Some 75 British politicians went to court, not round the corner from Westminster to the English High Court (which had already dismissed the case against the prorogation of parliament) but to the Scottish Court. Why? Because they thought – rightly as it turned out – that the political nature of that court would be different. There is no clearer proof that politics has driven the law from the courts! Doubtless Remainers would call it “a people’s court”. So did the Nazis -“Volksgericht”!
We all know the massive evidence for the Nazi foundation of the European Union, its planning by leading Nazis like Walter Funk (convicted at Nuremberg but released in the mid 1950s to work in the Lower Saxony Education Ministry) implemented by people like Hans Globke (a leading Nazi responsible for the Nuremberg Race Laws and then State Secretary under Adenauer in the 1950s) and Walter Hallstein (the “Nazi Leadership Officer” responsible under Hitler for negotiating with Fascist Italy the post war “Jew free” Nazi settlement) who became the first President of the European Union.
In today’s Europe, when NATO troops entered Kosovo the Albanian KLA greeted them as friends and as “the fascist armies”. When German troops entered Bosnia they were greeted by “Handzar” troops – the name of the Bosnian Nazi SS division in the Second World War, re-formed in the 1990s.
There were many more Nazis and fascists and Nazi supporters involved in creating the EU (see https://www.amazon.co.uk/Into-Fire-Rodney-Atkinson-ebook/dp/B07QWBFF3R/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=%22And+into+the+Fire%22+by+Rodney+Atkinson&qid=1568303343&s=gateway&sr=8-2
available on Amazon or through this website) and (http://freenations.net/of-course-the-eu-is-like-nazi-europe/ ) so it is no surprise that those in Britain who seek our final surrender to this modern version of corporatist fascism and European imperialism have used all the lies, propaganda, prevention of elections and constitutional bypasses which characterise fascist methods.
Even their grotesque demonstrating and singing on the floor of the House of Commons looks like the kind of disruption typical of Nazis in the 1930s Reichstag! The Nazis had minority support – so do the Remainers today!
THE PROROGATION CASE
One of the characteristics of courts in a fascist society is their continuous interventions in the democratic process and their increasingly political nature. These are quotes from a Court Summary of the judgement in Scotland which declared this particular prorogation of parliament illegal. https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/in-full-scottish-court-of-session-rules-boris-johnson-s-suspension-of-parliament-unlawful-1-5002045
“Lord Brodie considered that whereas when the petition was raised the question was unlikely to have been justiciable, the particular prorogation that had occurred, as a tactic to frustrate Parliament, could legitimately be established as unlawful. This was an egregious case of a clear failure to comply with generally accepted standards of behaviour of public authorities.
It was to be inferred that the principal reasons for the prorogation were to prevent or impede Parliament holding the executive to account and legislating with regard to Brexit, and to allow the executive to pursue a policy of a no deal Brexit without further Parliamentary interference.”
Judges are supposed to take the facts and obey the law – not “infer” what was intended by a perfectly legal act – i.e. the prorogation of the longest session of Parliament for 400 years, the accommodation of the Party conference season and the presentation of the new Prime Minister’s Government’s programme.
They may as well say that any Government which prior to the Fixed Term Parliament Act decided to hold an election at a time of their choosing would (they “infer”) be illegally taking advantage of a weaker opposition. Or in the John Major case where holding an election prevented the publication of an embarrassing enquiry into the MPs’ expenses scandal. It matters not what can be “inferred” or what advantage the Governing party might get – it matters only if the prorogation was lawful and usual. And that both the English Courts and the Northern Irish Court have confirmed.
This one was perfectly usual. Its length, 34 days compares with the length in 2016 of 25 days and 2018 of 26 days. In fact only extra 4 days of parliamentary sittings will be lost and we know it made no difference because the Opposition were able to mount the biggest coup against any Government in history and pass their own legislation on the Brexit extension! So much for “impeding Parliament”
MORE FASCIST METHODS OF THE REMAINERS
When Lord James of Blackheath exposed in the House of Lords the disgraceful surrender of British Defence and Security interests in the May Withdrawal Agreement (including defence equipment procurement and Intelligence sharing abhorred by our Intelligence Allies in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA – “Five Eyes” system) he was told by Lord Blunkett:
I appeal to him to conclude, because it is not in either his interests or the interests of the Committee for him to continue.
Former NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson demanded to know Lord James’ sources. Other Lords demanded he resign and advised him he can expect a visit from the police! All this for stating what has been in the public domain for months – but not in so effectively censored official political discussion (like so much else critical to our survival e.g. this website!!!)
In his latest bending of our constitutional procedures Dominic Grieve MP (the holder of the French Legion D’Honneur) insulted the Queen by getting a majority to present a blatantly political “Humble Address” to the Sovereign:
“to direct Ministers to lay before this House, not later than 11.00pm Wednesday 11 September, all correspondence and other communications (whether formal or informal, in both written and electronic form, including but not limited to messaging services including WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Facebook messenger, private email accounts both encrypted and unencrypted, text messaging and iMessage and the use of both official and personal mobile phones) to, from or within the present administration, since 23 July 2019 relating to the prorogation of Parliament sent or received by one or more of the following individuals”
As Guido Fawkes has pointed out, this is a blatant refutation of Article 10 of the Human Rights Act which protects individuals:
Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
But the fascist authoritarian leftist corporatists know how to sweep such niceties aside! And just in case the people’s elected Government and the will of the people expressed in a referendum should be a problem we even have one (highly politicised judge) saying that if Boris Johnson would not trigger it a civil servant could sign a letter asking the EU for a Brexit extension, and could rule that the letter is in effect from the Prime Minister, whether or not the PM agrees.
The ultimate corporatist Fascism! – rule by “civil” service acting on the demands of a rogue parliament which daily thumbs its nose at the electorate – an electorate of which 50% said it was “fundamentally undemocratic” for MPs to try to prevent the UK from leaving the EU and agrees by 54% to 25% that the:
2016 referendum result should be respected, ‘irrespective of how I voted’
Even 35% of Remain voters agreed while 49% (to 29%) opposed a Brexit Extension to January 2020 and 43% (to 32%) agreed that if the EU refuses to make any more concessions, the UK should leave the EU without a deal on October 31st.
HIJACKING PARLIAMENT
It was under Standing Order 24 https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmstords/614/body.htm#BGBIGDDA which allows emergency debates that Speaker Bercow allowed the opposition to take over the parliamentary timetable. He had long before abandoned any semblance of neutrality by boasting he had voted Remain and his increasingly shrill attacks on the Government and Leavers have confirmed that he is the worst Speaker in living memory – siding in word and deed with Remainers in all parties and against the voters.
Standing Order 24 says an MP “rising in his place at the commencement of public business may propose, in an application lasting not more than three minutes, that the House should debate a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration”. Then “the debate shall be held on a motion that the House has considered the specified matter” and “a debate under this order may last not more than three hours” and it must concern “the administrative responsibilities of Ministers of the Crown or could come within the scope of ministerial action.” (taking over the Government’s timetables is not such a “specific” matter)
The Order says nothing about taking over the Parliamentary timetable which has always been within Government control. Standing Order 14 states that government business has precedence on each day of a parliamentary session, with certain exceptions. Currently, the key exceptions include:
• The 13 Private Members’ Bill Fridays on which the Commons debates bills proposed by individual MPs
• The 20 days allocated to Opposition parties
• The 35 days given over to debates chosen by the Backbench Business Committee, which chooses topics on the basis of bids made by MPs
So that Order was also overturned to pass, with the Speaker’s help, the Opposition’s Bill which took control of the timetable and then took control of Withdrawal negotiations with the EU.
MASSIVE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR BREXIT DELAY ACT
It has also rightly been maintained that the Opposition’s “Surrender Act” means that for every week’s delay in Brexit it will cost taxpayers £250m or £1bn per month. Only the Government can move a “money resolution” to provide such funds and this was not sought nor granted. Therefore the Act to force a Brexit extension is unconstitutional and invalid.
But what do the new parliamentary hegemonists care!?
In the New Statesman (surprisingly – are the Left catching up at last?) the historian Helen Thompson argued that Remainers were guilty of breaking the constitution:
“Those who wish to stop Brexit are not good-faith defenders of the principle of parliamentary sovereignty they now purport to champion.
It takes some chutzpah to assert that parliamentary sovereignty requires the legislature to triumph over the executive so that the UK can stay in a constitutional order that places EU law above parliament’s authority to legislate.”
BROTHERS AT WAR
Much media coverage was given to the resignation of Boris Johnson’s brother Jo Johnson. But less well publicised by our great “democratic” British media was the strong attack on Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party by Jeremy’s brother Piers Corbyn. He wrote @Piers_Corbyn:
“What the ……are labour playing at? One clause in Benn’s bill means we can only leave the EU if the EU agrees. 5 Million leavers voted Labour at last election I don’t think they’ll vote Labour next time, so much for Labour respecting the result of the 2016 referendum”
FASCISTS TO THE LEFT OF US, FASCISTS TO THE RIGHT OF US
………Into the valley of death road the 35 million (voters in the 2016 Referendum).
We must never forget that Fascism and Nazism (that combination of right wing corporatist big business and the State with left wing elitist socialism) was a dominant political movement in Europe from 1925 to 1975. It has returned – as I predicted 30 years ago in my booklet “Your Country Your Democracy, the Threat from the European Union”.
The contempt for democracy and the sovereignty of the voters, abolition of the nation state which begat modern democracies, the hatred of communities and individual democratic capitalists contrasts with their love of the big State, big business and big banks (financiers behind the Remain campaign) supranational business and supranational power, the technocratic and bureaucratic hierarchies and elitist pseudo intellectuals.
Their hatred of the Jews murdered millions in the 1940s and is driving Jews out of Europe in record numbers today. Their corporate control of markets exploits the consumer and their corporatist control of Government bypasses the voters.
Their politicised courts distort the law and deny justice. The rule by judges and elitist collectives (aided by an unbalanced Speaker) overrule the true sovereigns’ democratic power.
