In 2016, under Prime Minister David Cameron, UK citizens were offered a referendum in order to decide whether or not the UK should stay in the European Union, and continue to have most of its affairs run from Brussels.
The result, as most know, was that a majority voted in favor of leaving the EU. 17.3 million voted this way.
Cameron unknowingly committed political suicide by allowing the referendum to take place; as he – and his advisors – were convinced that the majority would vote in favor of staying in the EU.
So began the saga called ‘Brexit’.
A new Prime Minister was chosen by the Conservative party, Theresa May, ex-head of the Home Office. May was seen by her cabinet colleagues as best able to negotiate the terms involved in leaving the EU. However, no country has ever quit the EU before, so there is no precedent for what the precise procedures will be.
But what we hear, is that it will take a minimum of two years to achieve, and that around 50 to 70 billion pounds will be the price to be paid for liberty. What we also know is that, to enable the transition to take place, the government has to adopt the entire EU rule book as part of British law, before then being eligible to take out those rules that the country decides in doesn’t want to adhere to! A truly bizarre concept – and a strong hint that something else is actually going on here.
Brexit is to be found on the front page of the national UK press almost daily. It is, in spite of the referendum victory for the ‘leave’ proponents, a highly controversial situation. One which has been revealed to be extremely complex, largely due to the fact that the entire divorce proceedings have been left in the hands of bureaucrats from both sides of the English Channel.
What are the motives for imposing the various conditions that these faceless clerks are imposing on the process? Who is actually behind this agenda – pulling the hidden strings?
There are significant numbers of UK citizens who don’t want the UK to go through this divorce. They are headed by some powerful media oligarchs and big business interests. These ‘stay’ proponents are using their considerable firepower to try to persuade the nation that the UK will suffer serious economic decline, should the full exit be achieved.
They have recently revived ex-Prime Minister and war criminal, Tony Blair, to lead their cause. Blair, you will remember, was the one to insist that Iraq had a hidden cache of weapons of mass destruction – and that Saddam Hussein was lying, saying that his country had no such weapons.
We shouldn’t need to remind ourselves that the entire horror of the invasion and military destruction of Iraq was predicated upon a fabrication of evidence concerning the existence of these weapons, at the insistence of Tony Blair and George Bush, the then US President.
What are you looking for?