MENU
Editorial

Editorial: The EU lie

Brexit jigsaw

First, let me start by saying that Brexit was an entirely selfish attitude. Having said that, it is the duty of the British Government to do what is the will of the majority of the British People and to do what is best for Britain.

It is plain for all to see that Britain was drawn into the Economic Community (the Common Market) by the promise of the Heath Government that we would be entering a trading bloc with common benefit to all of the members without ‘any significat loss of sovereignty, we now know that to be a blatant lie.

Professor Alan Sked, a dominant expert in European Affairs and an historian wrote that Britain being drawn into the European Community was part of a major conspiracy by Harold McMillan and his protege, Edward Heath to form a World Government and that membership of the European Community was the first step towards this aim. (http://www.theunituk.org.uk/2015/12/10/how-a-secretive-elite-created-the-eu-to-build-a-world-government/) and they recruited Jeanne Monet, a French National, to work inside the British Government to achieve this aim.

Before the age of the internet, it was relatively easy for Edward Heath to use Government resources to convince Britain to join the original 9 Members of the EC, much like Cameron has done the same to use tax-payers money to try to convince us to do the same. In both cases, they have relied on the natural trust that many people have for their Government.

In the case of Edward Heath, it was relatively easy because the Electorate relied entirely upon what was written in the ‘Establishment’ newspapers and by using public money to completely overwhelm the funds available to those, such as Tony Benn, who told the truth to the British public.

It is completely ironic that the champions of Britain staying out of the EC were the Labour Party. So many recognised that joining the EC would eventually result in the sublimation of Nation States and though they advocated ‘workers rights’ would eventually be seen as a means to reduce the incomes and job security of the British working class. It has long been a standing joke that Labour supporters would vote for a donkey as long as it had a red rosette on its a**e but those times are rapidly changing. The Brexit vote has changed the thinking that the Labour Party supporters have a ‘tribal’ support for the Labour Party as they now realise that the ‘Parliamentary’ Labour Party are part of the Westminster Elite and care nothing for their grass roots supporters.

Despite the knowledge that the European economy is moribund and has been known for some years to most thinking people, there are still Left Wing (as opposed to Labour Party rank and file) activists that will blindly follow the Parliamentary Labour Party doctrine, none more noticeably in the public sector. Especially so of those working in the Educational sector including Primary and Higher education. It is no accident that Britain’s greatest traitors were Philby, Burgess and McClean who were all prominent in the higher echelons of Academia. Their rarified environment in academic circles allowed them to develop their mischeivous and totally erroneous impression of the World to the detriment of our interests.

It gives me no great pleasure in pointing out that the educational establishment has chosen to promote a feeling of efficacy about the EU among the young. It has chosen to portray the EU as a beneficial establishment in their formative years to accept the less attractive parts of the EU to being a price that we have to pay for membership. But, is that membership worthy of ignoring the rights and freedoms won by the British People over more than a millenium?

In Continental Europe, historically their Law has been subject to the whims of whatever potentate is in power whereas in Britain, our Law has developed from King Alfred in the 11th Century that established the beginnings of British Common Law. This was further exemplified by ‘Magna Carta’ in the 13th Century which gave the right for Free ‘Englishmen’ the right to be heard by his peers within a very short time (Habeus Corpus) and not be tried twice for the same crime (double jeopardy). On the other hand, French Law known as the ‘Code Napoleon’ which has been basically adopted in the proposed ‘Corpus Juris’ (Latin- the body of the Law) places the State above the rights of the individual. Under Corpus Juris, it is the right of the State to incarcerate a person without ‘due process’ merely on the suspicion of them being involved whilst the ‘crime’ (which may not even be a crime under British Law) is investigated without recourse to legal Counsel and that the Judge works with the prosecutor to investigate the ‘crime’ and that the Judge sits with the Jurors in their deliberations. The prosecution in a criminal trial can appeal a ‘not guilty’ verdict and there have been cases where this has been carried out and the unsuspecting accused dragged off the street and put in jail. (Download the ‘Democracy in a Federalised Europe’ ebook from this site for some authentic examples of this). It is indeed an affront to Habeus Corpus that the British Home Secretary in November 2014, saw fit to opt Britain back into the iniquitous European Arrest Warrant which places British Citizens into just that jeopardy, to be carted off to a foreign land purely on the authority of the ‘correct paperwork’ and without any proof needed whatsoever to be subject to the loss of Habeus Corpus.

Can any sane person wish to change the rights that they have enjoyed all their lives for such a regime. This is not hypothesis, it is fact. Despite Cameron’s pledge that we in Britain are free from the the threat of ‘Ever closer Union’ the EU is in a de facto state of being part of a Federalised Europe and only requires the definitve statement of such. The Lisbon Treaty has seen to that.

I have to ask the young whether the promise of EU funding (despite the fact that it is money paid in by the British tax-payer and the EU has no money of its own) for increased spending on Universities is of any use when highly, academically qualified graduates from the EU are allowed to come to Britain to usurp any future employment at cheaper rates than British graduates?

The fact that so many are in University is an example of the intlligence of the young. Why then do they not question those that are only concerned that their establishment Universities are only interest in their corporate continuance and is based only on their desire to remain remain as an entity rather than the what is beneficial to the Country as a whole?

My plea is that the young step back and use their obvious intelligence to realise what is being done to them by interested parties. It may be OK to adhere to short term advantage, but what of later, when you leave University? Will you be able to get work that is commensurate with your qualification? You may be lucky to do so but what of your peers that are being undercut by those coming into the Country. Idealism is a great thing but try to raise a family and get on in your chosen career when there is so much unnecessary competition.

Those that voted (or did not vote but wanted) to remain in the EU also have to consider that to vote ‘Remain’ was NOT to maintain the Status Quo. Despite Cameron’s claim that the agreement to remove the wording of ‘Ever Closer Union’ as applied to Britain was sufficient to keep Britain out of a federalised Europe is simply not true. The subject of declaring a Federalised Europe will be decided under ‘Qualified Majority Voting (QMV)’ and Britain will simply have no veto. In fact, it is well known that the EU had a raft of new legislation that would not be announced until AFTER THE referendum in case it should affect the result. In fact, the ‘reform negotiations’ by Cameron, though agreed by the Council of Ministers, would not become a legal entity until ratified by the European Parliament. This was immediately clarified upon Cameron’s return by Martin Schultz, the European President, that it would not come before the Parliament until AFTER the referendum and Schultz openly stated that they would not be approved. Cameron asked for basically nothiing and came back with even less. There is also a considerable amount of legislation that has come from the EU without any publicity simply because the public, if they were made aware of it, simply would not accept it. The ebook ‘Democracy in a Federalised Europe’ mentioned above has some of this information. It is slightly dated in as much as it has not been updated since January 2016 and consequently, does not include the latest information. However, what is included is entirely true and researched from authentic EU documents and other recognised institutions. Mentioned in the book, for example, is the proposed ‘consolidation of all existing treaties by the Spinelli Group of Arch-Federalists in the EU Parliament which expounds among other things that the unelected Commission, much reduced in size, becomes the ‘Government’ of Europe and that all EU Citizens can vote in and stand for any ‘National Parliament’ and that even those ‘National’ Parliaments will become ‘European’ Parliaments with no greater status than the devolved Parliaments in Cardiff, Holyrood and Stormont in the United Kingdom. This proposal has been placed before the EU Treaty Change Committee since early last year for perusal. The document has been reproduced in our ‘Archive’ section for all to see under the title of ‘Fundamentallaw.pdf. Those that wish to have the opportunity to read all of its 309 pages and it is quite a frightening document for all those that wish to live in a democratic State.

Let me add that the latest IMF predictions are that unless the EU drastically changes their policies, the ‘Euro’ and consequently the EU itself will soon cease to exist. We seriously need as a country to be outside of the EU before it happens. The Euro policy is not of our making and there is no possible consideration that we should be dragged down with it. After all, what is the point of unelected EU constantly making the wrong decisions that should condemn the UK to such an inept manner. Nobody wishes the pain and misery upon the People of Europe but unless they do change, and quickly, this will happen and had we not voted to leave the EU, it would happen to the United Kingdom too. It will still cause us considerable difficulty but so much less than if we remained in the EU.

The only real solution to the continuing EU crisis is for them to renounce the ‘European Project’ and make a relatively orderly withdrawal from the Euro Currency and return sovereignty to the member states so that they can trade amicably with each other as sovereign states. They have proved that they can work together in trade, now let them disband the bureaucracy and let people get on with their lives. But, of course, this will not happen. The EU will hang on until grim death and take most of Europe with it when it finally does fail. It is up to us to ensure that we are not dragged down with it by attempting to subvert the result of the EU Referendum.

Since the referendum, Britain has had trade inquiries from several Countries including Australia, New Zealand, south Korea, India and even China (who find the EU too difficult to work with). New Zealand has generously offered the services of their its trained negotiators. We have few of our own because the EU prevented us from making deals on our own behalf. Cecilia Malmström of Sweden is the EU Trade Commissioner and has the sole prerogative to conduct trade negotiations for the whole of the EU’s 28 Member Countries. She is trying to prevent Britain from negotiating our own trade deals until we leave the EU. In fact, Britain has every right to negotiate trade deals before we leave and have them signed on the same day as we finally secede from the EU. Manufacturing in Britain has been found to have increased by 6% and the woeful claim that the British Stock Market will fail has been proven entirely wrong. In fact, in just days since the referendum, the FTSE is close to what it was before the referendum. Yes, the Pound Sterling has temporarily suffered but is within the normal ‘fluctuation’ range of a traded currency and is rising once more. In any case, a weaker Pound is highly beneficial to exports which we need to bolster our own economy.

The EU referendum is a ‘done deal’. Whereas a normal referendum is only ‘advisory’, the fact that the EU referendum was enshrined in Law makes the result MANDATORY also, the result is NOT open to debate by (the biased) Parliament, but is solely the right of ‘Royal Prerogative’ and gives the Prime Minister the unilateral right to declare Brexit in exactly the same way that Britain was drawn into the EU in the first place without the need for Parliamentary debate or approval. Indeed, Gordon Brown did just that when in 2004, The EU attempted to bring in a ‘Constitution’ for the EU which was soundly rejected by National referenda in Holland and France. Instead, the EU simply redrafted the ‘Constitution’ as the Lisbon Treaty which was almost exactly identical to the Constitution in content and effect. Though openly ridiculed by Manuel Barroso, the EU President, that they were the same document, Gordon Brown insisted to the British People that they were not and simply, in December 2007 and together with David Milliband, unilaterally signed Britain up for the Lisbon Treaty.

If you consider that you do not like the result of the referendum, then the Law states that you have to live with it. If you want your Country (and subsequently yourself) to succeed, then you have to take the pragmatic view and support what has become the Status quo. The same goes for the politicians in Parliament who are doing their best to sabotage the result of the referendum but they cannot succeed. Some of them, despicably, have attempted to use the Courts as Arbiters but they risk losing the supremacy of the Country’s highest Court, Parliament’ should they hand over their prerogative to the unelected Judiciary and will probablyl lose in any case, but by then, it will be too late as they will have already forfeited their supremacy.

It is now up to all of us to pull together to allow Britain to prosper, but it will not unless we all forget our differences and get on with it.

6
Leave a Reply

Help put the World to rights and leave a Comment

  Subscribe  
Notify of
Christine Baker
Guest
Christine Baker

So having listened to Theresa May today, she promised that Brexit means Brexit and will take us out of the EU. She is talking in terms of two years. I was led to believe last year that if thGovernment repeal the European Communities Act of 1972, prior to activating Article 50, we should be out of the EU in weeks, not years. Is this correct?

Margaret Robinson
Guest
Margaret Robinson

Its also wrong and contradictory to the remainder of your letter to say that Brexit was a selfish act. A great many of Brexit supporters voted leave to save our kids and grandkids from this evil institution.

iananthonyharris
Guest
iananthonyharris

a certain amount of duplication here!

angela gardner
Guest
angela gardner

Thank you for this detailed report. It clarifies a few points and helps the less informed of us see a more balanced view!

MENU
Powered by: Wordpress
%d bloggers like this: