IT’S ALL SO TERRIBLY UNFAIR

The mourning of the metropolitan media elite is very revealing. They can’t stand this democracy business. Chavs having a say? Ugh.
.

Tim Blair

The UN’s Special Representative for International Migration, Peter Sutherland, demands corrective action:

image

Some of Sutherland’s fellow losers think a petition might help:

Thursday’s referendum saw 17.4 million (51.9 per cent) votes cast to leave the EU, compared with 16.1 million (48.1 per cent) for remaining part of the bloc, with a turnout of 72.2 per cent, according to the Electoral Commission.

In response, more than 2.6 million people have signed an online petition calling for the Government to implement a rule that ‘if the Remain or Leave vote is less than 60 per cent based on a turnout less than 75 per cent, there should be another referendum’.

These people are ridiculous. Meanwhile, Remain supporter Oliver Imhof has now joined the Leave camp:

Above all other ideological affiliations, I am a democrat. And as a democrat I have to accept a defeat. I have to accept being oppressed by a majority of an older generation that seems intent on depriving us of our future. 

This is why I am leaving this country.

Bye bye!

.

There is no excuse delaying to invoke Article 50. Negotiations will disclose UK’s impossible situation. A 2nd referendum seems inevitable.

Clq4bi6WEAAZAOI

BRILLIANT BREXIT BOMBSHELL

Last week’s Brexit vote in the UK was the finest nation-defending decision since the Manhattan Project was approved during World War II.

Not only has the rejection of Britain’s European Union membership commenced the UK’s restoration as an independent global power, but it is also serving as a brilliant sociological x-ray. In the wake of Brexit, we see the biases and prejudices of anti-democratic leftist snobs exposed in stunning, nuclear-lit clarity.

It was only a few years ago that leftists were demanding we pay attention to the incoherent whining of the Occupy movement. Their filthy tent cities represented the authentic voice of the people, apparently, and must be heeded.

Yet when the people of Britain actually did have their say last Thursday, leftists were furious at the result and dismissed Leave voters as ignorant racist fools. “The chavs are going out all over Europe,” sneered the ABC’s Jonathan Green, “chavs” being the British equivalent of bogans.

“The truth is this is modern politics: ignorance masquerading as firm belief,” Green continued. “What does Leave actually mean? It’s a proxy for prejudice.”

Rejection of the EU actually meant that a majority of British voters were sick of being dictated to, on immigration and many other issues, by unelected EU clowns.

On the morning of the referendum, a Sydney mate called his Uncle Johnny in the UK to wish him a happy 90th birthday and to ask how his WWII paratrooper uncle would be voting.

“When I was 20 I dropped into France to stop the Germans taking over my country,” he replied, “so I thought I’d better have another go at stopping them now.” Then the war hero put on his overcoat, strode out into the West Yorkshire rain, and cast his vote. He’d be one of those ignorant, prejudiced “chavs” Green was talking about, I suppose.

“Brexit proves how dangerous the fear peddled by hyper-conservatives and anti-immigration parties can be,” Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young babbled, although she was less concerned about danger following the deaths of 200 asylum seekers whose Australia-bound vessel sank in 2011. “Tragedies happen, accidents happen,” said Hanson-Young. So does democracy, Sarah. And it kills far fewer people.

It was touching to see a sudden concern from leftists about financial issues in the wake of the Leave vote’s success. “A billion dollars has wiped off the value of pension funds alone,” wept Guardian columnist Vanessa Badham. “Companies are withdrawing staff and investments. It’s huge.” Given that Badham is a Marxist, this represents something of a shift in values. Those poor, poor companies.

(Continue reading Brilliant Brexit Bombshell.)

ANGRY AND ASHAMED

Tim Blair

The Sunday Mail‘s Steve Rice is furious:

A stunning decision by 52 per cent of voters to leave the European Union has, for the first time, made me angry and ashamed to be English …

No one should truly have to feel like that about their homeland.

Steve has no need to feel embarrassed. After all, he now lives in … Adelaide.

UPDATE. By contrast, here’s Daniel Hannan:

I’ve never felt more proud to be British. Think of the sheer weight of the forces lined up to keep us in the EU.

All the main parties. The CBI, the TUC and virtually every Brussels-funded trade association or lobby group.

Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley and the other megabanks and multi¬-nationals.

Every foreign leader who owed David Cameron a favour.

Think of the threats and the scare stories: recession, unemployment, environmental disaster, World War Three, “the end of Western civilization”.

How did British voters react? With calm, common sense and courage. 

And they won.

Andrew Bolt:

Frauds and foreigners help Leftists try to subvert Brexit vote

Andrew Bolt

How does the Left deal with defeat in a poll? By enlisting liars and foreigners to overturn it:

The House of Commons petitions committee is investigating allegations of fraud in connection with a petition calling for a second EU referendum.

Its inquiry is focused on the possibility that some names could be fraudulent – 77,000 signatures have already been removed.

More than 3.2 million signatures are on the petition, but PM David Cameron has said there will be no second vote…

A number of people on Twitter have pointed out that some people appear to have signed the petition from outside the UK.

Only British citizens or UK residents are permitted to sign the petition, including Britons based abroad.

No wonder luvvies think democracy is divisive & should be avoided. They mercilessly attack opponents & refuse to accept results: divisive.

UN: - EU must destroy homogeneity of member states through immigration
Despite warnings from many people that this huge immigration into Europe that we see now, had to be planned on a high level, very few would listen. Instead those who insisted that something was fishy were called conspiracy nutters and paranoid. But when the UN chief of migration, Peter Sutherland (pictured), openly states what is on the table, what the plan is for Europe, the conspiracies suddenly become truth, as many originally far-fetched conspiracies do.

Peter Sutherland, who is UN migration chief & chairman at Goldman Sachs bank, wants to use (Muslim) immigration to destroy European countries’ culture. Here is what BBC

reported:

“The EU should “do its best to undermine” the “homogeneity” of its member states, the UN’s special representative for migration has said.

Peter Sutherland told peers the future prosperity of many EU states depended on them becoming multicultural.

He also suggested the UK government’s immigration policy had no basis in international law.

He was being quizzed by the Lords EU home affairs sub-committee which is investigating global migration.

He told the House of Lords committee migration was a “crucial dynamic for economic growth” in some EU nations “however difficult it may be to explain this to the citizens of those states”.

This was actually the plan already years ago, and ISIS, who has less brains combined than a football team, could never come up with, and executed such a large-scale plan. The terrorist organization is simply successfully exploiting it by sending terrorists along with migrants and refugees.

Mr Sutherland, who is non-executive chairman of Goldman Sachs International and a former chairman of oil giant BP, heads the Global Forum on Migration and Development , which brings together representatives of 160 nations to share policy ideas. The organization has had 7 international meetings so far, and had its first one in 2007.

The 7th meeting was held in Stockholm, Sweden (imagine that) on 14 to 16 May 2014, where the theme was: “Unlocking the Potential of Migration for Inclusive Development.”

And the 8th meeting will be held in Istanbul, Turkey on 14-16 October 2015, where the theme will be: “Strengthening Partnerships: Human Mobility for Sustainable Development.”.

The agenda for a New World Order, often referred to as NWO, most people reject as a conspiracy. This despite former US President George H.W. Bush’s speech of exactly the plan for a NWO. Now, combine the above and the video below, and the conspiracy starts to make sense, huh?

Of course there will be conflicts throughout Europe at some point. It will be a clash of civilizations, and most likely it is something that has been calculated into the plan. Reduction of the population is surely going to happen. It is inevitably in conflicts. Then the UN Peace Keeping forces will swoop in, patrolling in Europe, and the UN is half way there, policing us.

The US however, is (at the moment) a different matter. Citizens are armed and can protect themselves. At least so far. But it won’t last. Disarmament of the US population is an important goal for the Obama administration (and the UN), and it’s fast approaching. And if you thought that amendments and laws can’t be changed, take a look at Europe, China, Russia, and most countries, where only the criminals carry, illegally.

NWO is a plan, not so much a conspiracy anymore, and it’s being executed now.

But don’t take my word for it. Instead listen:

There is very little we can do about it. When the elite decides upon something, it is imposed upon us whatever we say or do. Unless there is an “European spring”, but that is not likely to happen. We are both too lazy and ignorant, and most of us refuse to even pay attention to stuff like this. Like herded sheep, watching “American Idol” and football. Grassing on the field till the herder calls. Lamb chops for dinner…

6 thoughts on “IT’S ALL SO TERRIBLY UNFAIR”

  1. Brexit’s Complicated Aftermath

    by Theodore Dalrymple

    For a long time, Britons who wanted their country to leave the European Union were regarded almost as mentally ill by those who wanted it to stay. The leavers didn’t have an opinion; they had a pathology. Since one doesn’t argue with pathology, it wasn’t necessary for the remainers to answer the leavers with more than sneers and derision.

    Even after the vote, the attitude persists. Those who voted to leave are described as, ipso facto, small-minded, xenophobic, and fearful of the future. Those who voted to stay are described as, ipso facto, open-minded, cosmopolitan, and forward-looking. The BBC itself suggested as much on its website. In short, the desire to leave was a return to the insularity that resulted in the famous—though apocryphal—newspaper headline: fog in the channel: continent cut off.

    If insularity is indeed on the rise, it is affecting increasing numbers of Europeans. According to the latest polls, nearly a half of the Italians and Dutch want their countries to leave. Discontent with the Union is also widespread in other countries. The French have a poorer opinion of the European Union than do the British, but because the French believe it to be reformable, fewer want to leave. Before the vote, the danger of Brexit to the integrity of the European Union was described in the French media in pathological terms, as a possible “contagion,” rather than merely an example to be followed—or not, as the case might be. And now the Union is faced with a dilemma: on the one hand, it will not want to make Brexit too painless for Britain, in case other countries, such as Sweden, follow suit; but on the other, it will not want to disturb trade relationships with one of Europe’s largest economies. Britain’s trade with Europe is largely in Europe’s favor, but it’s easier for Britain to find alternative sources of imports than for Europe to find alternative export markets.

    There is now a race between the breakup of the European Union and the United Kingdom itself—for the Scottish leader has threatened another referendum on independence. This breakup would be even more difficult, especially for Scotland; Germany has already said that it would welcome Scotland into the Union, but if Scotland thinks that it would then be able to escape George Osborne’s policy of so-called austerity—which is to say, his feeble attempts to balance the budget—it might get a nasty shock when dealing with German finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble. And, if Scotland were to sign up to the Schengen Agreement, a ridiculous but real and damaging land border between England and Scotland would suddenly become a reality. This is something not seen for hundreds of years.

    The vote might also lead to a unification of Ireland, for the Northern Irish also voted to remain in Europe. Sinn Fein has already called for a referendum on unification. Such unification would be a great blessing for England, but not necessarily for Ireland.

    One possible reason for the success of the Brexit campaign was President Obama’s ill-conceived intervention, when he threatened that if Britain voted to leave the Union, it would have to go to the “back of the queue” as far as any trade agreements are concerned. This sounded like bullying, and was not well-received by much of the British population, which had already been subjected to quite a lot of such bullying from others. If I were an American, I shouldn’t have been pleased with it either, for Obama spoke not as a president with a few months left in office, but as a president-for-life, or at least one with the right to decide his successor’s policy.

    Among the many subjects not properly discussed during the campaign was whether large and fundamental political changes should be made based on 50 percent-plus-one of the votes cast in a single plebiscite. The House of Commons is not constitutionally bound by the results, and most members of Parliament support remaining in the European Union. They could argue, not without plausibility, that a vote representing no more than three-eighths of the total electorate isn’t quite the groundswell of opinion that should be required for fundamental change. If they acted on this argument, however, violence might erupt.

    First published in City Journal.

      1. I haven’t seen data that leaves out London – which skewed it somewhat. According to this, “England voted strongly for Brexit, by 53.4% to 46.6%, as did Wales, with Leave getting 52.5% of the vote and Remain 47.5%.
        Scotland and Northern Ireland both backed staying in the EU. Scotland backed Remain by 62% to 38%, while 55.8% in Northern Ireland voted Remain and 44.2% Leave.”
        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887

        But some areas voted much higher, either way. Even Scotland isn’t as clear cut as some are saying. Again, results were skewed by the Central Belt which takes in Edinburgh and Glasgow, and receives generous kickbacks/bribes/ sweeteners from the EU in the form of grants for charities, business, media, uni’s, schools, galleries, museums etc. In my area it was borderline between remain and leave. Here’s more on that:
        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36616028

  2. Great article, thanks.
    2 important points I hadn’t spotted previously:
    1. “Before the vote, the danger of Brexit to the integrity of the European Union was described in the French media in pathological terms, as a possible “contagion,” rather than merely an example to be followed—or not, as the case might be.”
    2. “One possible reason for the success of the Brexit campaign was President Obama’s ill-conceived intervention, when he threatened that if Britain voted to leave the Union, it would have to go to the “back of the queue” as far as any trade agreements are concerned. This sounded like bullying, and was not well-received by much of the British population, which had already been subjected to quite a lot of such bullying from others. If I were an American, I shouldn’t have been pleased with it either, for Obama spoke not as a president with a few months left in office, but as a president-for-life, or at least one with the right to decide his successor’s policy.”

    1. Other theories which support observed facts:
      Relativity theory
      String theory
      Theory of Gravitation….

Comments are closed.