Gina Miller 2
European Union

Gina Miller: “Brexit is about emotion. It is like a religion.” No, Ms Miller, that’s Europhilia

Gina Miller, the lawyer leading the legal fight against the Government’s use of its prerogative powers to trigger Article 50 and thereby commence the process of leaving the EU, was asked if she thinks the Supreme Court will rule in her favour, that is, uphold the decision of the High Court. She responded:

Yes. To me, it was always clear that it is such a black and white letter of the law case: Parliament is sovereign. The drama around it became all about politics, not about the case. When I was vilified by the press and politicians, I always asked: Have you actually read my case? If you knew what it was about, you would be backing it. But the drama has been extraordinary. Everything about Brexit is about emotion. It is like a religion. People’s rationality seems to have been thrown out of the window.

Note the juxtaposition of Brexit with emotion and irrationality, which are, she avers, attributes of religion. In her impeccable, rational, legal, enlightened and sophisticated secular mind, Brexit is the pursuit of the brainless; the delirium of simpletons; the burning passion of zealots, bigots and extremists against the rule of law and the world of rights. Anyone who believes that the people are sovereign is living in la la land.

It is actually people’s dogmatic adherence to the immutable doctrine of ‘ever closer union’ which is more cultic, and Europhilia which is more akin to blind faith. Charles Moore observed back in 2007 that the inexorable drive to ever closer union, by which the rejected Constitution for Europe morphed into the Lisbon Treaty, was so secretive and anti-democratic that it was antithetical to the very system of law which Gina Miller is so eager to uphold. He wrote:

A process that involves the very basis of law – the inclusion of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the treaty would enable the European Court of Justice to force Parliament to comply absolutely with its rulings – is being conducted like a papal conclave. The body elected to make our laws knows almost nothing about it.

With this observation he echoed Labour’s Peter Shore, the late Lord Shore of Stepney, who observed in his book Separate Ways that the EU Commission behaves “like a priestly caste – similar to what it must have been in pre-Reformation days, when the Bible was in Latin, not English; the Pope, his cardinals and bishops decided the content of canon law and the message came down to the laymen, only when the Latin text was translated into the vernacular by the dutiful parish priest”.

It is all so obscure, convoluted, unknown and incomprehensible. The ubiquity of bureaucrats and proliferation of bureaucracy ensures opacity and obfuscation. The EU has a soul, we are told, and Angela Merkel’s priestly vocation is to find it and save it: “We must give Europe a soul. We have to find the soul of Europe,” she said. It is a messianic mission for which the EU Commission entertains ecumenical representatives who dispense millions of euros to religious organisations in quasi-spiritual pursuits, whose objective is to persuade the ignorant and recalcitrant laity that the EU is divinely inspired, a work of God, without which the people will perish. Even now, they work to frustrate and overturn Brexit, because they know what’s best.

Here, Ms Miller, is your emotion; your delerium. Here is the fanatical religious fervour of the Euro-beast, against which the British rule of law now contends, and the British people’s rationality is being brought to bear. Let Parliament determine whether or when to trigger Article 50. It is no big deal, for they have already determined to do so. Man plans, God laughs.

  • CliveM

    Well the court has ruled in her favour.

  • len

    The EU is embedded in the body politic of the UK like a ‘tick’ it will take some care and time and effort to remove it successfully.But it will be removed.

  • dannybhoy

    “It is actually people’s dogmatic adherence to the immutable doctrine of ‘ever closer union’ which is more cultic, and Europhilia which is more akin to blind faith.”
    It is in the nature of the proud and rebellious who say “there is no God,” to seek an earthly unity.
    “Now the whole earth had one language and the same words. 2 And as people migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. 3 And they said to one another, “Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly.” And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth.”
    Genesis 11.

  • len

    Those behind the creation of the EU knew full well the people woudn`t swallow the concept whole.So they feed it to us in small pieces until we were almost full.

  • Dreadnaught

    The responsibility for this shilly-shallying absorbing so much of txpayers money and patients rests fairly and squarely on the sloping shoulders of David Cameron and his cut and run cowardly behaviour. If an Act of Parliament took us in, its only legal if an Act is passed that triggers taking us out. This should have been reiterated when he glibly gave the promise of a Referendum on the issue of EU membership.
    We can not claim that Parliament is sovereign then deny that principle in circumvention of the Parliamentary process. That fact should have been the Government’s first point of reference from the outset.
    It smacks of a lack of awareness of the Rule of Law that is apparently lacking or something more sinister, in the ranks of the Civil Service that is supposed to advise governments.

    • dannybhoy

      I think by and large the intelligentsia and the Establishment wanted us to stay in the EU and that is why they are fighting tooth and nail to drag us back in.
      But it’s too late.

      • Dreadnaught

        Of course. They don’t live in the same world of the great porportion of the population who have lost their jobs, future and hope of being held as being of any value other than their vote once every five years. While the EU is busy making laws and defining cultural change without referencing the views of the people they are in effect ‘govening’ and the MPs and public servants just rubber-stamping those directions.
        How more cushy can it get!

        • CliveM

          When you inhabit a bubble, it becomes all important, especially when that bubble provides you with so much. Unfortunately you also tend to forget that there is a world outside that isn’t benefiting.

          • Dreadnaught

            Quite so.

    • 1642again

      Contributors on the BBC R5 discussion this morning, whether Remain or Leave, were roundly rubbishing the Referendum Act’s drafting and Cameron’s lack of preparation for a ‘No’ vote. Rarely has a political legacy been so profoundly shredded so quickly, but the signs are that Obama’s will tank even faster. Both were great, glib, hollow vessels of self-importance.

      • Pubcrawler

        Barack Ozymandias. You’d need a heart of stone, etc.

        • 1642again

          Alas I don’t. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah-breathe-hahahahahahahahhaha!

  • preacher

    The ‘ remoaners ‘ will just keep on until the article 50 trigger is pulled. They are blind, deaf & dumb in their own selfish sycophantic world. they are content to continue the pessimistic threats of doom & gloom in a vain attempt to scuttle the will of the populace, ignoring the green shoots of a new era dawning.
    Driven by fear that has escalated to panic as the day approaches, their cries grow louder as time runs out. We have been in the E,U prison for 40 years, we have paid our dues & done our time, now we have earned our freedom & the right to leave, the people have voted ! you have lost ! stop trying to make the majority of the U.K look like ignorant children or idiots.
    Pull the trigger A.S.A.P Prime Minister & stop this attempted insurrection.

    • Little Black Censored

      Pulling the trigger isn’t going to stop them.

      • preacher

        No brother, but it would certainly slow them down.

  • Busy Mum

    If Gina Miller states that ‘Parliament is sovereign’ and wishes it to remain so, (presumably she does, else why the poppy?) why is she against Brexit? She, and her case, would have more credibility if she wasn’t pro-EU.

    • Pubcrawler

      There is also the George Soros factor.

  • PessimisticPurple

    There IS a rational case for Brexit. The problem is, that was not the case that carried the referendum. What carried it was the good old English “stick it to Johnny Foreigner at whatever the cost” mentality, and it’s going to cost England huge.

    I have previously stated that the United Kingdom is, in reality, Greater England. The average English person might be able to give you a strict, precise definition of the distinction between the UK, England and Britain, but he doesn’t believe a word of it, not in his heart. The Island is ENGLAND. The UK is ENGLAND. Scots, Welsh? Quaint English people, like Yorkshire men, or the Cornish. The Northern Irish? Well, OK, the Republic can have them (Pleeeeeeze please PLEASE take them, Dublin). The point is that the English have no respect. To them, there are only two nations in the world, ourselves and everybody else, and the Scots and the Welsh come under the heading of “Ourselves”, whether they like it or not. Why? Because they’re on OUR island.

    It’s that mentality which has driven Brexit, not the completely rational case which can be made for exiting the EU. If THAT case had been made, the English might have looked at the buzz saw they’re walking into and perhaps not been so anxious for hard Brexit and its hard Borders. Yes, those borders will keep Johnny Foreigner out, but they’ll also keep the English IN, which is just dandy with the rest of us, but what does that mean for you?

    Firstly, the idea that the world is lining up to do trade deals with you. Laughable. Right now, you are party to fifty-three trade deals with non-EU countries around the world, and every single one of them was negotiated with the EU as a body, which means that every single one of them falls (as regards the UK) the morning after Brexit. You won’t be starting at zero, you’ll be starting at minus fifty-three. And it gets worse. We hear much talk about manfully falling back on WTO rules, but the UK joined the WTO under EU auspices and its schedules – ie, its terms of membership – is intimately bundled with that body’s membership. It’s complicated, but the point is that the UK’s membership conditions can be stymied by just about any other member, from Vanuatu to the EU itself, which is also a member.

    So how are you going to compensate for all this? What are you going to do in the ten or fifteen years it will take to negotiate new trade agreements, assuming you can even get decent terms, that is? How is your country going to break even when it’s a middling small, post-industrial historical theme park on the rain-swept edge of Europe? Simply put, you’re going to get gutted like a fish by the Tories. All they things that make your lives livable, all the benefits built up for you by generations of struggle, from old age pensions to the National Health Service are going to be filleted. They’re going to turn the UK into the Hong Kong of Europe and you lot are going back to the Edwardian.

    And all because you don’t like Johnny Foreigner.

    • len

      In a nutshell…rubbish.This is about democracy and sovereignty.

    • 1642again

      It’s attitudes like yours that helped drive Brexit and Trump to victory, and will put further wind in the sails of the anti-globalist movements on the Continent. All the received ‘globalist’ wisdom is being torn apart and Trump is already ripping it up within a week, and acting as a spur to the flank of the Tories.

      We are a Sovereign nation again and can do what we like and choose freely to live with the consequences, but once again it is the British who first of any nation who have said “no” to a swelling tyranny, swiftly followed by our transatlantic cousins. Others may follow, but as these two great nations are renewed following their decisions, the world will need to take heed.

      People like you, consumed by Anglophobia, simply don’t understand the British people. neither did our own internationalist establishment, but they’re having to learn fast now. Eire faces a stark choice, if reason prevails they will follow the UK out and avoid being crushed by far greater economic and political forces.

      It was long past time for the British people to cast off the heavy sleep-inducing duvet liberal globalism and stride once more into the cool fresh outside air where we are always at our best.

      • David

        Well put !

      • bluedog

        ‘Eire faces a stark choice, if reason prevails they will follow the UK out and avoid being crushed by far greater economic and political forces.’

        Indeed. A unique opportunity presents in which the Irish Question can be settled to the benefit and satisfaction of all parties.

      • David Harkness

        1642, I think there is a good chance that the ‘gravitational pull’ of a non Eu uk may force Ireland to leave the eu.

    • William Lewis

      It must feel a lot better now that you have finally managed to get your anti English prejudices off your chest. And your purple prose was indeed pessimistic. Well done.

      • CliveM

        Was it? I fell asleep half way through.

        • William Lewis

          Then you made better use of your time, Clive.

      • PessimisticPurple

        It’s only prejudice if it’s not accurate. You don’t like foreigners.

        • William Lewis

          Both of those sentences are false.

        • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

          Linus Redux

    • Busy Mum

      ‘My voice is even and low, my eyes are level and straight’….but how dare you a) think you know better than I do why I voted the way I did and b) accuse the least nationalistic people in the world of xenophobia? The English led the world in subsuming national/ethnic identities into an ethos which transcends mere tribal identities and they have been quite content to be British above all else. More than can be said for any of the other tribes inhabiting this island.

      • Jon of GSG

        Hear, hear!

    • Coniston

      Slightly right in one respect – many English people do confuse England with Britain. This is because of historical and geographical ignorance. The British Isles (politically now the UK and the Irish Republic) is made up principally of four peoples – English, Irish, Scots and Welsh. Because the English, numerically, comprise the vast majority of the people of these Isles, it is only natural that the others are much more aware than the English of the differences between themselves and the English. Many English are now also increasingly aware of the differences between themselves and the London elite.
      There is no obvious reason why the four nations of the UK (English, Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish) cannot co-exist as proud members of a unified country – the UK – though this will require a degree of local autonomy, which should also apply to the English regions.
      I have been aware of these things from a young age – I always looked at maps & knew the names and location of the English, Welsh and Scottish counties (and about half the Irish), and ticked them off when travelling by road with my parents. I am mainly English, but have some Welsh and Irish ancestors.
      How many people (English, Scots or Welsh) know which counties of the ancient province of Ulster are not in N. Ireland?

      • David Harkness

        Monaghan, donegal and one other, but ‘d have to look it up to be certain.

        • IrishNeanderthal

          The other is Cavan.

          Located therein is the town of Ballyjamesduff, where they hold an annual Pork Festival, featuring among other things the Olympigs, a series of athletic events for pork farmers.

          One of these is the ten-legged race, where the farmer runs tied between two pigs.

          • LOL! Had to up-tick for this one. There was no choice.

    • Hi

      You’re not a ghastly cyber Nat?

      The juxtaposition of England and the UK isn’t just an English confusion. It’s common for Americans , Europe and others to call the UK “England” as well. Not surprising given England is the largest component of the UK , population and wealth wise .

      In terms of crowing about trade , this works both ways. For example, the republic of Ireland Brexit is a catastrophe , because Britain is the republic’s biggest customer of agricultural goods. There was an article in the Guardian detailing this and several Irish companies are suffering greatly. So it is important to realise that it is in everyone’s interest to settle up in an amicable fashion. Or everyone will loose out .

      Britain doles out 2% of its national wealth to the rest of the world in aid. No trade, no aid. If the EU does wish to be funny then they being a vast exporter to the UK will loose out. If it gets to hardball Britain can make itself into a tax haven by abolishing corporation tax and income tax, undercutting the Irish tax haven and incidentally the Dutch one as well.

    • Inspector General

      Look old chap, Brexit is inevitable. Parliament knows that to deny it will mean that come next General Election, their cosy two party setup will be smashed up just as much as the Labour Party was struck down in Scotland. Nobody foresaw that coming, but it doesn’t take too much brain to work out that UKIP will be the massive winner next time round.

      The referendum stalled UKIP, as it was meant to do. But UKIP is very much around – and so are the ‘backwoods voters’ who turned up in such great numbers for the referendum to take us out, many of whom had rarely if ever voted before. With that force on board, how can UKIP not sweep the board!

    • CliveM

      You’re not the first Scottish RC and nationalist on this site. He was a chippy individual as well. Interesting that you criticise the English for being anti foreigner, whilst indulging in a little stereotyping yourself.

    • ChaucerChronicle

      1. No State is compelled to ratify a trade deal with another to trade.
      2. You Europhiles still can’t see President Trump neutering Germany.

      You accuse us of ‘And all because you don’t like Johnny Foreigner.’

      The truth is that it is Germany that treats foreign (southern EU) workers as ‘slave labour’. They are paid less relative to German workers and receive less in benefits. That’s negative discrimination and a repudiation of the Discrimination Directives of the EU.

      Anglo-American economists have been baffled by the phenomenon called the ‘Productivity Gap’ between German and Anglo-American labour.

      Now we know: 1930s-style old fashioned German racial superiority.

      • Richard Hill

        Not mentioned is the different education systems. Swiss-German young people enter the workforce much earlier. The US concept of k-12 education is to blame.

  • 1642again

    Ultimately,whether a state/country has a soul (itself disputable) is only to be determined by the willingness or otherwise of people to fight and die for it over generations. Millions fought and died for the UK, even though they disagreed with one another about its governance, but how many are willing to fight and die for the EU, even more so if it means fighting against a country that wants nothing to do with the EU? Merkel and others seem willing to sacrifice others to achieve their EU soul, but their own lives and those of their close family? That is still to be seen.

  • IanCad

    The Supreme court has spoken. Bare-knuckle time again. Tory traitors – Simon Burns and many others – will have another crack at rescinding our new found sovereignty. Maybe we should seek to fire up the few Labour patriots left standing.

    Time was, as HG’s reference to Peter Shore noted, when men such as he were the most passionate and articulate voices in the cause of independence.

    Over thirty years old now, but his speech in 1975 should be linked to far and wide:

    • Busy Mum

      Ditto Hugh Gaitskell…..

  • CliveM

    There is coming up two bye-elections in seats currently held by Labour.

    There has been much speculation about how the PLP will vote on Article 50. Although why the media has been asking Corbyn I have no idea!

    Thing is, with UKIP breathing down Labours neck in one and the Tories rumoured ahead in the other, I wonder him many Labour MP’s in seats that voted Leave, will vote against Article 50 and risk triggering a General Election?

    Not many I suspect.

    • CliveM

      Of course if UKIP were to win, how much would the message be reinforced? Ignore the vote and your out.

    • len

      Surely self preservation would prevent Labour from kicking up too much of a fuss over triggering article 50. A General Election would probably finish Labour.

      • CliveM

        I think the problem Labour has , is that it is so disjointed, with so many multiple squabbling factions, I think talking of Labour having a position on anything, is meaningless. Whatever the whips say the MP’s will decide For themselves.

        At the moment it may even be impossible to talk of a ‘Labour party’ such is its current state.

        I think enough will vote for self preservation.

    • Dominic Stockford

      Owen Smith has declared, via the Guardian, that he will oppose Article 50.

      • CliveM

        And some will, but I suspect not enough.

        I could be wrong however!

        • I wouldn’t trust most of them to vote for Article 50.

          • CliveM

            Trust? I wouldn’t trust them to spell their names correctly!

            But this is about self interest and self preservation.

  • David

    Just look what the elitist, globalist euro-fanatics have attempted to do, over four decades !
    They have worked stealthily in the shadows of undemocratic institutions, designed to ensnare and enslave us.

    Moreover this squalid attempt, seeking the intervention of a pro-EU court created by the Blair creature, was clearly designed to thwart democracy and continue the subversion of our sovereignty; fortunately it represents but the faint, closing shots in this war against our national identity.

    The EU has been disastrous at almost everything it has touched. The rational arguments are almost all on the side of re-establishing democratic nation states, which are the highest places where legal authority is legitimate.

    Fortunately, we will soon be out, as a self-governing, democratic nation once again, leaving this squalid little exercise in biased self-interests, masquerading as something else, to rot in shame.

    • len

      I suspect a lot of’ big shots’ are behind Gina Miller’s attempt to derail Brexit?.

      • David

        Yes probably, in the shadows, their natural home. The likelihood is that she’s just the “mule”.

      • 1642again

        I saw post on line a link between her ‘foundation’ and one funded by George Soros. She’s under orders.

        • Merchantman

          George Soros. I recommend he and his group is designated a terrorist organisation because that is their effect.

        • Dominic Stockford

          Would that be the nice mr soros who looks so good in an ss uniform.

          • 1642again

            He allegedly did his work experience with the SS informing on fellow Jews for a price so that his friends could grab them and send them to a nice holiday camp. What a kind man.

      • Bernard from Bucks

        “Funded by Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Alex Chesterman?”
        Hearsay maybe, but there is ‘never smoke without fire’ is there?

    • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

      I dislike the Supreme Court – it’s name is borrowed from the USA and has no historical link with the country, a creation of the Blair creature indeed. As for the robes worn by the judges – a trivial issue I grant you but an irritant nonetheless – they look like a job lot from a Star Wars movie. A return to the House of Lords (where the Law Lords sit in judgement) under a Lord Chancellor (sod the ‘Justice Minister’) would restore the natural order, but of course that will not happen.

      • Maalaistollo

        Madam, I beg to inform you that we have had a Supreme Court since 1874/5 by virtue of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873, as amended.

        It was originally intended that the judicial functions of the House of Lords should be replaced by a Supreme Court; it appears that there were concerns about the quality of those of their lordships who heard appeals (in which respect we seem to have made little progress in the intervening 144 years). In the end, the system for appointing judges to the House of Lords was reformed, so the need to abolish the judicial functions of the House was obviated.

        Following the enactment of further legislation in 1874 and 1875, the title ‘Supreme Court’ was retained, but thereafter it comprehended both the Court of Appeal and the High Court in its various divisions. So, indeed, it remained until the infernal tinkering of the Blair creature gave us the present spectacle, which demonstrates the extent to which the majesty of the law has become attenuated in recent years.

        In a former life I was a Solicitor of the Supreme Court (as were all solicitors then). Now, alas, I believe they are described as ‘Solicitors of the Senior Courts’, which always puts me in mind of the kind of articles gentlemen purchase at their tobacconists.

        I earnestly hope that in drawing your attention to this matter I do not incur your displeasure; I appreciate that the events to which I allude above post-date the period of your esteemed spouse’s episcopal tenure and therefore of your involvement in public affairs.

        • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

          Goodness! One learns something every day! Many thanks for shedding light on this – much appreciated. I still do not like the designation ‘Supreme Court’ however, whether it was introduced under the Lord Chancellorship of Lord Mountararat of the Blair creature, but one is stuck with it.

          • Maalaistollo

            Madam, I am humbled by your condescension. Might I crave the indulgence of a Hob-Nob – I would consider it more than sufficient recompense for having been the means of bringing enlightenment?

          • Dominic Stockford

            And it isn’t supreme, the euro courts claim dominion over it, just as the Pope claims jurisdiction over this realm.

          • bluedog

            Mrs P, this communicant thinks you may misunderstand the intent of the Supreme Court, which is not totally without merit.

            Blair made the mistake of devolving every possible entity of the UK with the exception of England. If England had a devolved parliament, the UK would move to a federal constitution of which there are many good examples. However England remains un-devolved, which is by the by. The devolved entities have their own capacity to legislate and in the case of Scotland, the under-pinning legal system is not that of the Common Law but Roman law. It follows that thanks to Blair, it is possible for the devolved entities to enact legislation which potentially conflicts with that of the United Kingdom. The Supreme Court is designed to resolve matters arising from these inconsistencies. It is in effect a constitutional court and Brexit is a constitutional matter. Where Miller went wrong was in bringing the case initially before the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, which may not be a court of the United Kingdom, having no jurisdiction in Scotland.

            The whole thing is a mess and needs to be sorted out. Fortunately now Mrs May is PM there is a real prospect of rational government, rather than the PC gibberish inflicted by Cameron.

        • Are you sure? Our Supreme Court of Canada was established in 1867 by the British North America Act. Odd that we’d get it before you.

          • Pubcrawler

            Trial run. Best to do it somewhere out of the way.

          • Nice.

          • Maalaistollo

            Fraid so. Sitting on my bookshelves are two large (and now, alas, obsolete) volumes entitled ‘The Supreme Court Practice’ which set out the rules by which procedure in the High Court and Court of Appeal was governed. Unfortunately that changed in 1999 with the introduction of a dog’s breakfast known as the Civil Procedure Rules, since when litigation has become more and more complex, expensive and practically unworkable.

            Surely it’s possible that Canada gets something before we do. What about Maple Syrup? Poutine is an affliction that has not yet, so far as I am aware, been visited on us, so that must be another first.

          • O yes, litigation expenses can be a fright, as I discovered during a copyright mediation process where haggling occurred in posh “mediation centre” boardrooms, with counsel on both sides gorging on a smorgasbord of fusion cuisine yummies, on my dime, while I made do with a perfectly kosher, but lackluster homemade cheese and mayo sandwich. Things went quite well for me, otherwise I’d have had to run to Havana when the bill came up, but still, my first experience with the law scarred me for life…and I hadn’t even seen the inside of a court room yet.

            Yes, I guess there’s no reason we couldn’t get a supreme court before you folks; either as an evil experiment, a product of inscrutable English humour, or as a punishment for trying to scoop your Jamaica sugar and rum barons by sending out French brandy-besotted Habitants to poke holes into thousands of trees. I take no credit or responsibility for poutine and any claims for damages should be addressed to the Quebec provincial government or to my lawyer.

      • David

        I totally agree. Blair’s “reforms” were all toxic to our constitution. What’s more the former hereditary Lords, were overall, wiser and closer to our national needs than the present bunch of self-serving media types.

      • chefofsinners

        The French use the word supreme to mean the boneless breast of a chicken.

      • The Canadian Supreme court was established in 1867 by the British North America Act…kind of a round about path, then.

  • Hi

    Where was the parliamentary scrutiny every time Britain became further immersed in the EU? Where were these lawyers when Parliament decided to grant to the EU more and more constitutional powers that it shouldn’t ever have given away?

    In any case these delaying tactics won’t work, because the court did not give the Scottish government , aka the SNP a veto over this decision which was a key victory. It was clear during the campaign from the REMAIN team that if Britain voted to leave it was going to be a “hard” brexit. The terms soft and hard brexit only appeared after three result and are a classic bit of marketing by remain people who are desperate to keep us in the EU.

    It is a useless distinction in any case because the EU leadership is making no bones about punishing Britain as an example to others and they’ve already said that any deal has to be inferior to full membership of the EU. Thirdly the EU wants “Perfidious Albion” out as that UK was always seen as a trouble maker and stopping the dream of a total USE . The trouble is pro EU people in the UK haven’t got this message yet,it is unrequited love. The EU is happy to see us go and doesn’t want us back.

    • Way to go, Hannah! You’re on a roll today. Had a good breakfast, I presume?

    • Martin

      Hannah

      And, of course, there would have been no requirement for a parliamentary vote if the remoaners had won.

  • Albert

    “Brexit is about emotion. It is like a religion.”

    So religion is just emotion apparently. Obviously, she will be next in the queue to debate William Lane Craig. She will easily defeat him, since he is just about emotion, not reason.

    • Dominic Stockford

      This was the point that sparked my attention. Religion is just emotion. Interesting, and so far from the truth that it is in fact terrifying. If people such as her seriously think this then it isn’t long before religion is legislated out. It’s a little like the UN declaring that Jerusalem isn’t historically Jewish.

      • Albert

        TBH I haven’t had time to read the rest of the piece. The headline grabbed my attention and I just thought, well, if that’s what she’s said, I probably don’t need to read the demolition. She’s obviously educated and intelligent, and yet she thinks such erroneous things. You are quite right if that is the level of people in the legal profession.

  • chefofsinners

    Brexit is about emotion. I’m ecstatic. Happy jolly boppy hooray diddly.
    Made all the better by watching the poisoned ivy of progressive politics wither and writhe and squirm and die.
    Power to the people!

  • betteroffoutofit

    Just because Singh-Beal-Maguire-Miller ran away from Roedean, went to school in Eastbourne and East London, and got married 3 times doesn’t mean that Guyana imbued her with understanding of what it means to be a phlegmatic British indigene!!!!!!! Clearly, the opposite is true.

    So who does this fat female think she is? Perhaps she fancies herself as the goddess-angel’s Valkyrie? As Your Grace might indicate, that merky one is enthroned at the head of the Beast; and I’m fascinated that her quest is for its soul!!

    I pray, therefore, for their success: and that their heady rush to Judgement will lead them all – quickly and safely – to their natural home.

    • If the judges had any sense they’d throw her and her spiteful and senseless case out.

      • betteroffoutofit

        Exactly. Neither do they understand, apparently, that their court is not ‘supreme’!!!

        • bluedog

          Oh yes it is.

          • betteroffoutofit

            Supreme as in Christ’s on Domesday?

          • bluedog

            Probably not. But that is not a matter currently before Supreme Court.

          • betteroffoutofit

            Oh.

      • bluedog

        The entire bench of the Supreme Court had the good sense to put M/s Sturgeon firmly in her place. How good is that?

        • The poison dwarf is going to table umpteen amendments in her damnedest to put a stop to the whole process.

          At least the judges didn’t complicate things any further I guess that’s something.

          • bluedog

            The court has correctly ruled that Sturgeon has no standing. Sturgeon’s entire position was always bluff, now called. Better still, it is only with the consent of the UK parliament that she can legitimately hold a second indyref. One wonders how the Scottish electorate will react now Sturgeon’s posturing is seen to be based on fantasy.

    • bluedog

      Racist, sexist drivel.

      • betteroffoutofit

        Well, the Judgement of Judgements (Doomsday) will sort that out 🙂
        Merky, Miller, and their Mistress/Masters do seem intent on hastening its arrival!

    • carl jacobs

      Could someone please translate this post for the poor confused American?

      • betteroffoutofit

        Oh, come off it Carl — you’ve done those “American Short Story” courses – you know about things like symbolism and names like ‘Aminadab’ [Bad anima palindrome] – (Hawthorne/”The Birthmark”).

        • betteroffoutofit

          Well, OK.
          Miller was born in British Guiana – to the ‘elite’ of what is now independent Guyana.
          She is clearly of mixed race. She went to ‘elite’ British girls’ schools – and ran away from the first one. She’s only 51, but has married three times. …. So maybe she’s the emotionally confused one? On the other hand, the British are known too be phlegmatic: she’s wrong about us.

          His Grace says: “The EU has a soul, we are told, and Angela Merkel’s priestly vocation is to find it and save it: “We must give Europe a soul. We have to find the soul of Europe,” ” . . . and he refers to the “Euro-beast.”

          Well — you know who the Apocalyptic Beast is, and that a woman rides it. So you know where their souls belong. Some of us apply that symbolism to the euSSR.
          In mythology, the Valkyries are female servants to the germanic gods.

          I’m suggesting that Merky (pun), Miller, and the Beast are intent on hastening Judgement Day (Doomsday)… and I’ve substituted “heady” for “headlong.”

          • carl jacobs

            What does “mixed race” have to do with anything?

          • betteroffoutofit

            Actually, I’ll take ‘mixed race’ back, as I don’t know what her race is. My point is that she’s not indigenously British and does not understand us.

            Toodle oo, Yankee . . ..

          • carl jacobs

            Fair enough.

        • Carl struggles with basic British language let alone the use of irony, allegory and symbolism.

          • carl jacobs

            Carl struggles with basic British language

            Only when basic British language deviates from English.

          • Where’s that “more English” “humbleness” now, Carl?

      • ChaucerChronicle

        1. The State of Guyana failed to teach her what it means to be British.
        2. She is riding some sort of beast to the Gates of Hell.
        3. He wants her to receive a speedy and warm reception down there.

        The rest seems garbled and lost in ‘transmission’.

  • len

    One gets the feeling that ‘the elites’ were doing very well out of the EU…I also see’ the elites’ have a contempt for religion and are not even concealing their contempt for democracy anymore.

  • Inspector General

    Religion is like emotion? Now there’s something you don’t get to consider every day. Maybe it is, but only from a woman’s point of view one would say. Having seen the devoted with their rosaries at work in the pews as they pray away, memsahib may have something. Not for an Inspector though, he prefers logic, and before any atheist scallys have a go, there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that the universe came into being all by itself. A sort of ‘what shall we do today’ exercise by vast nothingness, if you will…

    • Inspector General

      Before it fell to pieces, the Inspector remembers his dowager’s rosarie which she used in Malta to while away the hours in the air raid shelters during the 39 45 war. It was a ghastly time. The German air force would swoop in low and target places like the Grand Harbour and bombs would spill onto the nearby residential areas. If that wasn’t bad enough, the Italians flew very high as they dropped their loads and missed everything they were out to get. But the bombs had to fall somewhere else of course, where they were least expected, naturally. All this and they were starving to death too before Operation Pedestal relieved the island…

      • Inspector General

        When you review the death, destruction and general mayhem the last time we tried to break away from a ‘unified’ Europe, the uncertainties after Brexit is just a bowl of piss in comparison…

  • carl jacobs

    Everything about Brexit is about emotion. It is like a religion.

    From a tactical viewpoint, this framing makes perfect sense. She is simply appealing to her audience, and her audience thinks religion is irrational. Is it a rational argument? No but that doesn’t matter. It’s an effective argument and an effective argument doesn’t have to be either rational or consistent.

  • not a machine

    I think there are counter arguments ,but it doesn’t matter ,ruling acknowledges referendum gave a result like no other .so perhaps grateful court didn’t interfere with that.Still find it a bit of a waste ,but there we are as far as I can tell its with the politicians for a while ,but returns back to the question so put , so answered. I would have also thought that those who think the EU club is going to work out will have a problem at some point .

  • Don Benson

    It’s all so simple. The people are sovereign. Parliament is not sovereign. It merely has sovereignty lent to it on a temporary basis, by the people, for reasons of practicality. But once the people have spoken, as in an election or a referendum, parliament must obey. Of course some politicians who dislike the people getting in the way of government try to assert that a referendum is only advisory. But even the last Prime Minister didn’t fall for that one. Before the referendum, David Cameron promised in writing that ‘the Government will implement what you decide’. He did not say ‘the Government will place your decision before parliament and then they will decide what to do.’ He didn’t say this because even he knew that would be an outrage.

    So when we talk about British parliamentary sovereignty we have always to remember that this is a tacit agreement between parliament and the people which, in theory, the people could always withdraw. Of course few of us are silly enough to wish for the violence and mayhem which that would involve, but parliamentarians should always resist the temptation to use that fact to assume an ultimate authority which they don’t have.

    We have a great tradition in Britain of drafting laws in such a way that they lack clarity and are often ambiguous. And this serves to put legislators and the judiciary at a great advantage over ordinary voters. It makes voters feel ignorant and politicians and lawyers feel clever. It doesn’t serve justice well and, as in today’s legal ruling, even the topmost judges in our legal system cannot agree over a pretty simple constitutional issue. It does at least highlight a fact we should never forget: laws are only the opinions of some people at some time, never truths for all time.

    • not a machine

      Exactly ,and its served us very well ,and we all hope will continue to do so

    • bluedog

      Right before our very eyes the Supreme Court has just proved that it is sovereign.

    • David

      Hear, hear !
      The Civil War established the principle that the people are sovereign.
      Since then we’ve widened the franchise enormously, but leaving the principle unchanged.
      I look forward to visiting my friends on the mainland of Europe as a member of a free, democratic nation. I shall be discretion personified, although I shall keep my Ukip lapel badge polished !

    • chefofsinners

      And the British people elected the Conservative party to government on the promise of a referendum. That was a surprise at the time, but with retrospect it is more easily understood.

    • συκοφάντης

      Parliament passes laws, not the people.
      Please do understand this, I know the English can be a bit thick sometimes.

      • Isaiah

        Scottish Parliament passed the laws in Scotland.

  • chefofsinners

    This case was a complete waste of everyone’s time and money. A Pyrrhic victory if ever there was one. Tomorrow there will be a one line bill in parliament and it will all be over. Another day’s expenses for the professional windbags in the Lords. Fat fees for the lawyers.
    Gina Miller can clearly afford to waste money on pointless legal action. The taxpayer at large is not so flush.

  • Mike Stallard

    Has anyone on this excellent blog actually come across this majestic dream for the continent of which we are an appendage?

    http://www.eureferendum.com/documents/fundamentallaw.pdf

    • Wonderful stuff. I found a typo, though. In the title, no less.

      A Fundamental Law of the European Union should read, A Fundamental Flaw of the European Union.

    • 1642again

      Hilarious. When trying to mate what turns out two very strong north poled electro-magnets in a permanent union the best thing to do is to turn up the pressure to force them together?

    • David

      Yes it’s true, that the Roman Empire forced together much of the EU’s area, by conquest, but I’d rather assumed we’d progressed to a more democratic model – NO ? Oh silly me !

      What utter delusional piffle !

      But such empire builders and utopian dreamers have always been very dangerous people.

    • Maalaistollo

      I got as far as the foreword, from which I learned that one of the august contributors was none other than Dany (sic) Cohn-Bendit. Remember him? The proposed Fundamental Law seems to have been extruded from a number of rather unappealing fundaments.

    • Royinsouthwest

      On the very first page of the text you linked to is the following statement:

      In the face of hostile public opinion, the national governments of its Member States fear to give the EU the powers and resources it needs. National parties and parliaments fail to embrace the European dimension of politics.

      So the European Union needs to assert itself. European challenges can be met only in a European way.

      In other words the EU should have the power to force through its policies even in the face of hostility from the public and parliaments of the various members. That is a prescription for a dictatorship. What do the “remainers” and the peoples of the member states think of that?

    • carl jacobs

      Good gosh! Have you even tried to read that thing? Two reactions.

      1. What would happen if 2000 Leftists representing every known Leftist constituency tried to write a Constitution? Well, now we know.

      2. Political reality seems an unknown concept to the authors. Perhaps that is for the best.

      • Think of it as a textual support system, or a padding of fluff and gobbledygook for the most important bit, “Chapter 4: Competition, Taxation and Approximation of Laws.”

        • carl jacobs

          309 pages just to hide the words “direct taxation”?

          • I think this was the abridged version for the public.

        • carl jacobs

          “Attention Germany! We will now begin direct taxation of Germans to fund the social welfare net in Greece. Continue being productive for the sake of European Solidarity!”

          • National self-flagellation. Amusing and still, better than the Wehrmacht rumbling through Europe.

          • carl jacobs

            Speaking of which … I received a copy of the film “The Sorrow and the Pity” for Christmas. From 1969. It’s about the German occupation of France. Excellent film. DeGaulle had it banned from French TV.

          • Was it over the bit about the popular French resistance consisting of over-charging German officers for a baguette?

          • carl jacobs

            Yeah, basically. The film is a long extended series of interwoven interviews with people who lived through the occupation – both French and German. It focuses on one city in Vichy with active resistance. Well worth the 4.5 hours.

          • 4.5 hours? Did you hold or use a catheter?

          • Should I tell you? O, well, you can take it. Full film on YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJKh4PYdVCE

          • carl jacobs

            I was watching “Hotel Terminus” on YouTube (same director, about Klaus Barbie) on Sunday when my router went Tango Uniform. But it was free. IIRC you have to pay for “Sorrow and the Pity”.

      • Mike Stallard

        I am so glad you said that. It is surprising how very many people haven’t and just assume that Mrs May and M. Juncker are on the same wavelength!

    • Alison Bailey Castellina

      We are not Europe’s poor appendage but its “celebrated island” (quote from a 12th century poet) and, in some senses, we are more celebrated than mainland Europe. My husband keeps saying that we are also the excellent offshore colony of Italy and carry some of its best aspirations and emigrants. Rome civilised us first. Rome Christianised us and Italians built our major castles and early churches. The reformed Church of England itself was founded by ‘Peter Martyr’ (actually Pietro Martiri).

  • ChaucerChronicle

    Your Grace

    Thank you for the link to the article ‘Man plans, God laughs’:

    ‘The House of Commons has voted to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty – by which the UK will begin secession negotiations with the EU – by the end of March 2017. And they did so by an overwhelming majority: 461 votes to 89 – a margin of 372.’

    On the one-hand constitutional doctrine (an invention by AV Dicey (1889)) holds that parliament is sovereign; on the other, from fear of electoral defeat, the Labour party believes it to be the People.

    I suppose the real constitutional position is this: the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty is convenient for the elites unless facing electoral disaster.

    The People know this.

    No surprise they’re turning from Labour to UKIP.

  • Holger

    Those who voted for Brexit clearly believe it’s some kind of path to the promised land.

    When the result fails to live up to the rhetoric, they’ll probably dream up a story about a prophet who’ll descend in glory from heaven at some indeterminate point in the future scattering 10 pounds notes around him, which the faithful will scrape up and use to fund the NHS, allowing it to offer West African levels of public healthcare, but only if doctors and nurses work 39 hours a day, 10 days a week.

    • chefofsinners

      Suck it up, Linus. Your last hope of seeing the will of the people thwarted has gone today. Brexit will happen.

      • Holger

        I don’t want to thwart anyone’s will. If you want to go, go. What can we do to facilitate your early departure?

        Rid of the angry, malcontent Brits at last! Let’s just hope we don’t end up with the ultimate irony of a plain and dumpy British first lady after the next election. What on earth would we do with her? No couture house would touch her with a barge pole. So much for the traditional role of the first lady as an ambassadress of French fashion…

        It’s looking more and more like Macron is the only viable choice for President, which is a far more interesting topic to me than all this incessant chatter about the British and their national temper tantrum.

        The door is wide open and we’re all eagerly showing you the way out. So can you please ask that dumpy tired-looking PM of yours to pull her finger out and walk through it? Britain is no longer a European partner and the sooner you vacate the premises, the happier we’ll all be.

        • bluedog

          ‘Let’s just hope we don’t end up with the ultimate irony of a plain and dumpy British first lady after the next election.’ Heavens, does this mean that the Chateau Fillon is bigger than yours? Or is it that you would still prefer an Italian courtesan who has shagged most of the British rock stars of the 1960s as the modern exemplar of Marianne? Either way, our influence is undeniable.

        • ChaucerChronicle

          You mean ‘a partner of the European Union’.

        • William Lewis

          “Rid of the angry, malcontent Brits at last! Let’s just hope we don’t end up with the ultimate irony of a plain and dumpy British first lady after the next election. What on earth would we do with her? No couture house would touch her with a barge pole. So much for the traditional role of the first lady as an ambassadress of French fashion…”

          Meeeow.

          Just goes to show that you can take the EU out of Britain but you can’t take the British out of Europe.

        • chefofsinners

          Perhaps you would like to stand for the French presidency. That would give the couturiers a challenge with the First Lady.

          • Holger

            Or perhaps I could pay Mme Fillon to do it.

            I wouldn’t expect her to actually turn up to any receptions. She’d be first lady in name only.

            It’s alleged that her going rate for pretending to work on behalf of the State while she stays at home in the Sarthe twiddling her thumbs is about 8000€ per month. A bargain if ever there was one!

            Imagine the savings on the presidential clothing allowance! 8000€ a month wouldn’t even have covered the Italian’s drycleaning bill.

            France hasn’t had a first lady since Hollande dumped his uncooperative girlfriend, so staff in the presidential spouse’s office at the Elysée are used to having nothing to do and will probably be more than happy to continue so to do.

            Therefore if ever I do win a presidential election, you can be sure I’ll make Mme Fillon an offer she can’t refuse. Playing the role of a fictitious first lady should be right up her street.

            I’m confident she’ll accept. After all, squat little manoirs in the Sarthe are, for all their modest proportions, complete money pits. Their owners are always on the hunt for spare cash. 8000€ a month for doing bugger all certainly won’t go amiss. If my term lasts for 5 years, she may even be able to pay for a new roof and double glazing.

            So how about it, Pénélope? If you’re hesitating, I’d be happy to throw in exclusive use of the chapel at Versailles and a long-term loan of the Crown of Thorns and its golden reliquary. Oh, go on then … the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch and St Frénégonde’s left big toe too! If that doesn’t sweeten the deal, I’m afraid I’ll have to withdraw the offer. If I give you more money, someone might start asking awkward questions…

    • Inspector General

      One of your worst ever, Linus. It’s over, can’t you see. We are getting out….

      • 1642again

        If they hate us so much shouldn’t they be pleased we’re leaving or do they just want us for the money?

        • Inspector General

          “We love you always. For your dollar”

        • chefofsinners

          They hate us because history always seems to prove us right.

      • Holger

        I know you’re leaving. It was a shock at first, but now that we’ve had time to consider the implications, there’ll be a collective sigh of relief this side of the sea on the day you finally flounce off.

        No more British temper tantrums to deal with in Brussels! Substandard British goods and services sealed off from the Continent on the other side of a tariff wall! Really when one thinks about it, the advantages of Brexit for us far outweigh the disadvantages.

        • ChaucerChronicle

          Trump threatens German carmakers with 35 percent U.S. import tariff. U.S President-elect Donald Trump warned German car companies he would impose a border tax of 35 percent on vehicles imported to the U.S. market, a plan that drew sharp rebukes from Berlin and hit the automakers’ shares.17 Jan 2017
          Trump threatens German carmakers with 35 percent U.S. import tariff | …
          http://www.reuters.com › article › us-usa-trum…
          Feedback

          • Holger

            Only a braindead Brexiteer could cheer the advent of a tariff war.

            International trade will be decimated if Trump makes good on his threats. Everyone – most especially the UK now that it’s leaving the Single Market – will lose.

            But that’s what this is all about, isn’t it? You want to destroy the global economy hoping that in the chaos, people will turn to your doomsday cult.

            They didn’t in the 1930s, did they? Another cult arose and the people you profess to love, but turned into Western culture’s scapegoat in order to punish them for killing your mad prophet, paid the ultimate price.

            Oh well, they have their own state now and can take care of themselves. And so can I. Those of us who can ride out any storm will be fine no matter what. If push comes to shove, I can live wherever I need to until the world returns to sanity. But not everyone is that lucky. Those are the ones who will suffer.

            When it’s all over, the world will remember who started it all. If Trump sparks a global trade war leading to catastrophic economic meltdown, the British and the Americans and their selfish, xenophobic nationalism will live in infamy for all time.

          • ChaucerChronicle

            It is, of course, Germany that has begun a trade war treating southern EU workers as ‘slave labour’ (a repudiation of EU Directives on non-discrimination) and thus reducing production costs.

            Germany through the EU has embarked upon its traditional trajectory: like a dog returning to smell its vomit.

            Once more the possiblity arises of the Anglo-Americans restoring peace to the continent.

            The Iron Lady was right: all the problems begin over there and we have to sort them out.

          • Over twenty years ago I read a sci-fi short story where German corporations were running slave factories in an impoverished Eastern Europe and fighting local resistance with private armies. I thought the premise too far-fetched, back then.

          • ChaucerChronicle

            The more I reflect on German history – the more my mind turns to Satan’s throne:

            http://www1.cbn.com/700club/seat-satan-nazi-germany

            At some point, soon, they shall return it to Turkey.

          • What a coincidence. Just picked up an English translation of Speer’s memoirs for two bucks plus tax, and there, right out of the horse’s mouth:

            “The temporary bleachers on the Zeppelin Field in Nuremberg were to be replaced by a permanent stone installation…Undoubtedly it was influenced by the Pergamum altar.” Richard and Clara Winston (transl.), Inside the Third Reich: Memoirs by Albert Speer (New York: Macmillan, 1970), p.55

          • Inspector General

            Yes, Avi, one has read Speer’s work. A fascinating insight. How the fellow escaped the rope when lesser slavers were strung up is rather a mystery…

          • He did sit in Spandau longer than others, on the other hand. Just started the book, so maybe there’ll be clues.

            On the topic of old books, I wonder if you noticed the appearance of a lot of classics for next to nothing in the few remaining bookstores in your neck of the woods. Must be a convergence of the older boomers going blind, batty or dying and the inability of contemporary yoof scholars to read sentences longer than four words.

          • Inspector General

            The bookshops in Gloucester are rather on their knees these days, Avi. Most of the independents have gone and you now find second hand books in bric-a-brak places. But an Inspector has no intention of curling up at night with some electronic tablet or whatever they call themselves these days. The good book will NEVER die…

          • No, Inspector, the good book will never die…as long as the publishers increase the font sizes in proportion to the length of our teeth. What we need is a decent Carrington Event and our piles of old books we would never think of throwing out will be worth their price in gold.

          • William Lewis

            I think that God has shown great mercy on the UK by allowing us to escape the German embrace.

          • ChaucerChronicle

            This prophecy was published in 2005. The LORD thy God has great plans for you and your people.

            Then the Lord showed me a large lion, and He said, “This lion represents the nation of Great Britain.” And it was a shocking sight, for where the lion should have been filled out and sleek and gleaming, was almost a skeleton. And its mane was barely visible, and its coat was covered in mange, and its roar which should have shaken the nations in its power and in its ferocity was strangled and barely audible. And the Lord said, “This represents both the glory of this nation at present and the state of My church as a whole in Great Britain.” And I saw in great letters the words: “THE GLORY HAS DEPARTED FROM THE LION, BUT THE GLORY OF THE LORD OF HOSTS SHALL RETURN AND THE LION SHALL ROAR AGAIN.”

            And the Lord said, “Bring back My glory. Bring back My glory that your nation may once more walk in the glory of its destiny, and the Church may show forth My glory.” And the Lord showed me a huge, flourishing green tree that was planted in the European mainland. Its huge trunk seemed to be planted in Brussels, and the foliage had grown so dense that the tree’s branches and foliage had grown over the English channel and covered Britain in a great dark shadow. And thousands of smaller offshoots and branches had taken deep root in Great Britain. And I saw the roots tangled and grown into London, and then through the British Isles up all the way to Scotland.

            The Lord said, “These are the deep roots of secularism and humanism that have taken deep root in this nation. These are the roots that are eroding this nation’s faith!” And I saw thousands upon thousands of people bowing in obedience to this tree, and the roots were tightly twisted around their ankles, but they seemed totally unaware of this, that they were bound. And so they rejected the faith of their fathers.

            And I saw a great scoffing and a great decline in the traditions and the foundations of the past. And this mass of people was divided into two camps: the first huge mass of people whose ankles were bound by the gnarling roots of the green tree from Europe were younger and seemed more modern in their approach. And I saw written over their head UNBELIEF, CYNICISM, and HUMANISM. And the foliage and green leaves seemed to shadow their heads, and I sensed that they were being attacked at a cerebral level.

            But the second group seemed to be those whose roots and foundations were from the established traditional denominations of Britain, yet they were just as affected as this first group. But I saw written over their heads PRIDE, SKEPTICISM, and CLOSED MINDEDNESS. And I sensed that the roots around their ankles had bound them in a different manner . . . that even if they heard the call of the Spirit in these days, the spiritual forces had them so bound that they could not move with the tide and the times of God. And I saw the green foliage literally cover and shadow their foreheads and eyes, and I saw the word “blinding.”

            “Humble Yourselves and Put Aside your Opinions and Press into Me”

            And I said to the Lord, “Father, what does this mean?” And He said, “The spirits that led Europe into post Christian decline have invaded Great Britain over these past decades and have infiltrated and overshadowed the nation with the same humanism and paganism and secularism. And yet Britain is still so blinded by her roots and her foundations that she is still declaring herself a Christian nation,” but the Lord says, “that she has been shackled by the enemy.” And I said, “Lord, what can break the shackles?”

            And the Lord spoke and said, “The prayers and fervent supplications of my saints in Great Britain. The repentance for the sins of commission and omission on behalf of the governments of Great Britain, on behalf of the people of Great Britain.” Then I asked the Lord about the Church, and He showed me thousands of people all belonging to different denominations with divisions and literally multitudes of OPINIONS. And somehow it seemed that the people’s opinions were all more important in their eyes than God’s opinion, and I heard Him say, “Until their opinions become My opinion, the Church will continue to be divided among itself and be weak and underfed and lack the true POWER of GOD. Oh, yes,” says the Lord. “There are many meetings, there are many committees, there are many opinions, opinions, but it is not the opinion and the thoughts of men’s hearts that will change the destiny of Great Britain, but the opinion and the thoughts and intents of the word of the Living God. Humble yourselves . . . Humble yourselves and put aside your opinions and press into me, the Living God for a living Word.” And the Lord said, “A humble and penitent heart I will not despise.” And I saw the words written: DIVISIONS AND FACTIONS.

            Then as people dropped to their knees — all over Britain from every walk of life and denomination – the lion started to change, and He grew strong and sleek and his roar grew stronger. And I saw written in the spirit: “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me.” And as the people started to seek the face of the Lord, I saw the word COURAGE, and I knew that in the spirit realm that Great Britain had been endowed from the beginning of time with the mantle COURAGE, and the Lord said LIONHEART.

            And God said Britain has yet to move into her end time destiny in the nations. And I saw again in great letters the words: “THE GLORY HAS DEPARTED FROM THE LION, BUT THE GLORY OF THE LORD OF HOSTS SHALL RETURN.” And the lion’s roar by now had gained strength.

            Wendy Alec, 2005

          • William Lewis

            Yes indeed. We should all repent and pray for our country as much as we can. Thank you for that.

          • David Harkness

            Cc, I went to the museum in Berlin to take a look at the Pergamum relics. I was interested to see that some of the mosaics had swastika like designs, wouldn’t rEad too much into that, but it was interesting.

            I also did a study on pre New Testament history, one of the things I read somewhere, that some of herod’s palace guard were warriors from present day Germany. These would have been the characters tasked with killing the infant Jesus.

            When the Kaiser visited Jerusalem he entered the city on a white horse, Allenby by contrast, entered the city, in humility, on foot.

            like you I wonder if Germany has a special role to,play in end times.

          • ChaucerChronicle

            That’s fascinating ‘ the swastikas’. Did you take any photos?

            The Taj Mahal I think has swastika designs.

            My guess is that different ancient cultures around the world knew about the ancient four rivers mentioned in Genesis.

            Somwhere deep down in mankind’s memory sits traces of what happened in the Garden of Eden (Ganden, in Hebrew).

          • ChaucerChronicle

            Germany? Perhaps, once the Throne is returned to Turkey. It may be that their military will fight in defence of Israel.

          • ChaucerChronicle

            The ancient swastikas are, I think, connected with the rivers in Genesis.

            ‘The river that issues from Eden is described further in Genesis: “…it then divides and becomes four branches. The name of the first is Pishon, the one that winds through the whole land is Havilah, where the gold is. (The gold of that land is good; bdellium is there, and lapis lazuli). The name of the second river is Gihon, the one that winds through the whole land of Cush. The name of the third river is Hiddekel, the one that flows east of Asshur. And the fourth river is the Perat.”‘

            I think there was a river flowing from Turkey to Afghanistan. That river route must’ve been taken by Jason and the Argonauts searching for the Golden Fleece. I’ve heard rumours that there are Afghan fishermen who use fleeces to fish for gold in a certain river.

          • bluedog

            Barking mad. Brexit is explicitly not about protectionism, you can see that close to home in France with the CAP. Brexit is a return to a global trading posture, unconstrained by the lunatics in Brussels. If Trump goes protectionist, it is absolutely nothing to do with Britain and contrary to British interests.

          • If you weren’t so prone to Gallic hysterics and hyperbolae, Linus, you might discern a classic softening-up of the opposition move by Trump. The Huns might scoff at the UK, but teeing-off the US will give them nightmares and moderate their actions. The bottom line is that good will and reciprocity in trade relations will be expected. So, for example, Canada, which buys American, will get a good deal, while China, which puts up barriers to US goods (and not to mention, rattles its saber in the Pacific), will get the short end of the stick. Makes more sense to make deals on case-by-case basis, than to get clobbered over and over again by vague globalist manifestos, oui?

          • Holger

            Trump needs to stimulate the US economy and create jobs quickly or his credibility (such as it is) is shot.

            Domestic demand is in the doldrums so exports are the only opportunity for growth.

            Problem is he wants to export products that have no market anywhere except the US. Where there is a market, we already buy. American IT products, software, smartphones, Coca-Cola, etc. are all sold here. But who in Europe is going to buy a Buick or a Dodge? Or hormone-soaked and genetically modified Frankenbeef? Or that bizarre white, waxy substance you call “butter”? Or putty-coloured, shapeless clothing with sizes starting at XXXL?

            Trump can “soften us up” all he likes. He can’t force European consumers to change our tastes and preferences just so he can find a market for all the crap his country produces. The growth he needs to create won’t be driven by increased European demand. His only option for stimulating growth will be to use tariff barriers in order to price European goods out of the US market. We’ll then be forced to retaliate. And then we have a trade war on our hands.

            That’s where Trump’s policies are going to take us. Right back to the 1930s. Autarky didn’t work then. It isn’t going to work now.

          • You are getting ahead of yourself. All Trump needs to do at this point is to cut back on the insane, useless socialist spending spree and remove self-imposed hurdles in the next four years to get a happy-spike. Cutting billions in regulations costs, opening up the energy sector to development, getting more favourable deals, increasing domestic production by a few percentage points, bringing back investment by reducing the highest corporate taxes in the world. In other words, just putting on the brakes on the kamikaze dive Obama started either out of sheer stupidity or ideological malice.

          • bluedog

            Put me down for a 2018 model Mustang with V8 and automatic. Far more fun and far better value than the over-priced alternatives.

          • Hi

            But above you were gloating about not having to import second rate British goods? You are contradicting yourself. Incidentally you go on about xenophobic this and racist that, but you seem to hate Britain. The pot is calling the kettle …. to use the old phrase.

        • Inspector General

          Well you don’t convince. You’ve been living on your nerves like an old hen ever since the referendum was announced…

          If anything, you’re getting worse by the week…

        • Hi

          “Substandard British goods and services sealed off from the Continent on the other side of a tariff wall! ”

          Common market didn’t mean compulsory market… i.e. no-one is forcing by law that European consumers buy British.

    • ChaucerChronicle

      It appears that foreigners working in Germany are paid less and receive less compared to Germans.

      Applied Teutonic German racial superiority ensures that Germany not only repudiates EU Discrimination Directives, but also cheats by using race as an instrument of industrial policy to manufacture the ‘productivity gap’ between German and Anglo-American labour.

      Germany will lead the EU not by visions and prophecies, but by the revived spirit of Munich whilst its poeple march in goose-step to Ode to Joy.

      • David

        On another very practical and particular note, I’ve experienced how Germans are given preferential treatment, over and above other nationalities, on their cross-Europe vehicle transporter trains. On one occasion tickets already booked for an English car club travelling to Italy, from northern Germany, were cancelled a week after being booked, and the tickets mysteriously reassigned to a club of German bikers ! No explanation, or even apology, was issued. I have no idea if this is widespread or not, hopefully not, but that is what we experienced. Fraternal isn’t it ? And rather sad and petty I think.

    • Happening so close together, Brexit and the US elections have obviously been hard on your nerves, Linus, old beggar. Alas, escape into feverish phantasmagoria with episodes of cackling offer only temporary relief and when the next axe falls, I fear the strain will unhinge you. Try to move quickly to the final stage of grief; acceptance. The world will not go the way you thought it’s going.

      • carl jacobs

        If he fled to France after Brexit, where will he go after Frexit?

        • My guess: He’ll buy a hog farm in Iowa.

          • carl jacobs

            Yeah, uh huh. He would NEVER move to the US. If he isn’t French he might as well be.

          • He could move to Cali and fight for its separation from the Union. Imagine, the GOP in government until the end of this century.

          • carl jacobs

            You wouldn’t need to lose all of California. Just the coastal strip from LA to SF.

          • Pubcrawler

            Plate tectonics will sort that out soon enough.

          • bluedog

            Noooo. Canada is the obvious place, somewhere close to the Obamas in darkest Quebec. Given Linus’ immense wealth, he may need a good trucker to move the furniture…

          • I think I’d be better off baking a wedding cake for him than moving his household goods. Visions of me in shackles before the ICJ for breaking his collection of Dresden china ballerinas.

          • William Lewis

            Ah yes, Iowa. The patisserie and haute couture state.

          • You’d be surprised: https://www.tripadvisor.ca/ShowUserReviews-g38020-d4948583-r22362053-Motley_Cow_Cafe-Iowa_City_Iowa.html

            One of the best French restaurants I’ve been in (in my pre-kosher days) was in a small place off a highway in rural, corn country south-western Ontario!

          • William Lewis

            That’ll teach me with my snooty, European assumptions. 😉

          • Blog ‘n learn!

          • carl jacobs

            The first church I attended in college is about a block and one half from that restaurant.

      • CliveM

        As Linus posts go, it was relatively short. Which must be a blessing.

        He’s a man who’s much too impressed by himsel

        • Cressida de Nova

          Sadly he is not the only one on here!

    • David

      That one is desperate !
      You’re scraping the bottom of a very deep barrel of despair.

      • Holger

        Despair?

        Oh dear. I see you have a psychological need to believe that those who oppose you must suffer.

        I have no doubt that any Brit whose livelihood depends on the EU will be feeling very despondent at the collective act of political and economic vandalism his country has just committed. Own goals can be very depressing for loyal supporters.

        Although I hold a UK passport because of an accident of birth, I am not and never have been a Brit. My primary nationality is European and will continue to be so long after the UK flounces off into “splendid” isolation. My British passport is a mere piece of paper that would enable me to live in the UK if I wanted to, Brexit or no Brexit. But I’ve spent enough time in your miserable little slum of a country to understand how unpleasant life is there.

        While up until the Brexit vote there were certain fiscal advantages for Europeans living in London, loss of access to the Single Market means there’s no longer any reason to do so. Tariffs and red tape will make doing business from London far too expensive. Any sensible foreign investor is currently laying plans to leave. Many wealthy Brits with overseas interests will do the same.

        Despair may well be an emotion you become intimately acquainted with over the next few years as capital flees from your economy and foreign investment dries up. But that will be your problem, not mine. You chose isolation. Live with the consequences.

        • Sarky

          Most wealthy brits live in tax havens anyway, so where’s the loss???

        • ChaucerChronicle

          It is Germany, through austerity measures, that is inducing Greeks to commit suicide.

          Germans should now pay reapartions for the War to Greece.

        • ChaucerChronicle

          There is no country called ‘European’.

          If there is, can you point out to us its capital city?

          If they have told you that your ‘primary nationality’ is European: they have either misled or lied to you.

          • IrishNeanderthal

            In the last several hundred years, the capital of China has switched between Beijing (the northern capital) and Nanjing (the southern capital).

            I was wondering if the EUnians were intending to establish Brussels as the central capital, in which case it could be translated into Chinese as Zhongjing.

          • ChaucerChronicle

            Or, it could be Strasbourg: €114 million is spent every year to move the European Parliament between its Brussels and Strasbourg seats every month.

            MEPs, secretaries, senior clerks, junior clerks, bag, file and cosmetics carriers, security officers, staff managers, cooks, bakers and butchers need to move every month to and fro Brussels and Strasbourg.

            It is proving impossible to decide whether it should be Strasbourg or Brussels. Committees have been formed with note-takers and then disbanded (and then reformed again) when officials from 28 countries ‘get stressed out’ over which city it should be.

            It would reduce stress levels if there were, say, 27 countries as the number of officials would be reduced.

            Anyway, a chap called ‘The Farage’ stood on the white cliffs of Dover and apparently parted the waters of the English Channel. Frenchmen at the port of Calais report a Brexodus on the scale of the Dunkirk evacuation.

            French hearts are sinking in despair; rumours are that a resistance is being formed.

          • bluedog

            Zhongjing is pronounced as ‘Berlin’ in German.

          • Hi

            I thought the capital of China was Peking?

          • IrishNeanderthal

            Same name, but by different routes of transmission to the West. To put it briefly:

            (1) The Europeans who first contacted the Chinese were mainly Italians or Portuguese, who hear Chinese consonants differently to Anglos.

            (2) Most of their contact would have been with Southern Chinese, although Marco Polo and the Jesuits would have been based in Peking.

            (3) In historic times, Mandarin Chinese has undergone a similar phonetic shift to what happened in Late Latin, where some g’s and c’s became soft while others remained hard. In Mandarin Chinese, before certain vowels, g and k became j and q (a sort of “ch”).

            The modern Chinese Romanization is similar to that devised by (I think) Americans in the Yale system.

          • Hi

            It’s very fascinating and I’m guessing that’s why Chinese restaurants here still refer to Peking , e.g. Peking palace and Peking duck.

          • IrishNeanderthal

            Quite so. And Peking University is still that institution’s offical English title.

            However, talking of Peking Duck reminds me that Saturday 28th is Chinese New Year. But ideally, goose for dinner.

        • ChaucerChronicle

          ‘My British passport is a mere piece of paper that would enable me to live in the UK if I wanted to, Brexit or no Brexit.’

          I’d be careful with your choice of words: both sides treat ‘traitors’ as cheap currency.

          • Royinsouthwest

            Your description of Holger’s plight reminds me of the chorus of the Bob Dylan song Like a Rolling Stone, especially the line “with no direction home.”

            How does it feel?
            How does it feel
            To be on your own
            With no direction home
            A complete unknown
            Like a rolling stone ?

          • Careful there, you’ll encourage Linus to take himself seriously and engage in even more moaning and groaning in that maudlin French way. And maybe even try to write poetry, perish that thought.

          • Royinsouthwest

            Perhaps his poetry is better than his prose!

          • We don’t want to experiment, though.

          • carl jacobs

            Fashionable Angst

            The world is dying.
            Everything is meaningless.
            So I’ll drink coffee
            And watch the sunset.

          • CliveM

            Why die
            Why did he die
            All told
            I was told he was old.

            Sheldon Coopers memorial poem for Dr. Seuss!

          • Now that you’ve had to, for some reason, try your hand at what I presume is a Mid-West version of haiku, –suitably embellished with underlining, given that there is no HTML code for sequins yet– we can hope that you will return to your usual pastimes?

          • carl jacobs

            How can I refuse
            The call of my muse
            To express but in part
            The despair in my heart?

            Oh Europe!
            Fair Europe!
            Wicked hands have slain you!
            And so I weep.

          • Hmm. A still-born iambic pentameter paired-up to a haiku imp. I will never bake a cake for that “marriage”!

          • David

            Good effort, but you still need a few more lessons I think.

          • carl jacobs

            What?? You dare to criticize my artistic genius? The effrontery! The arrogance! The presumption!

          • Anton

            Keats did it better:

            Stop and consider! Life is but a day;
            A fragile dew-drop on its perilous way
            From a tree’s summit; A poor Indian’s sleep
            While his boat hastens to the monstrous steep
            Of Montmorenci…

          • Holger

            What a load of old bollocks.

            I know exactly where home is and it certainly isn’t Britain.

            If the wave of nationalism currently washing over so many countries also breaks over mine and brings to power a neo-fascist government under which I refuse to live, then I’ll go somewhere else and wait until it falls. As it will. Extremism never lasts.

          • ChaucerChronicle

            Then why do you wave a British passport to suggest you’ve joined our legal and political community?

          • ChaucerChronicle

            Holger, the issue seems to boil down to, with you, your wish to impose a ‘European’ identity dissipating our national identity.

            Have you ever sat down and thought through why ‘nationalisms’ arise?

            Have you thought why more Brits favour the Anglo-sphere countires than our neighbours on the European continent?

          • ChaucerChronicle

            ‘refuse to live’?

            Cowardice?

            Can you imagine if the Puritans had refused to confront that dictator King Charles I?

            The British colonists at Lexington?

            Dietreich Bonhoeffer under the Nazis? Corrie Ten Boom in the concentration camp?

            The British and Empire nations refusing to fight Nazi tyranny?

            The Soviet dissident Solzhenitsyn under the iron fist of the USSR?

            Martin Luther King Jr?

            Holger, sometimes men only understand what freedom is when they sit down in a cell supervised by the Secret Police.

          • I can only think of one country where nationalism hasn’t caught on yet (it will, but they take longer) or where you’re not likely to be hanged or thrown off a roof. Are you living in Iceland, now? Thought that their Thing had stricter residential permit standards.

          • Inspector General

            An Inspector can almost visualise your eyes darting from left to right each day as you find your liberal degenerate world you so love vanish before your eyes. Here’s a laugh, if you’ve haven’t already seen it. Pink Hole reports that the word ‘gay’ has been expunged from the Whitehouse website, save one instance. That’s to do with some book about or by some long gone first lady, and the word is unmistakably in its meaning as a synonym for happiness…

        • Royinsouthwest

          My British passport is a mere piece of paper that would enable me to live in the UK if I wanted to, Brexit or no Brexit.

          That is the trouble with British passports. Ever since Blair became prime minister they have been scattered out to all and sundry like confetti at a wedding. Also, as you reminded us, there is a large fifth column of people who were born in Britain but who have little loyalty to the country. Earlier generations would be disgusted by this state of affairs.

        • ChaucerChronicle

          Seder-Night

          Prosaic miles of streets stretch all round,
          Astir with restless, hurried life and spanned
          By arches that with thund’rous trains resound,
          And throbbing wires that galvanize the land;
          Gin-palaces in tawdry splendor stand;
          The newsboys shriek of mangled bodies found;
          The last burlesque is playing in the Strand—
          In modern prose all poetry seems drowned.
          Yet in ten thousand homes this April night
          An ancient People celebrates its birth
          To Freedom, with a reverential mirth,
          With customs quaint and many a hoary rite,
          Waiting until, its tarnished glories bright,
          Its God shall be the God of all the earth.

          Israel Zangwill

        • Royinsouthwest

          I wonder if this poem is still taught in our PC schools in mulit-culti Britain?

          Breathes there the man, with soul so dead,
          Who never to himself hath said,
          This is my own, my native land!
          Whose heart hath ne’er within him burn’d,
          As home his footsteps he hath turn’d
          From wandering on a foreign strand!
          If such there breathe, go, mark him well;
          For him no Minstrel raptures swell;
          High though his titles, proud his name,
          Boundless his wealth as wish can claim;
          Despite those titles, power, and pelf,
          The wretch, concentred all in self,
          Living, shall forfeit fair renown,
          And, doubly dying, shall go down
          To the vile dust, from whence he sprung,
          Unwept, unhonour’d, and unsung.

          Sir Walter Scott

        • David

          Risible, absolutely risible.

          • Holger

            If I have a choice between being a citizen of the world and a grunting Neanderthal tribesman who can’t see further than the circumference of his beer gut, I know what my choice will be.

            The truly sad thing here is that you believe one small victory means the entire post-WWII settlement has now been obliterated in favour of your narrow-minded nationalism. Yes, you persuaded the British to leave the EU. No, you don’t now rule the UK and can’t impose your agenda on the British people.

            Theresa May has no plans to scrap the Human Rights act. The Equal Marriage act isn’t going to be repealed. Abortion is still legal and there are no plans to outlaw it. You’re still living in a country with a liberal, left-wing social policy. Only now the liberal left-wing, who before the Brexit vote regarded you as odd but essentially harmless nutters, now hate you with a passion.

            By voting to leave the EU you’ve set yourselves up for revenge on a scale you can’t quite comprehend at the moment. When it comes – and come it will, because politics are cyclical and what goes up must come down – you won’t know what’s hit you.

          • bluedog

            ‘The truly sad thing here is that you believe one small victory means the entire post-WWII settlement has now been obliterated in favour of your narrow-minded nationalism.’ Simply not the case, and yet continually the position of Europhile extremists such as yourself. The war aims never included the EU in any manifestation. The Marshall Plan was not a precursor to the EU, neither was NATO. At the end of the war, your nation still ruled India, although the Cripps Offer of 1942 was a pledge awaiting redemption. The world was a very different place and your comment is pure anachronism. As Hannah suggests, if you hate us, you are free to leave.

          • Holger

            I don’t live in Britain. I have no desire to. Why would anyone want to live in such an ugly, unpleasant country full of fat, angry, unhappy people?

            I’ll stay where I am, thanks. If political developments bring a fascist government to power here, I’ll go somewhere else and wait until it falls. But I certainly won’t go to Britain. If I have to live abroad, there are many far more pleasant places to bide my time in than your muddy island.

          • bluedog

            Have you thought of Germany, and specifically, Berlin? Now that united Germany has emerged as the undisputed hegemon of the EU there is no point in hanging around a branch office like Paris.

            Go straight to head office in Berlin and make a name for yourself. With your immense wealth one is certain you will excite the interest of a private banker with the right connections in the mittelstand, the traditional engine-room of German industrial enterprise. As power and wealth accrue to Berlin one imagines there will be endless cultural attractions on which to feast. Indeed, you could even ensure free tickets to just about everything by becoming a patron at a high level of a prominent gallery, opera or ballet. Can one humbly suggest that you finance the purchase of a signature work by a major artist? Now that would really open the doors for you, conferring the sort of recognition and acceptance you seem to crave.

          • Holger

            Your phobia of all things German is becoming quite hysterical.

            Germany is just one member of the EU, albeit the richest and most economically powerful. It does not seek to impose its way of life on its neighbours but it does ask for fiscal clarity and responsibility as a condition of its cooperation. This is a reasonable request.

            I’m perfectly happy to see Germany succeed. Prosperous neighbours generally leave you to get on with your life. I have no desire to live in Germany, although it’s a perfectly nice country. But my German is vestigial and I believe it’s important to speak the language of the country in which you live.

            I’ll stay where I am, I think. I enjoy living here and see no reason to move. If at some future point it becomes necessary to move, then move I will. But I won’t be going to live in Berlin. I’d prefer somewhere with a little more sunshine.

          • Surely you must realize, though, that regardless of what’s being kept for now, everything can come under review and be subject to adjustment under an independent democratic government and weakened international institutions.

          • ChaucerChronicle

            Holger, you’re living in fantasy land: there is no such country as ‘the World’.

            Now, now, now what’s all this about revenge?

          • Holger

            As I said, revenge will come from within. You’ve pissed off an entire generation of young Britons who see their parents’ vote to leave the EU as a betrayal.

            These are the people who are going to have to look after you when you’re in your dotage (which most of you already are). Good luck!

          • ChaucerChronicle

            Holger, it’s often assumed that the young will retain their ‘liberalism’ (‘rebellion’) into their ‘autumn’ years.

            Observation suggests moral development as they age.

            Most ‘grow up’ (mature) and emerge as social conservatives regretting the errors of youth.

            ‘All’, in the end, want peace with their Creator and fellow man.

            David Hume, atheist philosopher famous for his philosophy of empiricism and skepticism of religion, cried loud on his death bed:

            “I am in flames!”

          • ChaucerChronicle

            Holger, you greatly honour us: ‘Yes, you persuaded the British to leave the EU.’

            Do you believe Theresa takes note of what we write?

            Well, I do know that His Grace is influential; you must ask permission if you want to kiss his hand.

          • Holger

            “You” was not limited to commenters on this blog. I meant all those who campaigned for Brexit.

            This blog is a tiny extremist corner of Brexit Britain where a few of the more choleric and reactionary characters gather to vent their spleen and fury against the modern world. Its influence is minimal, although I will grant you that in arrogance and delusion, few others can equal it.

          • ChaucerChronicle

            What’s he that wishes so?
            My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin:
            If we are mark’d to die, we are enow
            To do our country loss; and if to live,
            The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
            God’s will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
            By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
            Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
            It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
            Such outward things dwell not in my desires:
            But if it be a sin to covet honour,
            I am the most offending soul alive.
            No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England:
            God’s peace! I would not lose so great an honour
            As one man more, methinks, would share from me
            For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
            Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
            That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
            Let him depart; his passport shall be made
            And crowns for convoy put into his purse:
            We would not die in that man’s company
            That fears his fellowship to die with us.
            This day is called the feast of Crispian:
            He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
            Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,
            And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
            He that shall live this day, and see old age,
            Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
            And say ‘To-morrow is Saint Crispian:’
            Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
            And say ‘These wounds I had on Crispin’s day.’
            Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,
            But he’ll remember with advantages
            What feats he did that day: then shall our names.
            Familiar in his mouth as household words
            Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,
            Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,
            Be in their flowing cups freshly remember’d.
            This story shall the good man teach his son;
            And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,
            From this day to the ending of the world,
            But we in it shall be remember’d;
            We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
            For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
            Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,
            This day shall gentle his condition:
            And gentlemen in England now a-bed
            Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
            And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
            That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.

            William Shalespeare, King Henry V

          • Holger

            William “Shalespeare”, eh? Is that one l or two?

            I know who you mean though. Your national poet and cheerleader. But really, if you’re going to regurgitate his jingoistic, xenophobic prose all over this site you could at least have the decency to spell his name correctly.

            The English are so tribal. Between all the grunts and threats and self-congratulatory flim-flam, the only clear message you convey is just how primitive and unevolved you are.

            Oh well, if you want to live in caves and paint yourselves blue (or is that just a symptom of your cold climate?) then go ahead. It’s your choice. I don’t know who you’re trying to impress though. Yourselves, probably.

          • ChaucerChronicle

            Holger

            We haven’t got time for your undergraduate mental horizons – we’re busy discussing important matters.

          • Hi

            “By voting to leave the EU you’ve set yourselves up for revenge on a scale you can’t quite comprehend at the moment”

            Hyperbole or what? You should be grateful that the British Empire and Commonwealth liberated France and Germany from a terrible tyranny called Nazism. Unlike France , Britain didn’t get occupied or collapse or have a Vichy regime which collaborated with Hitler and consequently helped to exterminate French Jews.

            You should be grovelling on your knees to the commentators here – British, Canadian, American and others whose forefathers and mothers stood and fought and bled against an evil which you have no idea about. An evil which pales into insignificance with your deluded accusations of bigotry.

            Revenge?

            Britain and America helped to rebuild Germany and France after the war.

            Revenge?

            Britain and the commonwealth countries bled for France during two world wars!

            Revenge?Revenge? What alternative universe do you live in?

            Britain is in NATO and is officially committed to defend the very countries which you say you think are going to commit revenge. So that statement is utter rubbish.

          • Holger

            Revenge won’t come from the Continent. It will come from within Britain. The left will take power again and those who sabotaged Britain’s EU membership will pay the price.

            And if you’re stupid enough not be able to realise that the only reason Britain managed to stand against Nazism was its sea defences, then you’re not worth talking to. If France had had a sea border with Germany, it wouldn’t have been so easy to invade.

            I’m used to British self-worship though, so I’m not surprised at such blatant arrogance. Claiming the accident of geography that makes your country so isolated somehow gives you a courageous and almost messianic nature is about as deluded as it gets. You live on an island, pauvre idiote! Of course it’s harder to invade! It’s easy to pretend to be brave when you’re safe behind an impregnable moat.

            The more I consider the question, the more convinced I become that we’re better off without Britain in the EU. You bring nothing to the table except a bad attitude full of arrogance and contempt. The isolationism that brought you to your knees before you joined the EU will see you knocking at our door again. I sincerely hope our leaders will have learned from past mistakes and will refuse you readmission. You’re not Europeans and never will be. Our attempts to cooperate with you were always doomed to fail because you don’t understand the basic concept of cooperation.

            So off you trot. It hasn’t been nice knowing you and we’re glad you’re going. Please don’t come back.

          • Hi

            “And if you’re stupid enough not be able to realise that the only reason Britain managed to stand against Nazism was its sea defences, then you’re not worth talking to. If France had had a sea border with Germany, it wouldn’t have been so easy to invade.”

            Well actually the sea defences didn’t help as :

            You do know that the battle of Britain was fought in the air , not in the sea ?

            You do know that the Germans tried to starve Britain out because she is an island ? (The battle of the Atlantic?).

            You do know that the left is actually being obliterated in opinion polls? And Jeremy Corbyn has been a left-wing Euroskeptic all his life?

          • Holger

            Of course your sea defences forced the Battle of Britain into the air. There was nowhere else for it to go. You can’t drive tanks over the Channel. If you try, they fill up with water and stop working.

            Yes, Germany tried to starve Britain out. That’s what you do when your enemy is in an impregnable defensive position. That’s what the Channel gives you. That’s why Britain resisted Nazi aggression.

            Had the Germans been able to attack Britain over land with their Panzer divisions, you would have fallen as quickly as any other country did. The fact you didn’t is largely down to the fact that being an island gave you a tactical advantage that the logistics of the period couldn’t easily overcome.

            But of course the British like to take all the credit for victory themselves. It was British strength and grit that won the war, wasn’t it?

            Tell that to the French who witnessed the BEF turn tail and run away from the German army in 1940. When back in their moated castle, they praised themselves for their bravery in running away so quickly and efficiently. The allies they left behind were less impressed.

            And yes, the left is not popular in Britain today. But politics is cyclical and the left will rise again. Maybe not today or even tomorrow, but its time will come. And as the fallout from Brexit is going to affect you for decades, they won’t forget who was responsible.

            The Italians say that revenge is a dish best served cold. In the case of Brexit, I think they’re probably right.

          • CliveM

            “Tell that to the French who witnessed the BEF turn tail and run away from the German army in 1940.”

            Looking backwards were they?

          • Hi

            So who’s doing the revenge in your view? The British left ? Italy? The EU?

          • Holger

            There’ll be no revenge from Europe. Now that we realise you’re really going, we’re so happy it would be pointless to pretend otherwise.

            The revenge will come from your own people when they realise what a con Brexit is. When the promised golden age of prosperity fails to materialise. When job losses caused by plummeting exports start to build to 1970s levels.

            Those who preached Brexit will get their come uppance in time. And here in Europe we’ll look on in bemusement, thanking our lucky stars we’re no longer mixed up in that can of worms.

            You’re on your own now. Good luck. You’ll need it.

          • Hi

            What I find sad is that by marriages my family is multilingual and stuff. My sister married a French Moroccan Jew and my bro married a French Algerian Russian Jew. …. my father was Anglo Irish and my mother was an Iraqi Jew and I have family in Israel.

            Therefore your cries of bigotry toward conservative Brexiters and dislike towards British people is utterly ghastly. Like you I fundamentally see that British participation in the EU is absurd and incompatible and for Britain and Europe this decision is the best for both parties. The EU is now free to become a federation of states without Albion intransigence.

            However unlike you I don’t see this as a bigoted or disastrous vote , at the end of the day Britain is still an ally of both France and Germany ,via NATO , in fact I believe Britain’s oldest treaty of alliance is with Portugal.

            So you are being utterly disingenuous in your last paragraph.

            I know you will come back with some comeback or other, but I think that the relationship between Europe and the UK will actually improve as a result of Brexit.

            Oh and tell me are Switzerland and Norway bigoted for NOT being part of the EU?

          • Holger

            Norway is not part of the EU because it doesn’t want to share its oil wealth. Switzerland’s refusal to join is motivated by peculiar historical factors that cause them to guard their independence jealously.

            Neither country has ever joined the EU. They didn’t join it, do their best to make life difficult for everyone, throw a tantrum when they didn’t get their way, then leave in a huff. That kind of behaviour is peculiar to the British.

            Anti-European bigotry has most certainly driven the Brexit vote. Anti-immigrant sentiment. Anti-German sentiment. Anti-anything that isn’t British.

            Of course all the rest of Europe can do is take note of the British decision and let you get on with it. It’s your right to leave if you want to. And yes, Europe will work much better without you, so on balance it’s probably for the best – at least for us. But your decision to leave turns you from a partner into a competitor. You’re no longer part of the family. You’re now outsiders with whom cooperation may be possible on some issues, but whose interests need not be factored into our decisions any more.

            There’s no reason why relations between Britain and the EU shouldn’t be cordial. But they’ll also be distant. Your companies will no longer benefit from privileged access to our markets. And in a world where Trump is busy crying “America First!” and tearing up trade agreements in order to negotiate unequal treaties with individual states – negotiations in which the US will hold all the cards – you’ll have guaranteed access to no markets at all.

            Your position is precarious and you haven’t realised it yet. You will soon enough though. I just hope the famous Article 50 is triggered before you get a chance to change your minds. That way in 2 years you’ll no longer be our problem.

            Europe without the UK will finally be able to function as a viable political union. And to be perfectly frank, who gives a damn what happens to you once you’re no longer a partner? Divorce signals the end of intimacy and the beginning of estrangement.

          • Hi

            My understanding is that air superiority is the key thing here . The British battleship fleet , whilst the largest in the world wouldn’t have helped , as they were obsolete : aircraft could simply destroy them , as Britain proved against the Italians at Taranto and then the Japanese at pearl harbour. Hence the aircraft and carriers superseded battleships. Therefore a war had to be fought in the air first. Destroy the RAF , then blitz British cities, then follow through with a cross channel attack.

            Where you could allow the British some pat on the back was that they could have cut and deal and made peace with Hitler. That Churchill said no , against the appeasers changed the course of history.

            As for who “won” the war , it was a grand coalition of Russia, The British Empire and The United States. All had a crucial part to play. The Russians bore the brunt of casualties on the eastern flank , but British and Americans opened up another front , prepare for the liberation of Italy and western Europe on D Day.

            So I wouldn’t claim Britain did or could have won the war alone. What the British did do was to hold on , via the battle of Britain and diversionary campaigns in north Africa until Russia and then the US came into the fray to turn the tide of the war .

          • Holger

            And what enabled the British to hold on?

            Geographical isolation.

            The Channel won you the war, which is nothing much to be proud of. Had it not been there, Hitler would have paraded down the Mall soon after parading down the Champs Elysées.

          • CliveM

            Counter factual speculation for which you have no proof.

          • bluedog

            Really, Linus, your reading of history is becoming increasingly distorted and short-sighted. What happens when the Boche break bad and threaten Paris yet again? It’s happened before and only a fool would believe it can’t happen again. That’s why the French have nuclear weapons. It’s also why time and again a British army has to try and secure the left flank of the French position, to keep the Channel coast in friendly hands. In both major wars of the past century, the British Army came under French command. To say, therefore, that we don’t understand co-operation is a gross injustice.

          • Holger

            Oh for pity’s sake …

            The French have nuclear weapons because they’re scared of the Germans?

            No. They have nuclear weapons as a deterrent against Russian expansionism.

            What is it with the British paranoia about Germany? The world wars were fought for very specific reasons which are no longer pertinent in today’s world.

            Prussian militarism and Nazism have been eradicated. Germany has no imperial ambitions, but like every country, wants to prosper. Its sheer size and the power of its economy mean it will always be a major player in European affairs and this is only right and proper. What do you expect them to do? Grovel at your feet for the rest of time because (the eternal British refrain) “YOU WON THE WAR!!!”

            Germany will do what’s right for Germany within the framework of European cooperation. If there was no EU, we’d all be in direct competition and German money would stay in Germany instead of being invested in projects designed to improve the living standards of all Europeans.

            I’d rather have the Germans inside the European tent pissing out than outside it pissing in. That’s where the British are going to be now, only a stream of British pee doesn’t have much of an arc to it and probably won’t even make it over the Channel.

            Go ahead and piss in your own moat. Old habits die hard.

          • David

            Sweet dreams !

        • Hi

          You are really Anglophobic , so why not renounce your passport and citizenship? You wouldn’t want to be associated with such a terrible place, so why not?

    • ChaucerChronicle

      It’s over Holger; there’s nowhere left to run:

      Prof Ted Malloch, tipped to become Donald Trump’s ambassador to the EU predicted the euro ‘could collapse’ within the next 18 months.

    • Anton

      A pint of bitter for you?

  • All that it’s missing is kosher turkey “bacon”!

    • Hi

      My sister Esther cooks this north African Jewish breakfast Shakshouka: poached eggs in tomato sauce with chill and cumin! And of course there’s the traditional Sabich breakfast sandwich. My partner likes salted herring and salmon with eggs , my bros also got into it .

      Here’s an anecdote about how Iraqi Jewish immigrants to Israel thought they were being given rotten fish . But it turned out to salted herring :

      “To my amazement, things became so heated that one of the immigrants threw a tray of food in the face of the person handing out the food,” he wrote. It turned out that the immigrant had accused the man of giving them rotten fish “in an attempt to poison them. He claimed that the man had sold the good fish and pocketed the money.”

      “I‘ve lived in Japan, I’ve done business in Thailand, I’ve lived and studied in the United States, and I now have a few Ashkenazi partners, yet to this day I can’t put something like that in my mouth,” he wrote. “How do you expect Iraqi Jews to eat herring for breakfast?”

      http://jewishrefugees.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/the-banker-who-saved-iraqi-jews-from.html

      • Shakshouka sounds good to me; nothing like starting your day with an atomic pile keeping a chain reaction going in your belly. The Russians like their fish for breakfast too and my former Londoner father in law loves his kippered herring with eggs on Sunday mornings.

        I cannot imagine what the response of these herring-phobes would have been if they had been handed Dutch surströmming, a fermented herring you can only eat outdoors. Even I can’t stomach that one.

  • Sarky

    All of this is just the death throes of a liberal elite who have just woken up to the fact that the rest of us don’t think like them.

    • 1642again

      For once I agree with you. The real collapse comes when the masking effects of QE and ultra low interest rates no longer work, and when real austerity bites and the client groups face financial scarcity. Sooner it happens the better as the trough will be less deep. If the government had let the bust of 2007/8 work its way through properly, and had just contained it to the financial sector and adopted proper austerity in the public sector, what’s coming down the track would have been largely avoided, and the post 2008 recovery would have been much swifter and more soundly rooted.

      What worries me is that their liberal mask in this situation will be ripped off and their real authoritarian repressive nature be let loose. If Trump can make real headway in the US, we may have a chance of winning out.

      • Anton

        Absolutely!

  • David

    England and the rest of the UK has always been a beacon of freedom. Although we are of course far from perfect, we can be rightfully proud of the freedoms that we achieved early on. Time after time we have resisted tyrannies.That includes the colonists who rightly rebelled against the misgoverning, heavy handed regime imposed from afar, on the colonies we established in North America, thus founding America.
    Once Brexit is achieved and consolidated it is essential that we restore equality before the law, and free speech by repealing the appalling illiberal laws introduced by Blair mainly, but also continued by Cameron and May. Hate speech, the laughingly named “Equality Laws” and curbs on free speech constitute assaults on our ancient freedoms, and all were introduced whilst we laboured under the EU’s threatening hand. I anticipate journeying on under clearer skies, breathing a freer air.

    • Dreadnaught

      As much as I agree with your sentiments, I have seen no appetite for repeal of the Equality Laws hate speech etc from anyone in Government.

      • CliveM

        Or opposition.

        • Dreadnaught

          Now you’re being silly MrC.

      • Royinsouthwest

        They know that if they said they wanted to abolish or at least carry out a major reform of the equality laws much of the press, the BBC, Channel 4 etc. would spend months screaming that the government was against equality. Similarly if they wanted to abolish hate speech laws, or much more closely restrict their scope, the media would claim that the government wanted to encourage hate. Therefore the Conservatives have opted for a quiet life.

      • David

        Not yet, sadly.

        • Dreadnaught

          I’m not holding my breath.

  • Mike Fowle

    Gina Miller is not a lawyer.

    • Royinsouthwest

      That is no criticism!

    • David

      No, something to do with investments I believe.

    • Maalaistollo

      That will endear her to Carl, although according to the Mail she almost got a law degree, so she’s not entirely untainted.

      • Shadrach Fire

        For not having completed her law degree she does very well. Probably her cash buying her some silk.

  • michaelkx

    if parliament ignores what the people have voted for, be it right or wrong, then we will know we are not in a democracy. If they do vote against what we the people have said, I hope that Mrs May has the guts to call an election, so we the people can remove the traitors at the voting box. or am I doing some wishful thinking.

    • 1642again

      Time to recall the Ironsides and Colonel Pride?

      • len

        Keep yourself on standby.

      • dannybhoy

        Without Oliver Cromwell and the Roundheads what would have been the future of our nation?

        • 1642again

          Similar to that of absolutist Bourbon France, only a third rate version.

          • dannybhoy

            Or France, or Spain, or Portugal, or Italy….

        • David

          Quite !
          Bravo the New Model Army !

          • dannybhoy

            What you too? I thought I was the only Cromwell supporter on the blog…

          • David

            Absolutely !
            A constitutional monarchy is fine, but we only have that because of Cromwell. He lived two constituencies to the west of us.

          • Martin

            Danny

            You were mistaken.

          • 1642again

            Have you not eyes to see?

      • michaelkx

        All up the boys

    • len

      If democracy fails and the will of the people is thwarted by undemocratic Remain factions a General Election would be a decider.
      Lets hope it doesn`t come to that?.

  • len

    Thing is ,I wonder if the UK will get out of the EU before the EU collapses?.Going to be a damn close thing?.

    • 1642again

      Greenspan recently suggested we won’t as he gives the EU/Euro less than two years.

      • Anton

        Glad to see he’s been reading my comments to Holger!

  • TropicalAnglican

    Mr Brexit seems to be moving rather faster than Mrs Brexit. When they meet up in Washington D.C. this Friday, I can almost guess what gentleman Trump is going to say: “You women are so slow…” And since he likes bestowing nicknames (e.g., head clown Chuck Schumer), do watch out, tardy Tessa!

    • len

      Trump is moving like a runaway train, going to run out of ink for his pen the speed he’s signing those documents.

    • David

      I’ve beaten The Donald to awarding her a nickname. She’s Maisie Maybe May !

      • bluedog

        We must hope that Trump is not so gauche as to have Farage sitting in on his meeting with Mrs May.

        • David

          Yes of course.

  • dannybhoy

    ot
    I got an email just now re Gavin Ashenden. I’ve posted it under his thread….

    • William Lewis

      Which thread?

    • Dreadnaught

      Dougla Murray holds the same position on religions as myself in that we recognise our historical Christian roots and that all religions are not the same with one in particular that is openly hostile to our heritage and all other philosophies world wide.

      • dannybhoy

        I’m a great fan of Douglas Murray. I think I read or saw him say that he had renounced his Christian faith. Mind you if true I don’t know what his understanding of Christianity is/was.
        I also think some people recognise and respect the importance of Christianity but don’t actually believe or embrace it.
        Christianity doesn’t give us the option though. It is all about being reconciled to God or facing judgement.

        • Dreadnaught

          Politically at least Dan, we are allowed to believe in what we want without persecution. However at the personal level we have to stand in our own corner and defend ourseleves with anything bar violence. One very good reason for defending this Blog.

          • dannybhoy

            I think that’s going to change before too long, and free thinkers will have to undergo correctional programming.
            Or join the Resistance..

          • Dreadnaught

            I’m already doing my bit for Resistance, but thanks for the invitation to reprogramming – biu I think I’ll pass on that thanks Dan.

        • 1642again

          Isn’t he a homosexual? Happy to be wrong but do recall seeing something.

          • Rhoda

            Wikipedia states ;
            Murray is an atheist, having previously been an Anglican, but has described himself variously as a cultural Christian, and a Christian atheist. He is openly gay.

          • dannybhoy

            Dunno, and frankly I don’t care.
            Even if he is there are lots of people in positions of power and influence who are adulterers etc. I’ve never heard him mention his sexuality, and it no more detracts from what he has to say on e.g. Islam or Christianity than what say… Prince Charles might think.

          • CliveM

            Gasp! You’re outing the Prince of Wales……….

            Who would have thought.

          • Dreadnaught

            Not much more to wait – Can I mention the Borgias now?

          • CliveM

            What were they gay as well?

          • William Lewis

            Yes, and the Nazis!

            Oh no. I’ve just Godwinned myself.

          • Dreadnaught

            ha-ha-ha – nice one.

          • CliveM

            Embarrassingly I had too Google Godwinned!

          • dannybhoy

            Springtime for Hitler..

          • William Lewis

            I rest my case.

          • dannybhoy

            Absolutely great film. One of Mel’s best.

          • dannybhoy

            May yourrr sporran wilt and the weee cuirrrrly hairrrs drap oot!
            You’re having a go because I have once more stated my admiration and respect for Oliver Cromwell.
            A flawed man like all of us, brutal yes, but then his understanding of our faith was influenced more by the Old Testament than the New..
            Found this on someone’s (http://annisbetweenworlds.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-truth-about-oliver-cromwell.html ) blog..

            Oliver Cromwell is an inspiration for Christian rights and freedoms. He was a surprisingly warm and passionate man who wrote very loving letters to his wife. He was interested in people and moved to defend those on the receiving end of oppression if they were Protestants, like the Vaudois. He was also an avid reader of the Bible, if not a devoted member of any local church. He was an Independent rather than a Presbyterian. A man of action, he restrained the power of unelected rulers for hundreds of years. This was an achievement – when France was suffering under the thumb of Sun King, Louis XIV.

            Second, we must not confuse Cromwell’s profound commitment to:
            the right of free speech
            the right to worship God according to the Bible
            the right of religious conscience
            the cause of European Protestantism
            with the modern secular notion of freedom – which is freedom from all social rules and God’s law. He would not have fought the Civil War for the latter concept. When Parliament today applauds Cromwell, it must appreciate that Oliver Cromwell did not fight for our freedom from the commands and standards of God. Freedom in the Christian sense comes with restraints and rules (although Christians are exempt from many religious rituals, such as animal sacrifices). Christian freedom comes from obedience to and acceptance of God.

            The Commonwealth and Republic failed in 1660 because it was not Christian, in practice. Being Puritan, the leaders wanted a purer, cleaner way of life for all people. Instead of bringing about an improvement in public morality and behaviour by conversion to Christ, they passed severe Acts in 1650 on:

            punishing adultery and all sex outside marriage – by death
            branding prostitutes with a “B” for “Bawd” – and death for their ongoing activity
            fines for swearing
            prohibiting public entertainments.
            Parliament even tried to pass a law against wearing cosmetics, but that failed, at the second attempt. The various death sentences were not acted upon, but they must have been a heavy yoke on the neck of the people.

            Clearly, these governing Puritans were not acting in a Christian manner, which is rather mystifying. The Bible certainly teaches Christians not to engage in these activities themselves – but Christians cannot force non-believers to do the same. Majority Christian rule may seek to inhibit sin, by some laws, in some way, but it cannot force public obedience – involving imprisonment and the death penalty. Cromwell may have been more moderate. He says he was surrounded by men who “took delight” in putting their fingers on the conscience of others and pinching them: this is vindictive bullying. All power corrupts.

            As for Ireland, Cromwell was probably heavily influenced by misinformation about a so-called massacre which took place on hundreds of thousands of second and third generation English living in Ireland in 1640-41. They were certainly turned out in their shirts and many were ruined and exiled, but there is no mass of evidence of mass slaughter by the Irish. Though untrue, this story was so often put into print that Cromwell was clearly influenced by a widespread English belief in Irish “barbarism” – and, no doubt, acted accordingly. Though this does not excuse his brutality, it sets it in a wider context. Some Continental Catholics and the Inquisition had behaved, at times, in a similar manner.

          • dannybhoy

            May yourrr sporran wilt and the weee currrrly hairrrs drap oot!
            You’re having a go because I have once more stated my admiration and respect for Oliver Cromwell.
            A flawed man like all of us, brutal yes, but then his understanding of our faith was influenced more by the Old Testament than the New..
            Oliver Cromwell is an inspiration for Christian rights and freedoms. He was a surprisingly warm and passionate man who wrote very loving letters to his wife. He was interested in people and moved to defend those on the receiving end of oppression if they were Protestants, like the Vaudois. He was also an avid reader of the Bible, if not a devoted member of any local church. He was an Independent rather than a Presbyterian. A man of action, he restrained the power of unelected rulers for hundreds of years. This was an achievement – when France was suffering under the thumb of Sun King, Louis XIV.

            Second, we must not confuse Cromwell’s profound commitment to:
            the right of free speech
            the right to worship God according to the Bible
            the right of religious conscience
            the cause of European Protestantism
            with the modern secular notion of freedom – which is freedom from all social rules and God’s law. He would not have fought the Civil War for the latter concept. When Parliament today applauds Cromwell, it must appreciate that Oliver Cromwell did not fight for our freedom from the commands and standards of God. Freedom in the Christian sense comes with restraints and rules (although Christians are exempt from many religious rituals, such as animal sacrifices). Christian freedom comes from obedience to and acceptance of God.

            The Commonwealth and Republic failed in 1660 because it was not Christian, in practice. Being Puritan, the leaders wanted a purer, cleaner way of life for all people. Instead of bringing about an improvement in public morality and behaviour by conversion to Christ, they passed severe Acts in 1650 on:

            punishing adultery and all sex outside marriage – by death
            branding prostitutes with a “B” for “Bawd” – and death for their ongoing activity
            fines for swearing
            prohibiting public entertainments.
            Parliament even tried to pass a law against wearing cosmetics, but that failed, at the second attempt. The various death sentences were not acted upon, but they must have been a heavy yoke on the neck of the people.

            Clearly, these governing Puritans were not acting in a Christian manner, which is rather mystifying. The Bible certainly teaches Christians not to engage in these activities themselves – but Christians cannot force non-believers to do the same. Majority Christian rule may seek to inhibit sin, by some laws, in some way, but it cannot force public obedience – involving imprisonment and the death penalty. Cromwell may have been more moderate. He says he was surrounded by men who “took delight” in putting their fingers on the conscience of others and pinching them: this is vindictive bullying. All power corrupts.

            As for Ireland, Cromwell was probably heavily influenced by misinformation about a so-called massacre which took place on hundreds of thousands of second and third generation English living in Ireland in 1640-41. They were certainly turned out in their shirts and many were ruined and exiled, but there is no mass of evidence of mass slaughter by the Irish. Though untrue, this story was so often put into print that Cromwell was clearly influenced by a widespread English belief in Irish “barbarism” – and, no doubt, acted accordingly. Though this does not excuse his brutality, it sets it in a wider context. Some Continental Catholics and the Inquisition had behaved, at times, in a similar manner.

          • Dreadnaught

            I did wonder when the topic would arise – an obsession of the Self-Righteous no less.

          • 1642again

            Rubbish. I made no pejorative comment, merely asked a fact, but it may explain why he is not a believing Christian while still a cultural Christian.

            I would also remind you that homosexuality is contrary to the teachings of the New and Old Testaments, and that this is an overtly Christian website. If you don’t want to be confronted by those teachings why spend time on here?

          • Dreadnaught

            Ah touched a nerve have I? I just thought people were sticking to the thread which is political.

          • 1642again

            Not at all. I believe homosexuality is sinful. I was merely pointing out to you the clear nature of my statement that made no pejorative comment. It’s you that sought to put a colour on it.

          • Dreadnaught

            No – you just love a bit of Queer Bashing.

          • 1642again

            Rubbish once more. I have never bashed a queer in my life, but do believe that the nature of a man helps explain their views.

          • dannybhoy

            1642again.
            Dreadders knows what we Christians think about homosexuality, but he’s right in that this is a political thread. In any case one can respect folk like Douglas Murray, David Starkey and even Peter Tatchell.
            I think this issue was being discussed before I remember you posting, but you and I would agree that all men are sinners and that sin is expressed in a multitude of ways. I would therefore say that practicing homosexuality is no more evil than adultery or pornography or paedophilia etc..

          • 1642again

            I don’t disagree with anything you say and cast no aspersions at all on Mr Murray at all, rather the contrary. But his sexuality does help explain his opposition to Islam and is therefore relevant., is my Christianity.

            I must say I am somewhat bewildered to see an outbreak of liberal virtue signalling on here.

            I have also come to the view that ‘Dreaders’ may not be what he appears. If you review the argument below you will see that he fled when I mentioned my suspicions that he is one of the Nina crowd, and indeed may possibly another alter ego. The viciousness with which he went for me after a very innocuous comment gives credence to my view.

          • dannybhoy

            Others here may know about Norty Nina, I know nothing about her. Danny is a fairly simple soul; not overly bright, pedantic and cynical at times, hasty to speak at other times.
            I take people at face value until shown otherwise, and even then I cannot see why I should condemn homosexuals more than other sinners :0)
            Dreads isn’t a Christian and doesn’t pretend to be. Nor is Sarks or Danj0
            It’s my observation (and unfortunate experience!) that it is relatively easy to be misunderstood vis-à-vis online blogging.
            One of the reasons I value this blog is because all sorts of folk feel free to comment. We have Avi, sometimes Hannah and her family, Sarks, Danj0 and Linus. To my mind that’s great because they challenge what I/ we understand and believe as true,and how we respond to homosexuals and homosexual issues. Also it’s usually done kindly and respectfully. That I think is why this is a great blog.
            The more the merrier, sez I. ((especially ladies -somewhat under represented I feel),

          • 1642again

            I wasn’t asking you or anyone else to condemn homosexuals more than anyone else, or indeed at all. I was merely surmising that his opposition to Islam was more motivated by his sexuality than ‘cultural Christianity’ although I’m sure both are at play. As for the other things, they are self evident if one is prepared to see.

          • dannybhoy

            You misunderstood, and it proves my point about communicating on line.
            I know you weren’t asking me to condemn homosexuals, but we have had this discussion some time back.
            Some here feel that homosexuality is worse than other sins -especially in its affects on society. Although I agree with the latter part of that sentence I sometimes struggle as to why we Christians seem to focus on homosexuality more than any of the other sins listed in Scripture.
            Anyway, please let’s move on..

          • bluedog

            ‘If you don’t want to be confronted by those teachings why spend time on here?’

            This communicant takes the view that if His Grace’s blog ever becomes an echo-chamber of homogenous opinion it will be a very sad day. There’s something to be said for the challenge of different ideas, don’t you think?

          • 1642again

            I agree, but will not have my words twisted into a meaning that even a simpleton could recognise they didn’t possess.

          • Dreadnaught

            Why bring it up – you wanted to praise him?

          • 1642again

            I actually think he’s one of the better and braver journalists tackling Islam, but can see that as a homosexual why he may feel so threatened by it, and that may be a greater motivation for him that his ‘cultural Christianity’.

          • Dreadnaught

            Its not so much your words that I question but you motive.

          • 1642again

            Ah, so you’re imagining and projecting now I see.

          • Dreadnaught

            You can stop digging now.

          • 1642again

            Not digging. Just putting you straight.

            As you seem to want to go on, I have also noticed that you don’t seem at upset when a genuine anti Semite and neo-nazi comes on here espousing their vile views, In fact our big brave hero is nowhere to be found in arguing against her. Perhaps because you have so much in common? You may be a tad more socially liberal than her but I do wonder if you have a lot in common.

          • 1642, to allay any concerns you may have, Dreadnaught is not an antisemite. I’m certain of this. People who ignore haters, as I often do as well, do so for different reasons. One of them is that not everyone is as good at exposing them and getting under their skin as, for example, Carl is.

          • 1642again

            I hope not but his sudden retreat when I wondered aloud why he hadn’t opposed Nina’s forays at all makes me suspicious.

          • No need for suspicion. I’ve known Dredders on this site for years, And I also ignored Nina’s forays, in my case because I sometimes tire of the battle and of wrestling in the shit with these repulsive people, preferring to banter with my chums here.

          • dannybhoy

            Amen, I agree and in appreciation of Dreadnaught’s input, but without wanting to offend another Cromwell supporter, let peace descend once more…..

  • Albert

    I think it all goes back to the fact that the establishment wasn’t really truthful with the public about joining the EEC in 1970s. People believed there was no transfer of legal powers to the EEC. Secondly, Parliament is not sovereign. The Sovereign is sovereign, and if there is any move from her, it is not to Parliament, but to the electorate, the same electorate that voted to come out. Powers were taken from people by stealth and now legal niceties are being used to prevent them getting those powers back.

    • David

      I agree fully with you except that, surely the Civil War demonstrated that Parliament is sovereign ? But Parliament draws its’ legitimacy from the people.

      • Albert

        That would be the same Parliament that was tyrannical, I think.

        • Dreadnaught

          No; that would be Cromwell and the Puritans that were ultimately tyrannical.

          • Albert

            All degrees within heresy, if you ask me.

          • Dreadnaught

            All degrees within heresy, if you ask me.

            How quaint.

          • 1642again

            They were magnificent!

          • Anton

            They took the view that they were fighting to preserve ancient liberties under threat from a would-be absolutist monarch who had already broken his word multiple times about consulting parliament regarding taxation.

            What do you understand by the phrase “Magna Carta”?

          • Pubcrawler

            “Did she die in vain?”

          • Dreadnaught

            For starters its not ‘phrase’ its a document. The Great Charter.
            The Magna Carta was a contract between one set of elites and another. A share of the spoils of suzerainty in return for ‘loyalty’ to the Crown.

          • 1642again

            It was the start of constitutional government and individual legal rights such as habeas corpus. Democracy is not possible or stable until these foundations are in place.

          • David

            It became tyrannical.

      • The people lend their sovereignty to the chosen government of the day. It’s a temporary basis.

    • Dreadnaught

      Parliament is not sovereign. The Sovereign is sovereign.

      I beg to differ.
      Parliament is sovereign under our Constitution.
      Since Royal powers were removed by the Bill of Rights 1689, the actual definition of ‘Parliament’ is as a composite of the Monarch, the House of Lords, and the House of Commons acting together.
      Parliamentary sovereignty means that only “Parliament” has the right to make or unmake any law whatever; no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament including the Monarch.

      • Albert

        All of that may well be true at the formal level, but I don’t think that it alters the real point: Parliament receives its mandate from the electorate.

        • Dreadnaught

          Just thought it worth pointing out as you wre pretty explicit in denying the sovereignty Parliament in favour of the Monarch. You want another Civil War? 🙂

          • Albert

            The Queen is known as the Sovereign. That was my point. But no – I’m not up for another Civil War thanks!

          • bluedog

            The important point is that Mrs May, as leader of the government in the House of Commons, has deferred to the findings of the Supreme Court. There is no trace of rejection in her demeanour or her actions. From this we can conclude that the Supreme Court has become the ultimate holding company of the United Kingdom and is thus the Sovereign.

          • dannybhoy

            This is something that puzzles me. When I was young young, the home secretary for instance would consult with experts on our (British) system of law as to whether he could legally keep a person in prison after his sentence expired on the grounds that he still represented a serious danger to the public.
            Nowadays and presumably because of European law and Human Rights legislation it seems that it is the unaccountable judges who decide what can and can’t be done, and practically run the country..

          • bluedog

            Until Brexit is consummated the ECJ is the ultimate holding company of the UK in a formal sense. But we now see the Supreme Court moving to take its place.

          • Albert

            Interesting point – it does look rather American. And as others have pointed out, since when have pro-EU types been worried about Parliamentary sovereignty and scrutiny?

          • bluedog

            Not so much American as Federal. Only the UK is not a federation.

          • Albert

            Thank you – I don’t know enough about constitutions to get the language right, but something a little odd certainly seems to be going on to my untrained eye.

          • Royinsouthwest

            The Remainers or Remonears, whatever you want to call them, do seem up for a new Civil War. It is not only Britain that is in danger. If the EU continues on its course of “ever closer unity” it might lead to wars like those in Yugoslavia after the collapse of Communism. That would be ironic in view of the fact that a few years ago the EU received a Nobel Peace Prize.

            Mind you, the value of the Nobel Peace Prize has been greatly diminished over the years. Tom Lehrer, an American protest singer, stopped writing protest songs after Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize because he said satire was dead.

            Barak Obama was awarded the prize after he had been in office for 5 minutes. He should have declined it on the grounds that he had not had time to actually earn it, or, alternatively, he should have said he was accepting it on behalf of the American people because by electing a man who identified as “black” (he is really just as much white as black) the American people showed that they wished to put racial divisions behind them.

          • Anton

            That’s an urban myth about Tom Lehrer giving up at that point. Check what his Wikipedia page says about Kissinger.

          • Royinsouthwest

            Thanks for the information.

          • Anton

            Always pleased to find another Lehrer fan. I got his autograph outside the stage door after the Jun 8th 1998 London show.

    • David

      Yes that’s right Albert.
      The whole project was secretive and based on deception from the start. Its founders realised that the only way to trick the citizens of the different countries into merging into one was to proceed slowly by stealth, offering attractive sounding little promises along the way, and only to reveal what they had lost towards the end.
      When we voted the first referendum we were lied to by Heath but the deception started before with “SuperMac”.

      • Albert

        I don’t know enough details, but that is my sense, and it just feels like that is continuing – an attempt by a self-recognized elite to impose their own view on everyone else.

        • bluedog

          That’s a very good point. The pinnacle of globalism has always been the Bilderberg Group, of which David Cameron and George Osborne were rising stars. One imagines their political demise and the enthusiastic embrace of Brexit by Mrs May would be the cause of deep angst in Bilderberger circles. Cross-referencing the list of US Bilderberg attendees with the Trump cabinet seems to give a complete mismatch.

          • David

            Yes. Please see my comments above to Albert.

        • David

          Yes that is the general sense of it. The EU project has always been about hollowing out true nation state democracy leaving a mere facade. As bluedog below states, the pinnacle of globalism has always been the Bilderberg Group. Although it has received a serious blow with Brexit, policies already implemented, by say Mrs Merkel, have an inertia which will continue doing great harm.

  • Dreadnaught

    Worth a revisit: Simon Heffer’s article:
    .
    In 1962 HAROLD MACMILLAN made the first, failed, attempt to get Britain to join the Common Market. Even Eurosceptical Cabinet ministers such as Enoch Powell were taken in by Macmillan’s protestations that entry was merely about the organisation of a free-trade bloc.
    The Treaty of Rome that founded the Common Market openly pointed out, the goal was of an ‘ever closer union’ economically and politically.

    Ted Heath if not directly lying, made sure that last element was kept very quiet when he finally broke through.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-228953/HOW-FOR-40-YEARS-THE-BRITISH-PUBLIC-HAS-BEEN-LIED-TO–.html

  • HedgehogFive

    The secret history of the EU, written on an Italian prison island, reveals why the project is doomed

    We were coyly told that the little island of Ventotene off Naples was where, in 1941, a prisoner of Mussolini’s had written the visionary manifesto that looked forward to building, after the war, a “United States of Europe”. What somehow got omitted was that Altiero Spinelli was a Communist (the Today programme merely described him on air as a “Fascist prisoner”, although, lest this be misunderstood, that was edited out of their online report).

    We were not told that Spinelli’s Ventotene Manifesto proposed that his future government of Europe should be quietly assembled by its supporters over many years; and that only when all its pieces were in place would those supporters summon a convention to draw up a “Constitution for Europe”, which would finally reveal to the European people just what they had been up to.

  • ChaucerChronicle

    Your Grace

    I’m not a practising lawyer; but it seems to me that the judges in the Miller case may have got issues ‘back to front’ in reference to the exercise of the Crown’s prerogative.

    On the one-hand the 1972 European Communities Act, through which the EU pours in its laws, does give a range of rights to citizens – and citizens expect legitimately to rely upon those rights. So a Government ought not to extinguish those rights without consulting Parliament.

    On the other-hand our Government has had (and does have) the right to sign or not sign treaties.

    In the 1970s Prime Minister Heath signed British entry into the Common Market (now the EU). However, EU law could not enter the British legal system unless authorsied by an Act of Parliament.

    He then presented the European Communities Bill to Parliament and asked it to approve or disapprove.

    Parliament approved – the 1972 European Communities Act became law. Through that law the EU injects its laws.

    It is unclear to me why the judges chose to narrow the grounds of prerogative power.

    • Dreadnaught

      I came across this blog discussing Brexit and the Courts a while back which you may find interesting. Dry as dust for my taste: well it would be I reckon being written as it is by a barrister.

      Carl Gardner
      I write Head of Legal to explain developments in law, and the law behind the news, to an informed and interested but not necessarily legal audience. And because I can’t help thinking, writing and obsessing about law, particularly my specialisms in constitutional, public, human rights and European law and the way they interact with politics and society.

      https://www.headoflegal.com/2016/11/04/why-the-high-court-got-the-law-wrong-about-brexit/#comment-1038686

      • ChaucerChronicle

        Oh my word Dreadnaught! I think you’ve pointed to the opening of a can of worms. If that lawyer is correct then the Supreme Court’s judgment exterminates all the EU treaties we’ve signed up to.

        Maybe His Grace was right after all, ‘Man plans, God laughs’:

        If this judgment is correct, its consequences are, I think, radical and surprising. If in 1972 Parliament really did end the government’s power by prerogative to (as the court thinks) change UK law by doing anything that alters EU law, then surely every change to EU treaties agreed by Prime Ministers has been unlawful. Why, if this judgment stands, was it lawful for Mrs Thatcher to agree to the Single European Act? Why was it lawful for Mr Blair to sign up at Amsterdam to the Social Chapter? The High Court implies in its treatment of Rees-Mogg that he had no prerogative power to do so.

        The list of worrying consequences goes on. What power have ministers ever had to agree in Brussels to EU measures such as Directives that (as the High Court sees it) change the law in this country when adopted? It seems to me at least arguable that, according to the High Court, all of this was unlawful—and that, to act lawfully now, we must all behave as if Britain were still in the European Community as it existed on 1 January 1973, before ministers by prerogative “unlawfully” made any changes. The solution to this conundrum can’t be that Parliament later “cured” ministerial unlawfulness by confirming the changes they’d agreed; if that were the answer, then the government’s planned “great repeal bill” could cure the supposed unlawfulness of article 50 notification.

        • Dreadnaught

          Glad you checked it out. As I said – too dry to even contemplate for me.

          • Glad as well that he checked it out and slaved away to give us the simplified version. Not that it’s of much help to me, unfortunately.

          • Dreadnaught

            Each to their own MrB – each to their own.

          • I’ll wait for a synopsis of the simplified version, if anyone wants to give it go.

          • ChaucerChronicle

            Avi – I wouldn’t bother. The lawyers are like ferrets in a sack squabbling with each other.

            The next step is a ‘Who Dares Wins’ one. The Government will publish a Bill and dare MPs to vote against it – after the Brexit referendum result for Leave.

            It appears that the Christian MP, Steve Timms, may oppose the Bill.

            One needs to walk around his constituency to see the results of East European immigration on the streets: men are sleeping on the sreets; empty alcohol cans everywhere (the after effects of soviet hopelessness); walking into supermarkets paying for the bulk of the shopping but not for the alcohol (police won’t intervene saying it’s a civil law matter) and it costs the supermarkets too much in civil case costs; slowly but surely his constituency is heading towards anarchy.

          • Brexit will happen. The trick will be to maintain vigilance and prevent back-sliding and backdoor deals in the months and years to come. The opposition forces and interests against it are formidable.

    • Hi

      It’s worth looking at the three judges who voted against the verdict and their dissenting opinion

  • Goodness, too early in the day for me. Coffee, another coffee and a large cup of India’s Brooke Bond orange pekoe to wash it all down.

  • NortyNina

    “Note the juxtaposition of Brexit with emotion and irrationality, which are, she avers, attributes of religion….Brexit is the pursuit of the brainless; the delirium of simpletons; the burning passion of zealots, bigots and extremists against the rule of law and the world of rights.”

    Well the EU Referendum last summer is the only time in my lifetime, and probably for the majority of voters, that we have been given an opportunity to vote on whether we want to be part of the European Union, which has always sought to rule us and deny our democratic voice, replacing it with NGO’s and pressure groups who are paid by the EU to lobby for the changes that the EU want to make anyway.

    Quite regardless of any benefits or otherwise, it is important for the ordinary voter to vote against being a member of the Union on principle because of the way the electorate have been treated.

    • carl jacobs

      Still trying, huh? Did you think this was going away?

      What did you mean when you wrote this, Nina? I will keep asking until you explain it.

      Someone should ask him if he thinks Israel should open its borders to third worlders too. Put him on the spot, make him condemn Israel publicly. It’s people like Friedberg Fraser who prove that Hitler was right.

      Nina’s quote above is found on a weblog called “Morgoth’s Review”. The article from which Nina’s quote is taken is called “The ‘Nazi EU’ Conspiracy” dated 31 May 2016.

      • Ivan M

        Thanks Carl. God only knows what we would do without your witch-smelling vigilance.

        • carl jacobs

          God only knows what we would do without your witch-smelling vigilance.

          Attempted irony. Jack would be proud of me. Or perhaps we should just call it sarcasm?

          I imagine someone else would step up. But quite frankly I’m not willing to find out. Every time I post that question, I increase the population of people who know what she is. I also prove she won’t answer it. Why doesn’t she answer? Because she can’t answer, and she knows it. She stays silent because any answer she gives will only further impeach her credibility. But her silence achieves the same effect. I win either way.

          So I’m going to stay right here and keep doing what I am doing so long as it needs being done. If you don’t like that, I don’t care. I will not have that counterfeit hung around my neck.

          • CliveM

            Well as long as you don’t expect an answer, you won’t be disappointed! I’m still waiting for one to mine.

            Especially as she is masquerading as a Christian, it is important that we pursue the truth and expose her.

            Well done.

          • Note to self: Try not to piss Carl off. Not too much, anyway.

          • dannybhoy

            Where’s your spirit of adventure?

          • Lost it somewhere, back in the 60s.

      • 1642again

        Well done Carl. Has she explained her theory that there were no Jews or Judaism until the 3rd century AD and that it’s all an anti-white/Christian conspiracy?

        She also reverted to her normal tactics of posting in the middle of the night when there’s no one around in the UK.

    • ChaucerChronicle

      We, Catholics, Protestants, Baptists, Methodists, Agnostics, Atheists, Communists, Russian Orthodox, will continue to disinfect this blog of National Socialists like you.

      What has our referendum got to do with you as an Australian?

  • Seadog

    She is not a lawyer.

  • Owl

    Ah.. Mrs Miller is part of the problem, and is too thick to know it.

  • IrishNeanderthal

    Alas, those people who attacked her with reference to her sex or her colour only make things worse.

  • chefofsinners

    Thank you, Ms Millar, for giving the Labour Party one almighty headache.
    How delicious to watch the discomfort of their MPs trying to work out which way to vote: Devil or deep blue sea? But soft! The ravished eye is diverted to the leadership, once again being ignored by the backbenchers and riven by resignations.
    Meanwhile, the government will emerge with a huge majority for what it was going to do anyway, and the arguments for a white paper put to bed.
    No Tory strategist would have dared conceive such a spectacular own goal.