Guys This is Fascinating another really important facet of the Nuance to what is happening with Nigel Farage? And is Brexit really something which an Oceana Aligned UK wants? or rather the UK with a properly functioning Parliamentary Democracy with a sovereign people?
Its All about Oligarchy.
Starter for 10 Federated Pound Stirling
Bonus 1. English Assembly
Bonus.2 Save Union Scotland.
Bonus 3, Introduce PR = permanent hung Parly. I.e needn’t worry about Jeremy Corbyn Govt @jeremycorbyn
When I was proposing the Grand cross-party Idea after the 2017 GE this was my prediction of how this would all get resolved, I still think it will play out this way. I am still agnostic on in or out as it makes no difference as long as the Neo-Cons have Trump by the short and curlies, which they seem to have.
Iron Law of Oligarchy.
Dominic Mckenzie Cummings (born 25 November 1971) is a British political advisor and strategist. He served as the Campaign Director of Vote Leave, the official campaign in favour of leaving the European Union for the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016. He is a former special adviser to Michael Gove. He was played by Benedict Cumberbatch in the 2019 drama Brexit: The Uncivil War.
In 2014 Prime Minister David Cameron criticised Cummings as a “career psychopath”
Watching SW1 these days reminds me of that scene in Citizen Kane when Boss Jim Gettys confronts Orson Welles (Kane):
Gettys: ‘You’re making a bigger fool of yourself than I thought you would Mr Kane… With anybody else I’d say what’s going to happen to you would be a lesson to you, only you’re gonna need more than one lesson — and you’re gonna get more than one lesson.’
Kane: … I’m gonna send you to Sing Sing Gettys, Siiinngg Siiiiinnnnngggggg…
These guys didn’t learn from the 2004 referendum before 2016 and even now very few seem to realise that a ‘second referendum’ would, given minimal competence from ‘Leave’, be a mega-repeat of 2004 in which ‘the EU’ would not even be the main issue.
I Smell Match FIxing more than Likely but definitely Ball Tampering.
The North East England devolution referendum was an all postal ballot referendum that took place on 4 November 2004 throughout North East England on whether or not to establish an elected assembly for the region. Devolution referendums in the regions of Northern England were initially proposed under provisions of the Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Act 2003. Initially, three referendums were planned, but only one took place. The votes concerned the question of devolving limited political powers from the UK Parliament to elected regional assemblies in North East England, North West England and Yorkshire and the Humber respectively. Each were initially planned to be held on 4 November 2004, but on 22 July 2004 the planned referendums in North West England and in Yorkshire and the Humber were postponed, due to concerns raised about the use of postal ballots, but the referendum in North East England was allowed to continue, particularly as it was assumed that the region held the most support for the proposed devolution.
On 4 November 2004, voters in the North East rejected the proposal, in an all-postal ballot, by 77.9% to 22.1%, on a turnout of 48%. Every council area in the region had a majority for “no”. The referendum was held in what was arguably Labour’s strongest region within the United Kingdom. The defeat marked the end of the Labour Government’s policy of devolution for England, and the other proposed referendums for the North West and for Yorkshire and the Humber were dropped indefinitely. This would be the last major devolution referendum to be held in any part of the United Kingdom under the Labour Government of 1997–2010.
The campaign against the proposed Assembly was successfully led by local businessman John Elliott, who argued that the institution would have no real powers and that it would be a “white elephant” and too centric to Newcastle upon Tyne.
This was the first major referendum to be held in any part of the United Kingdom which was conducted and overseen by the Electoral Commission after its establishment in 2000 under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act
Roman Historians shaped the perception of British history to the extent that from the Stone age through to The exit of the Romans in circa 450 AD, we are reduced to a bunch of savages. By the Roman account, we savage Britons are civilised by Rome and then left to rot in the Dark Ages. The modern-day Bede’s and the Anglo Saxon Chronicles of alternative media notwithstanding, our Current media may just as well have the same Latin Spin as the times of Romans in Britain. The real bowler though is not a bowler but a pitcher and the pitcher’s mound is in the District of Columbia and the Capitol of Washington. The game we play politically is most definitely no longer Cricket.So whos on First Base?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbJwwJ33TEI
Tacitus explains the policy of his father-in-law, Agricola, in bringing the comforts of Roman civilization to the barbarous British:
‘His object was to accustom them to a life of peace and quiet by the provision of amenities. He, therefore, gave official assistance to the building of temples, public squares and good houses. He educated the sons of the chiefs in the liberal arts and expressed a preference for British ability as compared to the trained skills of the Gauls. The result was that instead of loathing the Latin language they became eager to speak it effectively. In the same way, our national dress came into favour and the toga was everywhere to be seen. And so the population was gradually led into the demoralizing temptation of arcades, baths and sumptuous banquets. The unsuspecting Britons spoke of such novelties as ‘civilization’, when in fact they were only a feature of their enslavement.’
Tacitus Agricola chapter 21, translated by H. Mattingly, Penguin 1948, 1973
Read more: http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=288#ixzz42Ur1m0hA