the British Isles portend the betrayal of the largest democratic exercise in the nation’s long history. Storm clouds gather in the form of elitist politicians seeking to tie the United Kingdom – once a proud, independent nation – to the increasingly fragmented European Union project. As the official deadline for leaving this European Superstate approaches, it seems that elected members of Parliament are determined to override the will of the British people in a capitulation that will mark the death knell of their freedom.
Will the U.K. forever be trapped in a political union with no hope of escape? Will the British Deplorables take to the streets to demand democracy be served? And is there any doubt remaining in the minds of the electorate that the government has its own agenda that must be served out as thin gruel in this ongoing saga?
Each week, we’ll be examining the machinations and plots that infect British politics.
The Dates, The Decisions
On March 29, Britain is set to leave the European Union. Under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, the U.K. gave its two-year notice of withdrawal, and that deadline is fast approaching. You might assume that Brexit is a done deal and that this nation of shopkeepers (as Napoleon described his eventual victors) should be negotiating new trade arrangements with the rest of the world. But, no, there are further machinations taking place.
Things like this defy all reason. They are based on the stupidest interpretation of how humans react to changing situations. It is like saying the only potential suppliers for the U.K. of certain fruits and vegetables are those from the European Union.
Because people don’t respond to incentives and there aren’t other suppliers ready to take up the slack if the Eurocrats keep their panties in a twist over this.
Parliamentary Deck Chairs
And yet, after another major session of Parliament in which Remainers were supposed to scuttle the entire process we see Brexit moving steadily towards its obvious conclusion.
The six amendments which were on the table yesterday ranged from virtue signaling about not wanting a No-Deal Brexit to parliament wresting control of the law-making process from the Government, over-turning nearly 40 years of tradition.
Four of them, all of the terrible ones, failed.
Because what finally happened is that these corrupt and venal MP’s finally ran up against the reality that they hold what power they have at the pleasure of the people they represent.
The “Remainers” have blown it in their efforts to stop the Brexit for which Britain voted. From Tom Luongo at tomluongo.me:
he more I follow the details of the Brexit story the more I sense complete panic from the camp that wants to Remain in the European Union.
Next week’s vote for Prime Minister Theresa May’s ‘Plan B’ deal will see a series of amendments voted on to tie the her hands between now and March 29th. These are making the headlines raising the hopes of Remainers and, most especially Wall St., that a “No-Deal’ Brexit will not occur.
The headlines are all Kabuki Theatre.
As I explained in an article for Strategic Culture Foundation the real story is the self-destructive behavior of Remainers. They are sacrificing all their political capital to stop a Brexit the people want (and voted for) with positions they can’t defend in specific terms.
The talking point that is repeated ad nauseum ad infinitum is ‘No-Deal’ would be horrible. It carries the implicit assumption that the people do not know what’s good for them.
But in reality a ‘No-Deal’ is horrible for the very people arguing against it. In politics, everyone is talking their book.
Criticism of the existing powers that be will get you moved into the deplorable “untouchable” caste. From James George Jatras at strategic-culture.org:
A survey of nations in what was once known quaintly as the Free World shows some of them engaged in what could best be described as a cold civil war.
Such a condition is inherently unstable. One possible future is one where the cold conflict becomes hot with unforeseeable consequences. Another is that one side successfully represses the other before violence reaches a certain threshold.
Now before we go any further, let’s make one thing clear. Whatever the country and its specific ills, we can be sure that Vladimir Putin is the culprit. According to Stephen Collinson of CNN(“Another good day for Putin as turmoil grips US and UK”):
‘The United States, meanwhile, remains locked in its longest-ever government shutdown, which is now entering its 26th day, is nowhere near ending and is the culmination of two years of whirling political chaos sparked by President Donald Trump.
‘It’s hard to believe that two such robust democracies, long seen by the rest of the world as beacons of stability, have dissolved into such bitter civic dysfunction and seem unmoored from their previous governing realities. [ … ]
‘The result is that Britain and the United States are all but ungovernable on the most important questions that confront both nations.
‘That’s music to Putin’s ears.
‘The Russian leader has made disrupting liberal democracies a core principle of his near two-decade rule, as he seeks to avenge the fall of the Soviet empire, which he experienced as a heartbroken KGB agent in East Germany.
Europe’s elite is finding it discomfiting that much of the peasantry can’t see the self-evident righteousness of their views and policies. From Raúl Ilargi Meijer at theautomaticearth.com:
There will be elections for the European Parliament on May 23-26 2019. They will likely change the face of Europe more than anything has done since the EU was founded. That is not some wild prediction. Many European countries have held elections since the last European elections in 2014, and just about all had outcomes that shook up domestic political ratios.
In most cases, countries went from traditional parties to newly founded ones. France erased the Socialists and center-right in 2017, and the final round of the presidential elections was between Marine Le Pen’s Front National and Emmanuel Macron’s brand-new En Marche. Macron won sort of by default, because France as a country would never have voted for Le Pen.
In Italy, M5S and Lega have taken over. In Germany, Merkel’s CDU/CSU coalition lost bigly though it remained the biggest party, but Angela lost her ‘socialist’ SPD partner which gave up so much it didn’t want to be in government anymore. In Spain, Mariano Rajoy’s center right lost enough to cede power to the Socialists who came up tops because they played a smart game, not because the Spanish wanted it to rule.
We don’t have to go through all 27/28 different countries to establish that there are almost tectonic shifts happening all over, away from traditional parties and towards whoever showed up without insanely extreme views. And if you think this move is now completed, you may want to think again.
The Anglo-American ‘Special Relationship’ has been known to exist as a close alliance between the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom since the days of FDR and Churchill forged during the Second World War. It is called special because of the unique historical and cultural bonds of kinship that unite the American and British peoples through a perceived shared heritage, common political/social/economic values and language. Together over the course of 72 years it has been the White House with the support of 10 Downing Street as its principal strategic leading ally in Europe.
The so-called ‘Special Relationship’ is an unprecedented coming together and sharing of two nation states intelligence and national security infrastructures and spy-intelligence organisations. The US-UK relationship is highly integrated at an intelligence, defence, foreign policy and security level. As well as being two highly developed, mature, sophisticated economies that do a tremendous amount of trade and investment with each other there are cultural affinities with a shared language and common ancestry.
At a political level the relationship between the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is an institution of the Anglo-American special relationship and the poster child of it. When it has been good and based on mutual admiration and mutual chemistry with a strong bond of friendship such as Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, Tony Blair with Bill Clinton and George W Bush, John F Kennedy and Harold Macmillan and FDR together with in war time arms Churchill it has served to create an aura of confidence and glamour as well as excitement in the conduct of Western global leadership under the American order. Low points included the evident cold body language and distaste Edward Heath had for Richard Nixon.
Unlike many websites, Straight Line Logic does not solicit donations. If you're going to lay out your hard-earned money, you should get something in exchange. If you like the site and want to support it, buy The Golden Pinnacle or The Gordian Knot, either as a book or download. The links are on the right-hand side of the page, in the Blogroll section. You'll be supporting the site, and getting a great book and hours of enjoyable reading.