29 March 2017 is a date which will go down in history as a turning point.
It marks the point at which stupidity as a prerequisite of being allowed to vote in the UK was officially sanctioned. It also marks the official sanctioning of hatred and xenophobia as a British trait suitable for campaigning purposes, since the only reason the aforementioned stupid people cast their votes the way they did last June was because of hatred and xenophobia directed at Europeans (and anyone else who doesn’t look British if you’re just too stupid to realise they might not be). Oh, and because of that bloody bus promising £350,000,000 a week to the NHS.
Of course, the Americans have taken a similar wrong turn with the election of a certain gentleman who – if you take into account some of the more artistically contrived stories the last few days – is either a complete a**hole or a misunderstood genius.
Occam’s Razor springs to mind here: if you come across as an a**hole to just about everyone who hears you every time you open your mouth, all things being equal, you probably are an a**hole. The same goes for Brexit, of course, because no matter how many times you repeat the mantra “everything will be all right”, the simple fact remains that the UK is leaving the largest economy in the world to strike out on its own as the fifth largest, and without having a clue how it is going to manage to retain that position.
So, 29 March 2017 will live in infamy as the precise point when the UK turned from metaphorically shooting itself in the foot, and aimed a little higher.
Another nail in the coffin of the UK as any sort of world power comes as it is announced that Theresa May will trigger Article 50 – the official notification of the UK’s intention to leave the EU – on Wednesday, 29 March 2017.
Remember: 29 March 2017.
It is a date which will live in infamy.
Incidentally, I saw a very appropriate comment posted by someone earlier today. They said:
The clocks go forward one hour on March 26th.
They go back 40 years on March 29th.
I wish I’d thought that one up.
And this one sums up pretty much everyone who voted to leave the EU:
why do remoaners always mention bananas when taking about the EU? I don’t mind if I never eat a banana again, I just want to get out of the EU, to be honest with you I don’t eat foreign food, it probably taste nice but I don’t trust it, Europe is ungrateful, we taught them English, gave them civilisation and taught them basic skills like how to use a knife and fork and use toilet paper.
Only thinking of himself, and so narrow-minded that he’ll only eat lard and gravel spread on BRITISH cardboard. The frightening thing is that he almost certainly believes that part about teaching Europeans to speak English and “civilising” them. And this clueless twat was allowed to vote last summer.
This article makes interesting reading. The heads of more than half of the top 500 companies in the UK say Brexit has already had a negative impact business, and two-thirds believe it will worsen over the next 12 months. The only people who have benefited so far are those who export, where the weaker pound has helped them – which makes me wonder what my arsehole of an ex-company’s directors said, since they don’t export very much, and yet were vocal supporters of Brexit prior to the referendum.
What really pisses me off is how every negative story ends with something along the lines of:
Despite ongoing uncertainty, the majority of business leaders – 96 percent – were confident their company can adapt to life outside the EU.
Idiots. It’s just like that asteroid that apparently slammed into earth 66 million years ago – life on Earth may have survived, but the dominant dinosaurs were wiped out. By comparison, managing to survive Brexit would not mean that Brexit is a good idea!
It’s funny, but all you have to do is look at a map of the world (above). Then consider what the world is like in the 21st Century.
We are not going to f***ing survive on our own – even less so if we move in with America just to try to alleviate the inevitable effects of Brexit. And it is unbelievable that anyone should believe otherwise, and especially not the leaders of large companies.
With Trump in the White House, another World War is looking increasingly likely. Trump has talked complete bollocks since the moment he was inaugurated, and yet Theresa May has already given him the key to her flat, which pretty much confirms whose side we’d have to be on once any war started. Europe, on the other hand, looks as if it would be more likely to tell Trump to shove it.
The USA might be the largest economic power in the world, but it is far from being the dominant military one. It is also shackled by being entrenched firmly in a particular moral foxhole, whereas those it might end up in conflict with have no such restrictions, and would happily adopt any moral position (and war tactic) that suited them in order to come out on top militarily. Furthermore, America is now managed by a complete asshole, and any war would be a disaster – both for America, and anyone else who had placed themselves in that same foxhole.
Theresa May is incapable of realising that Brexit is not as simple or as narrowly defined as David Cameron’s idiotic referendum question last June implied. The extremely narrow winning vote to leave the EU was wrong last year. It’s even more wrong now.
The UK’s size versus the rest of the world is currently the inverse of the size of its ego.
The UK should be a part of Europe. Geographically it is. But it should also be part of it both economically and politically.
On 30 September 1938, Neville Chamberlain (then, the British Prime Minister) returned from a meeting with Adolf Hitler. He is famously pictured holding a piece of paper aloft, and he can be seen on newsreel footage saying:
This morning I had another talk with the German Chancellor, Herr Hitler, and here is the paper which bears his name upon it as well as mine. Some of you, perhaps, have already heard what it contains but I would just like to read it to you: ‘ … We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again.
Later that day, outside Downing Street, he was quoted:
My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts. Go home and get a nice quiet sleep.
“Peace for our time” was previously uttered by Disraeli (another British PM) after a meeting with Germany in 1878. You’d need to be a very dumb (or a Brexit voter) to not know what happened next in both cases.
Cut to 79 years later, and Theresa May cosied up with Donald Trump last week on an official visit. Trump made some noises that would have been music to May’s ears – about Brexit being good, and stuff like that. After she left, and while she was travelling to meet President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey (a Muslim country, you understand, though you won’t if you’re a Brexiter), Trump announced his ban on Muslims entering the USA. Theresa May refused to comment for several days, until we were fed a snippet where she had pretty much been forced to say she “[did] not agree” with the policy.
I’m just saying.
Theresa May has spent the whole time since she became PM absolutely refusing to give details of her plans for Brexit, and refusing equally absolutely to involve parliament in the whole affair.
UK Courts previously ruled that Parliament must be involved. Theresa May appealed that decision, and after yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling upholding the original decision, she is now quoted as saying:
I recognise that there is an appetite in this House to see that plan set out in a White Paper. I can confirm to the House that our plan will be set out in a White Paper published in this House.
The words ‘cow’ and ‘two-faced’ spring instantly to mind. This is precisely the opposite of what she has been saying since last summer, and which she went to court to try to maintain.
Furthermore, when Theresa May came to power, the likelihood of Donald Trump becoming president of the USA was seen as being as likely as Hell freezing over. I do not think – for even a second – that Theresa May wanted Trump in the White House, and I am equally certain that behind closed doors she made the same comments that the rest of the world was making. If nothing else, we can be absolutely certain that, given the choice, she would not have wanted Trump.
But Hell froze over twice in 2016 – once with Brexit, and then with Trump – and will go down in history as a turning point, in much the same way that 1914 and 1939 were turning points. Therefore, it is sickening that May is now kissing up to Trump.
Every single thing Donald Trump said or did during his election campaign went against the morals of huge swathes of people. Indeed, the only people in America who he didn’t insult were the same sorts of people who voted to leave the EU in the UK (with the exception of women, who he insulted every time he opened his mouth). American Redneck males love him. And that’s all, folks.
Trump has more recently claimed that “water-boarding” – a type of torture used on people to make them confess to anything you want them to confess to, and which is similar to drowning them slowly – works. Torture is illegal under both US and International Law. He intends to build a wall between Mexico and the US, in a chilling echo of Berlin in 1961. He has already started moving on controversial oil pipelines through Native American territory – still more chilling echoes, this time of the White Man’s advance through the Americas in the 1700s and 1800s. Trump is also a climate change denier, and has recently ordered the American Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to delete all data relating to climate change from its website (he has previously claimed that climate change is a Chinese hoax).
Then we come to Trump’s comments relating to women (well, anyone who isn’t heterosexual and male, really). To be sure, some of his quips would be innocuous on their own. However, every single one of them takes on a whole new meaning when you consider them all together, and especially when you remember that they have come repeatedly from the mouth of a man who is now President of the USA.
Just as you don’t need to be a genius to know with absolute certainty what Theresa May thought of Trump as a prospective White House candidate, or her reaction when he won, you also don’t need to guess very hard to imagine Trump’s view of Theresa May – past or present.
Theresa May broadcasting that she wants to cosy up to Trump in spite of all of this is simply an example of two desperate people looking for support. May is trying to screw the UK, and Trump is trying to screw the US. Neither realises it – but the shocking thing is that the public as a whole doesn’t realise it, either. That’s why we have May and Brexit this side of the pond, and Trump and… well, you can’t really put him into words… on the other.
Brexit is wrong. Trump is wrong. And God help us all.
The government has lost its appeal against having to put the decision to trigger Article 50 to Parliament.
Let’s not forget:
- allowing morons to vote on EU membership in the first place was the worst decision any government has ever made in this country
- Britain is part of Europe
- It should also be a member of Europe
- the days of the “British” sneering at foreigners should have been forced into the dustbin of history and left there
If only someone would grow a backbone and reverse this idiotic “decision” to leave. The narrow ‘leave’ vote was based entirely on prejudice, hatred, and sheer ignorance by those who cast their votes that way.
I just did a quick check of the exchange of the GBP versus USD and noted that it is currently at a new 30-year low of $1.206. The previous low was in early October last year at around $1.211.
And still the retards who voted to leave the EU are convincing themselves that everything will be all right.
It won’t. And it’s going to get much worse.
Oh, and one more thing. If it wasn’t for Donald Trump and his influence on the strength of the USD, GBP would probably be much lower than this.
Oh dear! Just had a look now, and pre-trading movement shows it off the side of another cliff – it’s down at 1.200, probably as a result of Theresa May’s continued incompetence and determination to destroy the country.
WE must remain in the EU. When will they realise this, and decide to overrule the halfwits who voted to leave?
An update from Charles Goerens, following the previous communication on this:
Dear Madam or Sir,
Yesterday I decided together with Guy Verhofstadt to withdraw my amendment on Associate EU Citizenship. We realised that this has become a very important issue that cannot await treaty change – as was my intention when I first tabled my amendment – since this might take years.
Yesterday evening, the House of Commons decided by a majority of almost 400 to support Theresa May’s plan to trigger article 50 by the end of March 2017. Hence the prospect that Article 50 will be invoked has become very real indeed.
The European Parliament will define its position on the Brexit agreement through a resolution during spring 2017. This seems to be the best opportunity to give Brexit negotiator Guy Verhofstadt the possibility to enforce the Associate EU Citizenship.
I recognise this might come as a surprise to many of you, but please understand that the abovementioned procedure makes it much more likely for the Associate EU Citizenship to succeed than through an amendment.
I haven’t written much about Brexit recently – if I did, I’d be at my keyboard permanently. However, one particular story today has prompted me to start writing about it again.
The story concerns an aged halfwit called Derek Norman. This unholy specimen is 82 years old, and he is apparently a “staunch Brexiteer”. It seems that he is guilty of extensive acts of criminal damage around the country, since it is his self-appointed vocation in life to go around removing any road signs which have metric values on them. He proudly boasts to have removed 2,000 signs – that’s 2,000 examples of absolute, outright criminal behaviour.
Most people his age would content themselves with hiding behind the curtains ready to run out and claim ownership of a particular corner if a learner showed up there. But this man is special.
I wrote a while back – shortly after the Referendum – that it wouldn’t be long before some prat started trying to bring back Imperial measurements. I was proved right when Warwick Cairns formed some jackass movement for precisely that purpose. Senior Citizen Norman has taken things a step further by committing acts of vandalism to effect the changes himself. It is also worth pointing out that he’s a UKIP activist, which means that his thinking is far from normal. As a small digression, it speaks volumes about his likely opinion and attitude regarding other Brexit propaganda, such as towards people whose lineage isn’t confined to this sceptr’d isle. You don’t join UKIP with the Party line anymore than someone in the American Deep South joins the Ku Klux Clan in order to promote racial tolerance.
Norman said: “We have what we call spotters all over the country who tell us about the signs.
Accurately translated, what he means is there are plenty of like-minded twats all over the place who look up to him and egg him on to commit further criminal acts.
He should be locked up until such time as he can be handed over to the British Natural History Museum and stored in a back room with all the other fossils.
I mentioned this a few days ago. The subject of associate EU citizenship for the very slight minority of us who weren’t so racially motivated (or so thick) as to vote to leave the EU.
Here is what Charles Goerens has to say on the matter in a letter sent out to those who have supported his proposals:
Dear Madam or Sir,
Let me first thank you for your email expressing your support for my amendment 882 asking for “associate EU citizenship” for citizens whose country withdrew from the European Union.
I am aware that you are numerous to worry about your future and I was actually overwhelmed by your spontaneous and many times very personal reactions that you shared with me in your emails.
Please accept my apologies for not being able to answer each and every email personally, but I want to let you know that me and my staff looked at every single email that was sent to me.
I would like to take the opportunity to explain the idea behind my amendment, which hopefully also gives an answer to the concerns that some of you have raised.
I tabled my amendment to the own-initiative draft report by Guy Verhofstadt entitled “Possible evolutions of and adjustments to the current institutional set-up of the European Union”, which aims at looking at the possibilities to improve the functioning of the European Union by a change of the Treaties. I have to acknowledge that these proposals are set-down in a so-called “own-initiative” report, and thus carry no legal weight at this stage. However, with the Brexit negotiations coming to a term, and given that the withdrawal of the United Kingdom, as one of the larger Member States, and as the largest non-euro-area member, affects the strength and the institutional balance of the Union, the European Union will have to revise its Treaties. This is where Mr. Verhofstadt’s report could serve as a basis for the revision.
In fact, in his report, Mr. Verhofstadt raises the idea of a type of “associate status”, which could be proposed “to those states in the periphery that only want to participate on the sideline, i.e. in some specific Union policies”, underlining that “this status should be accompanied by obligations corresponding to the associated rights”. This new type of “associate status” could thus be one of the possible outcomes of the negotiations about the future relationship between the EU and the UK. My proposed amendment could hence go hand in hand with Mr. Verhofstadt’s proposal and could be seen as a solution satisfying all UK citizens who wish to maintain a close relationship with the EU, whether they live in or outside the UK territory.
Of course, some might argue that the “associate EU citizenship” would grant UK citizens a privilege that EU citizens, who might have to quit their jobs in the UK, do not enjoy. Yet, we have considered this issue and therefore propose that the associate citizens pay an annual membership fee directly into the EU budget as an own resource of the Union, following the reciprocal principle of ‘no taxation without representation’.
Citizens, who, against their will, are being stripped of their European identity, are likely to tumble into situations, which may entail personal tragedies. Some of those concerned might even never have lived in the UK and yet be forced to move to a country that they might only know through visiting their relatives or spending their holidays. Imagine a UK national living abroad for decades but never staying long enough in one country to be eligible for citizenship in this host country. This is actually the case for some, as I have witnessed through your emails. An EU that praises mobility and thus makes it possible for all its citizens to travel throughout the continent without borders should become active when this great achievement is at stake.
Finally yet importantly, I want to point out that I am perfectly aware that all of the above is far easier said than done.
Currently the Treaties specify that European citizenship stems directly from the national citizenship of its Member States. However, it also specifies that citizenship of the Union is additional to and does not replace national citizenship. Creating an individual citizenship to the Union would thus require treaty change, not in the least to specify its rights and duties, but it would not infringe upon national citizenship.
My proposal is first of all a political impulse to push the boundaries, on different levels. In fact, at a first stage, the coming six weeks are going to be decisive when the Committee for Constitutional Affairs is going to vote on the report and my amendment on 21 November and later, in December, when Parliament as a whole will be called to pronounce its opinion at plenary level. In the meantime, I will have to gather the required majority in this house to pass this amendment by convincing my colleagues of the necessity to make a statement.
At a later stage, when it comes to the negotiations on the future relationship between the EU and the UK, my idea could also serve as a means to convince the UK government to accept freedom of movement of people along with the other three freedoms, which the European Single Market seeks to guarantee.
In all the cases mentioned above and in particular in the eventual case of treaty change, political determination will be of utmost importance and I will definitely not content myself by truckling to those who consider my proposal unfeasible. I am determined to bring this idea as far as I possibly can on the European level. Indeed, history proves me right when we look at the achievements, which European citizens enjoy nowadays. Who thought, for instance, that one day, EU citizenship would give every EU citizen the right to vote for and stand as a candidate in municipal and European Parliament elections in whichever EU country the citizen resides, under the same conditions as nationals. This is reality today and yes, it needed a tremendous effort and, above all, the political determination to get this far. Why not exert ourselves for this cause and make the “associate EU citizenship” happen?
P.S. What can YOU do? A great number of UK MEPs have already expressed their support for the “associate EU citizenship”. Make sure that they are going to persuade their colleagues in their respective political groups to back this proposal, too.
Please note that similar initiatives are currently under way. Feel free to support those, too.