THE SLOG | An incorrigible Cognitive Dissident
NAILING THE NASTIES BEHIND THE MURDER OF BREXIT
EXPLOSIVE: Olly Robbins, Theresa May,
and the deposing of David Cameron
Date: November 21, 2018 | Author: John Ward
Building more evidence to support the contention that Britain has undergone a Silent Coup, The Slog examines the background to the Robbins/May relationship, their links to the security services, the blatantly sudden removal of David Cameron, and the recruitment of supine media owners to the process of lying about the realities of sabotaging Brexit.
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
The profoundly smug face to your left is that of Olly Robbins, the man with sole control over the UK/EU departure accord. You may not be aware of this, but Mr Robbins (apart from being the standard-issue Oxbridge moron) became a card-carrying EU federalist at the remarkably tender age of 19. At Oxford, Robbins was president of the Oxford Reform Club, a group promoting a federal European Union.
That was in 1995. Six years before the euro came into existence, this man was a passionate advocate of Europe’s nations ceding sovereignty to a centrally organised EU bloc.
And there is more:
In 2010, he became Deputy National Security Advisor responsible for Intelligence, Security and Resilience. In this role, Robbins negotiated with The Guardian on how to curtail its reporting of material leaked by Edward Snowden relating to the operations of the CIA and GCHQ.
In 2015, he began working directly with Theresa May as Home Secretary, when he became Second Permanent secretary there.
While fulfilling this role, he was ordered to leave a meeting of the Home Affairs Select Committee after he was deemed to have given “unsatisfactory” answers about budgets, and to instead provide answers outside the hearing later the same day, which he did not do.
In September 2017, Robbins moved from the Brexit department to become Prime Minister Theresa May’s personal Brexit advisor.
It’s important that everyone reading the above biopic fully understands the nature of this man. He is an EU federalist zealot, a security services censor, and an insolent élite functionary who readily misleads and ignores the democratic process.
The euphemisms ‘National Security Advisor’ and ‘Second Secretary’ are terms very familiar to anyone with even the most superficial knowledge of the intelligence services: Olly Robbins is a spook, a spy, and a man dedicated to the aims of a power beyond Britain.
His relationship with Theresa May goes back at least three years. He became May’s personal advisor on Brexit fourteen months ago.
Can anyone explain to me please why, following a referendum decision to leave the European Union, the man chosen for central control over the exit negotiations was a confirmed priest of the diametrically opposed political ideology?
——————————————–
A former Westminster source, meanwhile, has been encouraging me to dig into the how and why of David Cameron’s strange departure volte-face over two years ago.
On January 5th 2016, Dave said that, if he lost the Referendum vote, he would stay on to see the exit process through. This (my retired source suggests) was his big mistake in the eyes of the Unelected Few.
You will all I’m sure recall how Rabid Scameron then emerged from Number Ten on June 24th to say he had lost, the electorate’s decision must be respected, and he would, um, not be seeing it through after all.
There were no soundings held in the Parliamentary Party about his position. There was no ‘Cameron must go’ drive, there were no letters to the 1922 Committee. But Cameron resigned. Somehow, Mrs May then became the front-runner but – as she was clearly a Remainer – Angela Leadsom (an allegedly firm Leaver and darling of the Tory grassroots) emerged as a serious contender.
Here too, the numbers suggested that in a full Party member vote, Leadsom could carry it. A daylight media bombing raid then took place on Leadsom’s head. Exit Leadsom, enter Mother Theresa without any leadership contest as the, er, leader.
For the six years previous to this, Theresa May had been Home Secretary, liaising closely with the police (during its period of proven conspiracy with Newscorp to look the other way when required) the security services (a favourite source of blackmail for Tory Whips) and Interpol – via which she met regularly with Brussels Eurocrats.
To be honest with you, my now retired mole vastly overrates the level of contacts and energy I have these days. Ten years ago, there were half a dozen scribes in the Fourth Estate I could either have tapped about it – or given them the rabbit to chase. But he was right to remind me of the (shall we say?) extremely fortunate sequence of events that saw Cap’n Theresa of the Mayflower anchored in the port berth known as Number Ten.
Just as Christine LaGarde became the US Alt State’s “gal” at the IMF, so too did Mrs Mayormaynot become the UK élite’s plant in Downing Street. Allegedly.
Can anyone explain to me please how a dyed-in-the-wool Alt State whore and dedicated EU Remainer became Prime Minister alongside federalist zealot Olly Robbins….unless they enjoyed the conspiratorial support of MI5 and devious Whitehall dilution of the Will of the British People?
——————————————–
But it wasn’t enough to get the key political Executive and Brexit negotiating power into the hands of confirmed geopoliticists. The final piece in this jigsaw has been the recruitment of British media owners and opinion leaders.
A brief glance at today’s main papers and the BBCNews website establishes fairly quickly those news outlets now being told what to write by the State: BBCTass itself of course, the Express (still depicting Mayniac as the Iron Lady) and the Mail, Sun, Metro, Standard & Mirror (all mocking Rees-Mogg’s Dad’s Army in a display of synchonised spinning). The Times is – predictably – one foot in, one out, and the Torygraph remains alone in pointing out Spain’s ‘appalling hypocrisy’ in trying to use Scotland as a trade-off for Gibraltar “concessions” alongside the reality of the pressure on Mrs May to improve the surrender document about to be presented to Parliament.
The Dad’s Army ridicule displays all the limp imagination one has come to expect from the self-styled élites, ignoring as it does the simple maths of the House of Commons, and the growing econo-fiscal crisis in the EU itself. An attempt is being made – ‘voters rally behind May’ and ‘coup threat abates’ – to suggest that opposition to the deal is a storm in a teacup. This is simply not true.
It is hard to see how 42% of all Brits being opposed to her deal, with only 19% (still falling) in favour of it, represents a reduction in the pressure on the PM: even among Tory activists, only 28% support the deal. And the last poll available showed Labour opening up a 4% lead over the Tories.
But this is the reality of Britain’s Silent Coup. The Information Democracy has been suspended in favour of Alt State muscle. For now. But at some point there will be a general election. And when that happens, a lot of Conservative MPs will lose their seats thanks to two massive ideological policy blunders: selling out to Brussels, and denying the 2020/Waspi group their rightful pensions.
The vast majority of MPs are by nature venal and self-protective: being unemployable in a proper job, the last thing they want to lose is their employment. It is a myth that 270+ Conservative MPs remain solidly behind Chequers II, and it is ridiculous to suggest that a move to ditch Theresa May has failed before it has even been tested by the voting numbers on the forthcoming Bill itself.
It remains a strong possibility that there are elements within the hobgoblins surrounding the Prime Minister who would love an excuse to “restore order” if and when things turn violent over this blatant betrayal. Following that, one might as well declare UK liberal democracy dead.
But a growing part of me thinks there won’t be any violence: rather, there may well be a growing awareness among MPs from all Parties that what one might call Planned Incompetence by Whitehall will cause a steady drift back into the European Union.
In that scenario, May’s bill will fail, Article 50 time will run out, and at some point there will be a ‘No Deal Departure v Remain’ general election. That would produce an anarchic bunfight….after which, who knows? The future makes fools of us all.
——————————————–
Doubt my contention that Britain has experienced a silent coup if you wish. Accept it but care not a fig if you wish. I suggest merely that compelling evidence exists pointing to a concerted, unelected and ruthless effort by the various élites in the UK and elsewhere to thwart the desire of a sovereign nation’s People to be independent on the basis of a referendum decision.
I accuse the security services, Whitehall, the British media and neoliberal interests across the Globe of complicity in a plot to destroy citizen sovereignty. I don’t do so lightly, and I didn’t start doing so yesterday: since July 2016 I have predicted with near-clinical accuracy what would happen.
The only weapons left to us now are as follows: the blogosphere/open media site internet, and tactical voting by constituency when we are next granted the right to make our feelings count.
The first of these is on the rise, but under a clear gagging threat from the political class. The second is woefully unorganised, and is as ever weakened by ideological differences.
If you – yes, you – enjoy a good brain, a kind heart, a sound intelligence and a grounded distaste for all things to do with Big Process as the destroyer of free reform, then your hour has now come.
The survival of an independent Britain is the issue of the hour, not Brexit. It has nothing to do with jingoistic patriotism or insular racism from here on. It is quintessentially about the defeat of globalist fascism by those in favour of personal freedom and communitarian innovation: genuine entrepreneurial invention for the fulfilment of the greatest number of responsible citizens.
https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2018/11/21 ... d-cameron/
Top 40 Draft Brexit Deal "Horrors"
(courtesy of the Spectator):
- May says her deal means the UK leaves the EU next March. The Withdrawal Agreement makes a mockery of this. “All references to Member States and competent authorities of Member States…shall be read as including the United Kingdom.” (Art 6).
Not quite what most people understand by Brexit. It goes on to spell out that the UK will be in the EU but without any MEPs, a commissioner or ECJ judges. We are effectively a Member State, but we are excused – or, more accurately, excluded – from attending summits. (Article 7)
The European Court of Justice is decreed to be our highest court, governing the entire Agreement – Art. 4. stipulates that both citizens and resident companies can use it. Art 4.2 orders our courts to recognise this. “If the European Commission considers that the United Kingdom has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaties or under Part Four of this Agreement before the end of the transition period, the European Commission may, within 4 years after the end of the transition period, bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union”. (Art. 87)
The jurisdiction of the ECJ will last until eight years after the end of the transition period. (Article 158).
The UK will still be bound by any future changes to EU law in which it will have no say, not to mention having to comply with current law. (Article 6(2))
Any disputes under the Agreement will be decided by EU law only – one of the most dangerous provisions. (Article 168).
This cuts the UK off from International Law, something we’d never do with any foreign body. Arbitration will be governed by the existing procedural rules of the EU law – this is not arbitration as we would commonly understand it (i.e. between two independent parties). (Article 174)
“UNDERLINING that this Agreement is founded on an overall balance of benefits, rights and obligations for the Union and the United Kingdom” No, it should be based upon the binding legal obligations upon the EU contained within Article 50. It is wrong to suggest otherwise.
The tampon tax clause: We obey EU laws on VAT, with no chance of losing the tampon tax even if we agree a better deal in December 2020 because we hereby agree to obey other EU VAT rules for **five years** after the transition period. Current EU rules prohibit 0-rated VAT on products (like tampons) that did not have such exemptions before the country joined the EU.
Several problems with the EU’s definitions: “Union law” is too widely defined and “United Kingdom national” is defined by the Lisbon Treaty: we should given away our right to define our citizens. The “goods” and the term “services” we are promised the deal are not defined – or, rather, will be defined however the EU wishes them to be. Thus far, this a non-defined term so far. This agreement fails to define it.
The Mandelson Pension Clause: The UK must promise never to tax former EU officials based here – such as Peter Mandelson or Neil Kinnock – on their E.U. pensions, or tax any current Brussels bureaucrats on their salaries. The EU and its employees are to be immune to our tax laws. (Article 104)
Furthermore, the UK agrees not to prosecute EU employees who are, or who might be deemed in future, criminals (Art.101)
The GDPR clause. The General Data Protection Regulation – the EU’s stupidest law ever? – is to be bound into UK law (Articles 71 to 73). There had been an expectation in some quarters that the UK could get out of it.
The UK establishes a ‘Joint Committee’ with EU representatives to guarantee ‘the implementation and application of this Agreement’. This does not sound like a withdrawal agreement – if it was, why would it need to be subject to continued monitoring? (Article 164).
This Joint Committee will have subcommittees with jurisdiction over: (a) citizens’ rights; (b) “other separation provisions”; (c) Ireland/Northern Ireland; (d) Sovereign Base Areas in Cyprus; (e) Gibraltar; and (f) financial provisions. (Article 165)
The Lifetime clause: the agreement will last as long as the country’s youngest baby lives. “the persons covered by this Part shall enjoy the rights provided for in the relevant Titles of this Part for their lifetime”. (Article 39).
The UK is shut out of all EU networks and databases for security – yet no such provision exists to shut the EU out of ours. (Article 8 )
The UK will tied to EU foreign policy, “bound by the obligations stemming from the international agreements concluded by the Union” but unable to influence such decisions. (Article 124)
All EU citizens must be given permanent right of residence after five years – but what counts as residence? This will be decided by the EU, rather than UK rules. (Articles 15-16)
Britain is granted the power to send a civil servant to Brussels to watch them pass stupid laws which will hurt our economy. (Article 34)
The UK agrees to spend taxpayers’ money telling everyone how wonderful the agreement is. (Article 37)
Art 40 defines Goods. It seems to includes Services and Agriculture. We may come to discover that actually ‘goods’ means everything.
Articles 40-49 practically mandate the UK’s ongoing membership of the Customs Union in all but name.
The UK will be charged to receive the data/information we need in order to comply with EU law. (Article 50). The EU will continue to set rules for UK intellectual property law (Article 54 to 61). The UK will effectively be bound by a non-disclosure agreement swearing us to secrecy regarding any EU developments we have paid to be part. This is not mutual. The EU is not bound by such measures. (Article 74)
The UK is bound by EU rules on procurement rules – which effectively forbids us from seeking better deals elsewhere. (Articles 75 to 78 )
We give up all rights to any data the EU made with our money (Art. 103)
The EU decide capital projects (too broadly defined) the UK is liable for. (Art. 144)
The UK is bound by EU state aid laws until future agreement – even in the event of an agreement, this must wait four years to be valid. (Article 93 )
Similar advantages and immunities are extended to all former MEPs and to former EU official more generally. (Articles 106-116)
The UK is forbidden from revealing anything the EU told us or tells us about the finer points of deal and its operation. (Article 105).
Any powers the UK parliament might have had to mitigate EU law are officially removed. (Article 128)
The UK shall be liable for any “outstanding commitments” after 2022 (Article 142(2) expressly mentions pensions, which gives us an idea as to who probably negotiated this). The amount owed will be calculated by the EU. (Articles 140-142)
The UK will be liable for future EU lending. As anyone familiar with the EU’s financials knows, this is not good. (Article143)
The UK will remain liable for capital projects approved by the European Investment Bank. (Article 150).
The UK will remain a ‘party’ (i.e. cough up money) for the European Development Fund. (Articles 152-154)
And the EU continues to calculate how much money the UK should pay it. So thank goodness Brussels does not have any accountancy issues.
The UK will remain bound (i.e coughing up money) to the European Union Emergency Trust Fund – which deals with irregular migration (i.e. refugees) and displaced persons heading to Europe. (Article 155)
The agreement will be policed by ‘the Authority’ – a new UK-based body with ‘powers equivalent to those of the European Commission’. (Article 159)
The EU admits, in Art. 184, that it is in breach of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty which oblige it to “conclude an agreement” of the terms of UK leaving the EU. We must now, it seems, “negotiate expeditiously the agreements governing their future relationship.” And if the EU does not? We settle down to this Agreement.
And, of course, the UK will agree to pay £40bn to receive all of these ‘privileges’. (Article 138)
