The Brexit vote on June 23 implies Britain will exit the European Union, correct? Is not that what it was all about? Well, not really, based on a growing chorus of voices that contends “No” does not mean no, “Out” does not mean out, “Leave” does not mean leave, “irreversible” does not mean irreversible, etc.
Indeed, it is valid that “Remain” lost and “Leave” won. And, yes, it is valid that Remain advocate Prime Minister David Cameron, just two days before the Brexit referendum vote, cranked up a last-ditch “Project Fear” blitzkrieg imploring British voters not to take the “irreversible” action of serving Brussels with divorce papers. Cameron pleaded with older voters to reject the call to “leave Europe” (as if the decades-old political EU is synonymous with the centuries-old historical, cultural, geographical Europe) and pressed them to “think about the hopes and dreams of your children and grandchildren.”
“And remember,” he cautioned, “they can’t undo the decision we take. If we vote out, that’s it. It is irreversible. We will leave Europe – for good. And the next generation will have to live with the consequences far longer than the rest of us.”
German Chancellor Angela Merkel likewise echoed that “irreversible” message, after meeting with Cameron at the summit of EU leaders in Brussels, on June 28, the Tuesday after the Brexit vote. “I see no possibility to reverse this. We would do well to accept this reality,” Merkel explained to reporters.
Nevertheless, even as Merkel, Cameron, EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, and EU Council President Donald Tusk go on to sound the irreversible/permanent/forever theme (most clearly in a desperate effort to quell the “Domino effect” of exit referenda by other member states), other voices owned by the same Remain side are suggesting – and some outright proposing – that the U.K. Parliament basically disregard and defy the Brexit referendum, and vote to stay in the EU. Other Brexit critics are indicating the U.K. hold a second In/Out referendum, utilizing the leverage it has won with the Brexit vote to acquire concessions, particularly on such thorny problems as border control/migration, EU foreign/military policy, EU judicial authority, taxation, monetary policy, and spending.
The “Remainians” have a legal, technical point in their benefit: The Brexit referendum was, legally, a non-binding “advisory” vote, in spite of the fearmongering, handwringing, once-and-forever claims of irreversibility by Cameron and Company during the campaign. Legally, Parliament (which intensely favored the Remain side) can ignore the results of the referendum. The big question currently is, are there enough Remainians in the Conservative and Labour Parties who are prepared to ditch the popular mandate signified by the Brexit vote, and risk the political repercussion?
The U.K.’s Remainian politicians, along with their Big Business and Big Banking allies (and the British and world press), are working on that. “Project Fear II” is in full operational mode, hammering British voters with a continuous barrage of stories of approaching market doom, jobs doom, investment doom, pension doom, business doom, banking doom, real estate doom, national security doom – all in a heated attempt to stir ample panic to stampede voters into endorsement of a redo vote.
A big element of that propaganda campaign is publishing “Brexit buyer’s remorse” reports about, and comments by, Leave voters, stating, basically, “Gee, I didn’t know it would have this terrible effect. Maybe we didn’t think this through; we probably need a revote.”
Here are a couple of the politicians and political commentators laying the ground work for a “Brexit redo”:
Former Labour Party Prime Minister Tony Blair – In an lengthy television interview with Andrew Neil on BBC, Blair, a rabid pro-EU globalist, detailed the Brexit doom and gloom arguments. When questioned by Neil about putting the Brexit problem to a second public vote, Blair stated, “Why rule anything out.”
Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt – A member of Cameron’s Conservative Party and a Member of Parliament, Hunt was one of the first British pols out of the gate to recommend further negotiations with the EU and a second vote on the Brexit. Hunt states that after Cameron steps down in October and a new prime minister is chosen (a job he is vying for), the new government should decide a deal with Brussels, which would then be “put to the British people.”
Tim Farron, Leader of the Liberal Democrats – Two days after the Brexit vote, Farron declared that his party would take a position at the next general election on a platform of derailing Brexit and keeping Britain in the European Union.
Jaroslaw Kaczynsk, former Polish Prime Minister – Kaczynski, the powerful leader of Poland’s ruling Law and Justice Party, explained the Brexit as “very bad,” and requested EU reforms and a second Brexit referendum in the U.K.
Sorin Moisa, Member of the European Parliament (MEP) – In an article for EurActive.com entitled “Why Brexit will not happen,” Moisa, a Romanian member of the Socialists and Democrats Group, publishes that “public opinion will wake up to the truth about Brexit,” and that some coalition of Labour and Conservative politicians will “force a new referendum.” “The new vote will be the real choice,” he boasts, “relying on genuine social understanding of what is actually at stake, and chances are it will reject Brexit with a strong majority. Giving up negotiations for the Exit Treaty should then close the matter once and for all. A huge social learning exercise will have taken place for both the UK and Europe. It’s going to be a lesson for populists of all creeds.”
Philip Stephens, columnist for the Financial Times – Writing an article for the very pro-EU Financial Times (long regarded as one of the principal U,K. mouthpieces of the Bilderberg globalists), entitled “Can Brexit be stopped? Anything is possible,” Stephens details a number of reasons that could be utilized to block a British exit from the EU. He wraps up his article:
So pro-Europeans should give up? No. So long as a British government does not trigger Article 50, Britain remains an EU member. The political forces unleashed by this referendum are unprecedented and unpredictable. It is far from fanciful to imagine that the next two years or so will see the complete recasting of the nation’s politics, quite possibly with the creation of a new, centrist, pro-European party. So those who want Britain to stay close to its own continent could think the unthinkable and work to make it thinkable.
Making the unthinkable thinkable (and doable) is the apparent objective behind David Cameron’s dilatory approach to activating Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which would commence the exit ball rolling, and start the clock ticking on the two-year exit procedure. By delaying the procedure, he has added to the uncertainty and given the politicians, central bankers, commercial banking insiders, and pro-EU lobby the time and maneuvering room required to stir up the Brexit anxiety and Brexit remorse to the levels needed to make formal proposals for a second referendum politically feasible.
Nevertheless, working at cross purposes on this plan are the Eurocrats’ own special plans for an overreaching EU superstate, details of which have only started leaking out in the past couple of days. As British voters become conscious of this centralized power grab, it will be increasingly hard for the EU schemers to overcome proper worries about the Orwellian features of this Big Brother superstate.
Feel free to leave a comment. We would like to know what you think. If you liked the post hit the like button below. Thanks!!!