Tag Archives: European Union

Freedom To Travel

Posted on by

Americans have become accustomed to traveling where they want to go when they want to go. That is part of the automobile culture that has developed in this country. An automobile represents freedom of movement. Americans are also used to being able to travel abroad without many restrictions (safety concerns, diplomatic issues can occasionally limit that freedom, but generally we go where we want to go). That may be changing shortly.

On June 5th (updated June 6th), The Epoch Times posted the following headline:

WHO Adopts European-Style COVID-19 Vaccine Passports as Part of New Global Digital Health Certificate

There are some health issues that should be considered when a person is traveling overseas–if a person has a serious cough or a high fever, they probably should not be allowed on an airplane, but I strongly object to global health certificates–particularly after seeing vaccine mandates implemented during the Covid pandemic. What government agency is going to determine who is eligible to receive a global digital health certificate? What vaccines or shots will be required in order for a person to receive this certificate? Will natural immunity be considered?
The article reports:
The World Health Organization (WHO) said it will take up the European Union’s digital COVID-19 vaccine passport framework as part of a new global network of digital health certificates.

The WHO said in a June 5 statement that it had entered into a “landmark digital health partnership” with the European Commission (EC), the European Union’s executive body.

As part of this new joint venture, Europe’s existing framework of digital vaccine passports will serve as the first building block of a global network of digital health products.

The article concludes:

Journalist Nick Corbishley, who writes about economic and political trends in Europe and Latin America, has warned that vaccine passports can lead to the implementation of a global digital identity scheme that will threaten privacy and freedom across the world.

“It’s like this checkpoint society. Wherever you want to go, you have to show your mobile phone, your identity … even if it’s just to go into a supermarket or go into a shop,” he said on EpochTV’s “Crossroads.”

Corbishley described the negative aspects of a global digital identification scheme as a kind of “digital gulag” in which people could be “effectively banished from society.”

“That is a terrifying vision,” he said.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. Various people are encouraging reading 1984 as a guide to where we are headed. Personally, I recommend the Book of Revelation in the Bible.

This Is Not A Happy Thought

Posted on by

On Thursday, Breitbart posted the following headline:

WEF’s Klaus Schwab Says China Will Be a ‘Role Model’ in the ‘Systemic Transformation’ of the World

China, the country that imprisons Uighurs, uses slave labor, puts anyone who disagrees with the government in jail, uses an ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) scale to control its population, etc., is the country Schwab thinks we should emulate.

The article quotes Klaus Schwab:

“I respect China’s achievements, which are tremendous over the last over 40 years, I think it’s a role model for many countries,” the Davos chief said, adding that while he believes countries should be able to choose the system they prefer to live under, the “Chinese model is certainly a very attractive model for quite a number of countries.”

“I look very much forward to having a strong Chinese voice in Davos to explain even better to the world what it means to see the party Congress which laid down the principles of the policy [and] what it really means for global collaboration and for global development,” Schwab added.

He concluded by saying that he has taken “great satisfaction” in seeing the European Union become more “unified” in its thinking following the Chinese virus and the war in Ukraine and that this could lead to deeper ties between Brussels and Beijing.

“I’m very pleased that we speak not only about Chinese-U.S. relations but also again about European-Chinese relations, and I feel despite all the question marks and to a certain extent cautious approach which we see in Europe, I think that very close ties can be established again between China and Europe because there’s such an interwoven economy.”

The article concludes:

China also seems to be in broad agreement with the World Economic Forum on using the issue of climate change to usher in radical changes.

For example, at this year’s WEF summit in Davos, the president of the Alibaba Group Chinese tech giant, J. Michael Evans said the firm, which like all other companies in Communist China is closely linked to the state, will be seeking to implement an “individual carbon footprint tracker” to monitor the behaviour of individuals in terms of their supposed environmental impact.

“We are developing through technology the ability for consumers to measure their own carbon footprint… where are they travelling, how are they travelling, what are they eating, what are they consuming on the platform,” Evans said.

It’s time for Americans to wake up. We need to elect people who will stand firm to protect our freedom. It is obvious that many of the world leaders are moving away from freedom to embrace tyranny. We need not to be part of that.

The Deep State Tries To Put Guardrails On Twitter

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article about how the political left and the fourth branch of government are attempting to put guardrails on Twitter now that Twitter is threatening them with free speech.

The article reports:

I think we are now seeing the outlines of how the Fourth Branch of Government are planning to keep control over information, specifically public discussion on Big Tech platforms, even as Elon Musk moves to open the valves of information from the social media platform Twitter.

Previously the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) announced a new Dept of Homeland Security priority to combat disinformation {LINK} on technology platforms including social media.

Many eyebrows were raised as the announcement appeared to be an open admission that the U.S. government was going to control information by applying labels, that would align with allies in social media, who need a legal justification for censorship and content removal.

This CISA announcement was quickly followed by various government officials and agencies saying it was critical to combat Russian disinformation, as the events in Ukraine unfolded.  In essence, Ukraine was the justification for search engines like Google, DuckDuckGo, and social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube to begin targeting information and content that did not align with the official U.S. government narrative.

Previously those same methods were deployed by the U.S. government, specifically the CDC and FDA, toward COVID-19 and the vaccination program. All of this background aligns with the previous visibility of a public-private partnership between the bureaucracy of government, the U.S. intelligence agencies and U.S. social media.  That partnership now forms the very cornerstone of the DHS/CISA effort to control what information exists in the public space.  It is highly important that people understand what is happening.

In July of 2021 the first admission of the official agenda behind the public-private partnership was made public {Reuters Article}.

What we are seeing now is an extension of the government control mechanisms, combined with a severe reaction by all stakeholders to the latest development in the Twitter takeover.

For two years the control mechanisms around information have been cemented by govt and Big Tech.  Even the deployment of the linguistics around disinformation, misinformation and malinformation is all part of that collective effort.  The collaboration between the government and Big Tech is not a matter for debate, it is all easily referenced by their own admissions.   The current issue is how they are deploying the information controls.

The Daily Wire reported on Tuesday:

The European Union issued a warning to Elon Musk on Tuesday, telling him that he must comply with EU regulations on policing online content, or face severe penalties.

In an interview with the Financial Times Tuesday, EU Commissioner for the Internal Market Thierry Breton said that he was giving Musk a “reality check,” adding that Twitter must cooperate with the EU’s rules on content moderation, including the pending Digital Services Act. The prospective legislation would force large tech platforms to take more action to disclose and remove illegal content, including “hate speech,” as noted by The Guardian.

There are people in America and around the world that are afraid of free speech. We are going to have to be alert to make sure that those people are not successful in determining what Americans and people around the world are allowed to hear.

What Security Does Europe Actually Have?

Posted on by

On Sunday, John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog wondering what protection against Russian invasion does Europe have from NATO or the European Union. It’s a very timely question.

The article notes:

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has caused a number of European countries–probably all of them–to reconsider their military defense postures. If Russia attacks them, will they be able to resist? And whom can they count on to come to their aid?

Responses vary. Germany is talking about abandoning its post-WWII de-militarization. France, in Gaullist tradition, wants the EU to take the lead on security. Others rely on a presumed airtight NATO guarantee of military assistance.

Sweden is an interesting case. Sweden is not a member of NATO, although it has collaborated closely with NATO’s central command. Instead, Sweden has allied itself with the U.S. and, to a lesser extent, the U.K.

This is a portion of the interview with Björn Fägersten, head of the Europe program at the Swedish Institute of International Affairs, included in the article:

Does the EU’s mutual defence clause have a similar effect to Nato’s Article 5?

Björn Fägersten: In a purely legal sense they are equivalent – in some ways the EU is a bit sharper. But on the other hand, the EU’s clause has a sub-clause that makes clear that it doesn’t affect member states’ individual choices on security policy, for instance for those countries that are neutral.

A key difference between the EU and Nato is that the EU has no real apparatus. Nato has a joint military headquarters, SHAPE, but the EU doesn’t have an equivalent.

Within the EU there are also expectations that Nato will be at the centre of European planning – most EU countries are members. In the EU’s Global Strategy from 2016 it is made clear that Nato is the cornerstone of the EU’s defence.

Looking to the future, many in the EU, not least Macron, have long spoken about the need for strategic autonomy, where Europe will take a more independent line in defence from the US. Last week Germany announced a huge increase in defence spending. How will that change the equation for Sweden?

BF: If in the long term Europe starts taking greater responsibility while the US takes the main responsibility for handling China, that would change Sweden’s calculation. Sweden would like there to be an American interest in its security, but if, for example, a new president was elected in the US in 2024 who had a more doubtful approach to European security, Sweden would be forced to rapidly reevaluate its defence strategy.

The article concludes:

Call me a cynical lawyer, but does “such action as it deems necessary” really obligate the U.S., or anyone else, to a full military response to Russian aggression in Europe? Might “such action” merely encompass economic sanctions in the event of a Russian invasion of, say, Lithuania?

I suppose it is best if Russia’s leaders assume that Article 5 represents an airtight mutual security pact, but it is easy to imagine a weaselly or mentally challenged president–or, perhaps, one who is uniquely focused on American self-interest–going back on 70 years of interpretation of Article 5 and more or less abandoning our European allies. No doubt that is something that they, too, are imagining.

Which I think is probably to the good. Donald Trump was right: it is long past time for powerful European countries, including Germany, to look to their own defense, even if in cooperation with us. And, of course, the more able they are to defend themselves against Russian aggression, the more likely they are to receive military help from their NATO allies, including us, should the time come.

There is value in working together and providing mutual aid, but there is also a lot of value in standing on your own two feet.

Avoiding A Possible Solution

Posted on by

When America cut her energy production, the price of oil and gas soared. When the price of oil and gas soared, the amount of money going into Russia increased dramatically. Russian gas and oil money are now being used to fund the invasion of Ukraine. So what is the best way to end that invasion? Cut off the money.

On Friday, One America News reported:

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson urged NATO leaders to take immediate action using the SWIFT international payments system to impact Russia’s President Putin and his regime, his office said following a call with NATO leaders on Friday.

Johnson urged leaders to take immediate action with SWIFT “to inflict maximum pain on President Putin and his regime,” his office said on Friday.

Not allowing Russia to use SWIFT would definitely stop the flow of money into Russia.

On Thursday, The Hill reported:

President Biden on Thursday defended maintaining Russia’s access to an international messaging system for banks despite pressure from Ukrainian leaders.

The U.S., United Kingdom and European Union on Thursday announced strict new penalties on the Russian economy, financial institutions and influential elites close to Russian President Vladimir Putin. But the Western allies did not bar Moscow from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), even after Ukrainian government officials urged them to do so Thursday morning.

“It is always an option, but right now that’s not the position that the rest of Europe wishes to take,” Biden told reporters after announcing new sanctions Thursday.

…The Biden administration also announced plans to impose sanctions on individuals and entities in Belarus, accusing the nation of supporting and facilitating Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Banks across the world use SWIFT to finalize transactions and transfers. Cutting Russia off from SWIFT would make it incredibly difficult for its banks to operate efficiently, but could also wreak economic havoc for European nations who depend on Russian oil and natural gas exports.

I would like to note that the European nations would not be dependent on Russian oil if the Biden administration had continued President Trump’s policy of American energy independence. There were a lot of bad decisions made by the Biden administration that led to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Bowing To Reality

Posted on by

On Sunday, The Epoch Times posted an article that might indicate that Europe is waking up the pitfalls of ‘green energy.’

The article reports:

The European Union has drafted a proposal that allows consideration for natural gas and nuclear energy to be included within the scope of “green” investments as countries and environmentalists battle over the complicated classification system.

Later this month, the European Commission is expected to suggest recommendations on the environmental criteria needed in order to classify an energy source as “green” and whether projects can be included within the EU’s “sustainable finance taxonomy.” According to draft conclusions viewed by multiple media outlets, the commission has suggested adding gas and nuclear energy to the green mix, resulting in immediate criticism from some governing political parties and environmental activists.

Gas projects would be temporarily labeled green if they were utilized in place of coal and emitted less than 270 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per kilowatt-hour (e/kWh), receive a construction permit before the end of 2030, and plan to switch to a renewable energy source by 2035.

There are a lot of problems with ‘green energy.’ Although solar energy and wind energy seem like a wonderful idea, the chemicals that go into making solar panels and the problem of disposing of wind turbine blades after they are no longer useful need to be considered. Natural gas is extremely clean burning and abundant. Nuclear energy with good safety measures is also reliable and safe. At some point we are going to have to admit that green energy alone will not provide the power needed to run our civilization.

The article concludes:

“Taking account of scientific advice and current technological progress as well as varying transition challenges across member states, the Commission considers there is a role for natural gas and nuclear as a means to facilitate the transition toward a predominantly renewable-based future,” the European Commission said in a Jan. 1 statement.

EU advisers have contended that gas projects shouldn’t be given green labels unless the amount of emitted carbon dioxide is less than 100 grams per e/kWh, failing which there could be disastrous consequences for the climate. Nuclear power, likewise, can have adverse effects on the environment, especially when it comes to the disposal of radioactive waste.

“By including them … the commission risks jeopardizing the credibility of the EU’s role as a leading marketplace for sustainable finance,” European Greens President Philippe Lamberts said, Reuters reported.

Several European countries that operate nuclear plants, such as France, want the bloc to consider the nuclear option to be included in the so-called taxonomy to make it eligible for green financing.

In September 2014, I posted an article detailing what happened when Spain decided to  convert to green energy. What happened in Spain should have been enough to encourage the EU to include natural gas and nuclear energy in their future energy plans.

Does The Government Have The Right To Mandate Vaccines?

Posted on by

On Saturday, The American Thinker posted an article about events in Europe surrounding mandatory vaccines.

The article notes six basic provisions of the Nuremberg Code which was enacted after World War II to prevent medical experiments on people without their consent.

These are the provisions:

    1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. [This includes the consent being free of duress.]

[snip]

    1. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
    2. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
    3. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
    4. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

The Covid vaccine is an experimental vaccine. It has not even gone through a three-year-trial period to begin to establish any long-term effects.

The article continues:

In Austria, where vaccines will soon be mandatory, people must show their papers.  Germany is planning to go down this path, too.  In Slovenia and Dhanbad, India, you cannot get gas for your car unless you’re vaccinated.  In Greece, they fine unvaccinated people over $100 per month.  In Australia’s Northern Territory, there are concentration camps for people who might have COVID.  And of course, tens of thousands of Americans are losing their jobs for refusing to get the jab.

It’s important to remember that this vaccine fanaticism exists even though it’s unquestionable now that people who are vaccinated can both catch COVID and infect others.  The vaccines have, at best, a minimal effect on the omicron variant (which hasn’t stopped Biden and Fauci from doubling down on vaccine demands), something we know because so many of the newly diagnosed cases of the omicron variant are in vaccinated people.

So: A disease that’s eminently treatable; a vaccine that’s not very effective, especially against the omicron variant; the same vaccine has unusually high risks; and government officials are high on the drug of totalitarianism.

Into this environment steps Ursula von der Leyen, the head of the E.U. commission, who wants all of Europe to follow Austria’s path with forced vaccinations, never mind that doing so would mean vaccinating unwilling people, violating the Nuremberg Code:

European Union countries should consider mandatory vaccination to combat Covid and the Omicron variant, the head of its Commission has said.

The article concludes:

In March 2020, the world’s political leaders were trying their best in an information vacuum. Now, however, we are seeing an Iron Curtain of COVID totalitarianism falling across the Western world — and we’d better say “no” before the dark night of fascism finally falls on America, too.

A Preview Of Things To Come

Posted on by

If the election of Joe Biden is allowed to stand, America is going to become a subsidiary of China. If you think I am overreacting, I would like to direct you to an article posted at Legal Insurrection yesterday.

The article reports:

Communist China on Monday demanded the United States to return to the Iran nuclear deal and end all sanctions placed on Tehran under President Donald Trump’s watch once Joe Biden moves into the White House.

“The US shall return to the Iran nuclear deal as soon as possible and without any preconditions, and the US should also scrap all sanctions imposed on Iran, other third-party entities and individuals,” Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in a video conference with other four signatories of the 2015 nuclear accord.

The Chinese foreign minister’s undiplomatic and stern tone underlines China’s belief in a ‘reset‘ in bilateral relations with a Biden-run administration. According to Chinese media reports, Beijing opened backchannel talks with figures close to the Biden team last month and wants a rollback on the tough policy course pursued by President Donald Trump.

…“A joint statement released by [German Foreign Minister Heiko] Maas and the foreign ministers of Iran, China, Russia and the UK acknowledged their desire to see the treaty upheld and greeted the prospects of a US return to it under incoming President-elect Joe Biden as ‘positive,’” Germany’s state-run DW News reported Monday.

“With Joe Biden on board, all parties to the nuclear deal want to bring it back to life,” the German broadcaster noted in a separate article last week.

The European Union has also joined the diplomatic push to get the U.S. to back the nuclear deal without any preconditions. European powers, mainly Germany, France, and the UK, had lined up huge investments in the oil-rich country before the Trump administration snapped back sanctions on the regime two years ago.

So why would the EU want us to enter into a deal that would eventually allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons aimed at Europe? Because the money to be made in the short term with trade with Iran has blinded them to the future with a nuclear Iran holding them hostage.

There is little doubt in anyone’s mind that a Biden administration will renew the Iran nuclear deal. There is also a lack of realization that the deal will make the world a much more dangerous place. You have only to look at the alliances currently forming in the Middle East to know what the countries closest to Iran think of the intentions of that state.

Some Good News

Posted on by

Yesterday The Conservative Treehouse reported that the United States and the United Kingdom will begin negotiations on a new free trade agreement. This is great news. As Britain leaves the European Union, they are going to need good trade agreements to keep their economy healthy. As America begins to disengage itself from dependence on China, it is going to need good trading partners. This is definitely a win-win.

The article notes:

The United States is essentially a self-sustaining economy. Meaning, if you think about a nation as an independent construct able to sustain itself; our imports are enhancements not priorities. Our domestic resources, energy development, food production and essential internal needs are capable of sustaining our population.  The import of products is valuable, but in the bigger picture not fundamentally necessary for survival.

The United Kingdom is very similar in this regard. The U.K. has abundant energy resources, food and agricultural development, and is positioned as an independent economy absent the dynamic of internal politics regulating those functions. Domestic politics surrounding left-wing climate change (energy development etc), to restrict internal development, are a function of ability, not necessity. The U.K. has abundant coal, oil and natural gas; it also has abundant agriculture.  [The U.K weakness is military defense.]

Because both nations are similar in their ability to be non-dependent on trade, a free trade agreement is essentially a second-tier negotiation on products and services that enhance the independence. This is a unique dynamic not found in all trade discussions. Two independent economic systems negotiating on trade enhancements to each-other.

This is a much different dynamic than negotiation with a dependent country like China. China cannot feed itself, it needs to import raw materials to sustain itself; thus the importance of the One-Belt/One-Road Beijing initiative. China is a massive economy, but China is also a dependent economy; subject to damage from external dynamics.

Similarly, due to advanced political ideology, Canada cannot sustain itself economically; however, they are dependent by choice. Currently Mexico is not self-sustaining; they too are dependent on both access to the U.S. market and the import of industrial goods. However, unlike Canada our southern trade partner is working toward self-sustenance.

…A U.S-U.K trade agreement would not be based on “essential” trade products or “vital” trade services. The trade is not essential, but it is complimentary.

A U.S. and U.K. trade agreement is based on mutual enhancements or mutual benefits. This is an important distinction to keep in mind because it plays into the larger geopolitical dynamic.

The U.K. is currently in a post-Brexit negotiation phase after they spit away from the European Union. Strategically, it is smart for the U.K. to enter into trade discussions with the U.S. for needed products and services they might currently be gaining from the EU.

The timing of trade discussion with the U.S. gives Prime Minister Boris Johnson leverage toward the EU.  President Trump and Boris Johnson have previously discussed this.

Additionally, the U.S. and E.U will eventually have to work out a new trade agreement because President trump is realigning all existing U.S. trade terms.

Definitely a win-win.

Good News For Britain

Posted on by

Breitbart is reporting today:

The government’s bill implementing the withdrawal deal has passed through both Houses of Parliament, meaning the UK will finally be leaving the EU on January 31st, 2020.

On Wednesday evening, MPs in the House of Commons rejected the amendments to the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill proposed by the House of Lords.

…In a brief comment after the bill passed, Prime Minister Boris Johnson said: “Parliament has passed the Withdrawal Agreement Bill, meaning we will leave the EU on 31 January and move forwards as one United Kingdom.

“At times it felt like we would never cross the Brexit finish line, but we’ve done it.

“Now we can put the rancour and division of the past three years behind us and focus on delivering a bright, exciting future — with better hospitals and schools, safer streets and opportunity spread to every corner of our country.”

It has been 1,309 days since Britons voted to leave the European Union.

The article concludes:

Leaked plans for the narrative on Brexit Day seen by the Dail Mail reveal that Cabinet ministers will tell Britons that the nation can finally come together, saying: “We will mobilise the full breadth of our new freedoms – from encouraging technology and innovation, to signing new free trade deals around the world.

“As we maximise all the freedoms the British people voted to grasp, we must also work to heal divisions… and reunite our communities.”

Brexit Day will mark “the start of a new chapter in the history of our country, in which we come together and move forward united, unleashing the enormous potential of the British people”, the document said.

So what will this mean for Britain? I don’t claim to understand the British economy or be able to predict the future. However, a few things are obvious. The farther removed a government is from the people government, the less free the people are. Britain is regaining its national sovereignty and its economic freedom. I suspect there will be a rough patch for a bit, but I see the economy of Britain growing because of this move. One of the first things I believe will happen will be a trade deal with America that is designed to help both countries. Stay tuned.

In Britain, The People Are Winning

Posted on by

Fox News is reporting today that British lawmakers overwhelmingly voted to approve Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s new Brexit deal Friday. The deal means that Britain will leave the European Union by January 31st.

The article reports:

Before Friday’s vote, Johnson painted it as a moment of closure for Britons, saying, “Brexit will be done, it will be over.”

“This is a time when we move on and discard the old labels of ‘leave’ and ‘remain’,’ he added. “Now is the time to act together as one reinvigorated nation.”

He said passing the bill would end the “acrimony and anguish” that has consumed the country for the last three years.

…The bill commits Britain to leaving the EU on Jan. 31 and to concluding trade talks with the bloc by the end of 2020. Trade experts and EU officials say striking a free trade deal within 11 months will be a struggle, but Johnson insists he won’t agree to any more delays, The Brexit bill has been amended to bar ministers from agreeing to extend the transition period with the EU.

The new divorce bill needs to be ratified by the European Parliament, whose vice president, Pedro Silva Pereira said officials expect to happen by Jan. 29.

It took a referendum and another election, but the wishes of the people in Britain are finally being honored. The political elites who fought Brexit have now been defeated–at least temporarily.

The Deep State Doesn’t Go Down Easily–In Any Country

Posted on by

The American Thinker posted an article today about Boris Johnson and his efforts to follow the will of the British voters and exit the European Union. Although I don’t fully understand the procedures involved in the British Parliament, I can see that there is a massive effort to block the exit the people of Britain voted for.

The article reports:

Yes, if thing stand as they do now, delays will go on into eternity, each deadline pushed back, and an exit from the European Union impossible.  The E.U. will notice this and just keep throwing up a wall of resistance to a deal to ensure that Britain stays, like it or not, or else keep moving the goalposts — into eternity.  When delays are endless, what an opportunity.  These useless satraps have nothing better to do, after all.  They like the pounds flowing in.  And such a coincidence: the parliamentary betrayal happened on the 80th anniversary of France and Germany declaring war on Britain.  Plus ça change…

What happened Tuesday certainly involves complicated parliamentary maneuvers, and the people writing of such disappointment do understand how these stakes work.

That said, it seems that the worst that can happen is that the country will be forced into a general election — very soon.  Johnson says that’s what he wants.  There’s actually reason to think Labor may just try to stop him.  But it’s likely he’ll succeed.

Advantage Boris.

After all, how was it that Johnson, instead of the eminently more reasonable-seeming Theresa May, ended up in his position?  He’s only there at all, and not too long ago, because of a powerful groundswell of public support for respecting the will of the majority on leaving the European Union.  Three years of dithering and delays by the inept May kowtowing to the wishes of the European Union and its endless delays is precisely why the Tories decided to take a chance on Boris, someone they rejected earlier as too wild and crazy.

The article concludes:

Johnson, meanwhile, is weathering the storm like a sea captain, tweeting his stance copiously, and coming up with excellent summations of what’s at stake. 

…He’s showing courage.  He’s not losing his nerve.  Voters will take note.  And while nothing is certain, it seems more than a little likely that with his gutsiness and steady hand, he will win this election, sweeping out the weaklings in his party, and then steam full speed ahead toward Brexit, which is what the British really voted for, deal or no deal.  The E.U. in such conditions, unlike now, is going to really, really, really want a deal.

I love the fact that he is using Twitter to bypass the media and speak directly to the people. That reminds me of another world leader. Please follow the link and read the entire article. Even though this is occurring in Britain, it matters to America. Boris Johnson is a leader with the courage to take on the deep state. We need more of that sort of leadership around the world.

This Is Not Good News For The Middle East

Posted on by

The Washington Free Beacon is reporting today that the U. S. has confirmed that Iran has successfully fired a nuclear-capable missile. Great.

The article reports:

Senior U.S. officials confirmed early Monday that Iran has successfully test-fired multiple nuclear-capable missiles in violation of United Nations restrictions on such activity, drawing a fierce reaction from the Trump administration, which will pressure European leaders this week to take immediate action aimed at countering Iran’s latest military moves.

Refuting Iranian claims that its illicit missile tests are defensive in nature, Trump administration Iran envoy Brian Hook vowed tough reprisals for Iran’s most recent missile tests, which are among the most provocative in recent memory.

“Iran has launched missiles that are capable of carrying multiple warheads, including a nuclear weapon,” Hook confirmed to the Washington Free Beacon while talking to reporters aboard Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s airplane en route to Brussels for NATO meetings.

The Iranian ballistic missile test comes on the heels of new evidence unearthed by the United States tying Tehran to the proliferation of advanced weaponry and missiles across the Middle East, including in Yemen, where Iranian-backed rebels continue to attack a Saudi coalition seeking to stem the violence.

The article concludes:

The administration is hoping to convince European allies to move forward with new sanctions as reprisal for the missile tests, a position many of these allies are hesitant to adopt. As Washington, D.C., moves forward with a bevy of new sanctions on Iran, some European allies have continued to balk the U.S. administration, seeking avenues to preserve the nuclear pact and ensure economic ties with Tehran remain open.

“We would like to see the European Union move sanctions that target Iran’s missile program,” Hook told reporters.

“Just a few days ago, we unveiled new evidence of Iran’s missile proliferation,” Hook explained. “Three days later, they test launched another medium range ballistic missile”.

“We have been warning the world for some time that we are accumulating risk of a regional conflict if we do not deter Iran’s missile testing and proliferation,” he said. “Iran is on the wrong track and our campaign of maximum economic pressure is designed to starve the regime of the revenue it needs to test missiles and proliferate missiles, support terrorism, conduct cyber attacks, [and] conduct acts of maritime aggression.”

What the Trump administration is not considering here is that Europe is economically dependent on trade with Iran. Until European leaders see Iranian missiles actually heading in their direction, they will not be willing to put any sort of sanctions on Iran. It needs to be done, but our European allies (?) are not willing to pay the necessary price.

Realizing The Threat To European Civilization

Posted on by

Reuters posted an article today reporting that Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban has decided not to sign the Global Compact For Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. The agreement was approved on Friday by all 193 U.N. member nations except the United States, which pulled out last year.

The article reports:

“This document is entirely against Hungary’s security interests,” Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto told a news conference, adding: “This pact poses a threat to the world from the aspect that it could inspire millions (of migrants).”

Hungary, along with Poland and Czech Republic, has taken a tough stand against the admission of migrants, putting it at odds with the European Union, but striking a chord with voters by arguing that irregular immigration threatens European stability, and fencing off Hungary’s southern borders.

Szijjarto said the U.N. pact was “extreme, biased and facilitates migration.

“Its main premise is that migration is a good and inevitable phenomenon … We consider migration a bad process, which has extremely serious security implications.”

France, Germany, and Sweden have all experienced drastic increases in crime due to the influx of immigrants from Muslim countries. Unless the immigrants are willing to assimilate (and most of them are not), the attitudes of the immigrants towards women and other western cultural norms have been a problem. Hungary has recognized this and acted accordingly.

The solution to the massive migration to Europe from Africa and the Middle East is for the people in the African and Middle Eastern countries to clean up their act. Generally speaking, in the countries the migrants are coming from, the wealth and the law are controlled by a select group of people in charge. I don’t blame these people for fleeing, but they need to stay and fight. If you look at the pictures of the migrants, the majority of them are men between the ages of about eighteen to thirty-five. They are fleeing rather than joining together to fight for economic (and other) freedoms. I wonder if these migrants were forced to remain in their home countries if they would be willing to fight for those countries.

Good News For America

Posted on by

American trade agreements have not worked in our favor. Many of our current agreements put American manufacturers at a disadvantage and cost American consumers money. One of the goals of the Trump administration is to level the playing field so that American goods compete on an equal level with foreign goods. President Trump has taken a lot of criticism for moving in this direction, but it seems as if he has made some very good moves.

The Conservative Treehouse posted an article today about some recent changes in some of our trading practices with our allies.

The article reports:

…Germany, without consulting with Emmanuel from France, just unilaterally announce the EU is willing to drop all trade tariffs against U.S. auto manufacturers as part of their strategy to fend-off steel, aluminum and crushing auto tariffs.

BERLIN—Germany’s leading auto makers have thrown their support behind the abolition of all import tariffs for cars between the European Union and the U.S. in an effort to find a peaceful solution to the brewing trade war.

The U.S. ambassador to Germany, Richard Grenell, brought the proposal for a broader industry trade pact to the Trump administration on Wednesday, according to people familiar with the situation.

That would mean scrapping the EU’s 10% tax on auto imports from the U.S. and other countries and the 2.5% duty on auto imports in the U.S. As a prerequisite, the Europeans want President Donald Trump’s threat of imposing a 25% border tax on European auto imports off the table.

[…] A French official said Paris was unaware of the proposal, and it wasn’t discussed during a recent summit between French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Meseberg, Germany. 

The article further explains:

All foreign automakers with limited U.S. operations are seriously concerned that Trump’s auto tariff threats will hurt their sales and profits, and the only way to avoid losing market share is to shift production investment into the U.S; or back into the U.S.

Strategery.

Back to Canada, and the ill-fated, now back-fired, scheme of Justin and Chrystia; standing naked and alone, as the reality of national economic interests has their former anti-Trump trade allies headed for the exits to save their industries.

Yikes, amid all of Canada’s uppity antagonism and demands for gender equity in NAFTA trade negotiations now they’re seriously exposed and more vulnerable than ever to Godzilla Trump and his “killers’.

This is definitely a ‘get out the popcorn’ moment.

One Rule For Thee And A Different Rule For Me

Posted on by

Europe is upset at President Trump’s imposing tariffs on imported steel. Well, let’s take a look at some of Europe’s past actions.

According to a story in US News in April 2017, the European Commission imposed taxes on Chinese steel exported to Europe. The taxes (or duties, if you prefer) were betwween 18.1 percent and 35.9 percent.

Meanwhile, CNN reported:

Trump said Thursday that he would impose a 25% tariff on steel imports and a 10% tariff on aluminum imports, a move that has been vociferously condemned by key US allies and trading partners.

The justification for the tariffs – national security concerns — also drew harsh criticism. German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel described the administration’s reasoning as “incomprehensible.”

“The EU must respond decisively to US punitive tariffs, which endangers thousands of jobs in Europe. There should be no doubt about that in Washington,” Gabriel said on Friday.

Winterstein said the 28 countries of the EU would respond to the tariffs as a single bloc. The Commission will discuss its response when it next meets on Wednesday.

One obvious move would be to file a complaint against the US with the World Trade Organization. Analysts at UBS said Europe would have a good chance of winning, but that could take 18 months.

In the meantime, the EU could introduce “safeguard measures” if it suddenly sees a surge in steel imports, Winterstein said. These measures could include tariffs or import quotas and can be enacted quickly.

So let’s get this straight–if America imposes tariffs on steel and begins to import less of it, the European Union would move to prevent any increased steel imports to Europe–they might even impose tariffs or import quotas. What? So it’s okay for them to protect themselves from cheap steel imports, but it’s not okay for America to protect itself from cheap steel imports. Good grief! After a while, the globalists are just boring–they are so predictable.

What Will Be The Impact Of This In Twenty Years?

Posted on by

Yesterday The U.K. Daily Mail reported that sixty percent of babies born in London are born to foreign mothers. That means six out of ten will be raised by people who have not been part of British culture. We need to think about what this means to the future of Britain.

The article explains some of the reasons for the high number of babies born to immigrants:

The new statistics on babies born to foreign-born mothers come after earlier figures from the ONS which showed that in some areas of London they account for more than three-quarters of births.

In the East London borough of Newham in 2014 more than three quarters of babies – 77 per cent – were born to mothers who were themselves born outside Britain.

In that year most of the foreign-born mothers who gave birth in the UK were from Poland, followed by Pakistan and India.

The 2014 figures showed immigrant mothers are more likely to be married than those born in Britain. Some 72 per cent of immigrant mothers were married that year, compared with 45 per cent of UK-born mothers. The ONS said this ‘reflects different expectations between cultures’.

The rise in the number of babies with foreign-born mothers has partly come because fertility rates among immigrants are higher than those of British-born women.

Although fertility rates among foreign-born women fell in 2015, an immigrant could expect to have 2.08 children. For UK-born women, the rate was 1.76.

 In the early days of the country of America, the population was made up of people who were not born here. Those immigrants formed the culture that eventually became the American culture. The shared values of those immigrants formed the basis of that culture–many had fled religious persecution–their faith was important to them and their freedom was important to them. They had a pioneering spirit that allowed them to journey through hardships for the chance to be free and reap the rewards of their efforts. America continued to take in immigrants, but screened them at Ellis Island to make sure they were willing to work and contribute to America. Originally there was no welfare system–an immigrant either worked hard and was successful or went home. Things have changed in America and in other places. Now immigrants are not necessarily encouraged to assimilate, learn the language, or work hard. The are not encouraged to become part of the culture or to help preserve the culture. When sixty percent of mothers in London are foreign born and may not be part of western culture, where will the country be in twenty years? Will Britain still be part of western civilization?

You Have To Fight For What You Believe–Even After The Vote

Posted on by

The U.K. Express posted an article today about Britain’s exit from the European Union. To put it mildly, the European Union is dragging its feet in allowing the exit of Britain.

The article reports:

The independent member of the European Parliament (MEP) lashed top EU officials for trying to “deny” Brexit with a vote claiming “no progress” had been made during the negotiations between the UK and Brussels.

During a debate in Strasbourg, Mr Woolfe said: “Abraham Lincoln once famously said ‘You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. But you can never fool all of the people all of the time.’ Well, the British people are no longer fooled that the EU wants to negotiate a fair Brexit agreement or even negotiate at all. 

“From Verhofstadt to Juncker, to Barnier and to Tusk, the message is clear: the EU will delay, damage and deny Brexit. 

“When President Tusk says the UK can’t have its cake and eat it, what he actually means is the EU wants its cake, our cake, the morning croissant, afternoon tea and finishing it with taking a pound of Britain’s economic flesh washed down with a glass of subsidised EU Chianti.”

Mr Woolfe comments came as the European Parliament prepared to vote on whether Brexit negotiations could move forward to discuss the future trade relationship between Britain and the EU27.

The “no progress” motion passed by 557 votes to 92, with 29 MEPs abstaining from the vote.

The former Ukip politician continued: “It’s clear the EU will not change its tune so it’s time for the Uk to walk away and end this charade.”

This should not come as a surprise to anyone. Globalists are not used to losing, and they have had a very bad year. Unfortunately, even though America elected a non-globalist President, he has not been totally sensitive to the cry of other countries wanting to be independent. President Trump has not supported Kurdish independence, saying it would bring instability to the region. Frankly, I think it would bring stability and encourage freedom. At any rate, there is something stirring in the world. Many people are tired of being ruled by a group of elites who want nothing more than to protect their own wealth and power. I wish Britain luck in exiting the European Union, but I don’t think it will be a simple process.

Immigration In Britain

Posted on by

Breitbart is reporting today on the impact immigration policies have had on the population of Britain.

The article reports:

A report by think tank Civitas says that the population of the United Kingdom is growing at a rate of more than 500,000 a year – the equivalent of a new town of about 10,000 people being created every week.

The article further notes that one in three babies born in Britain and Wales had at least one foreign parent.

So what caused this?

The article explains:

Blair (former prime minister Tony Blair) has been accused of presiding over a “silent conspiracy” to flood the UK with migrants whilst he was prime minster, ordering his ministers to not discuss the subject in public, with his government working to force the country to “see the benefit of a multicultural society”.

The Civitas report identifies EU enlargement, “with the admission of the countries of Eastern Europe”, as the second reason for population growth trends to change so rapidly.

Again, the arch-europhile’s New Labour government decided not to implement transitional immigration controls like the majority of other EU countries, with Blair admitting in 2017 that he had no idea how many people would migrate to Britain when the bloc expanded to include former Communist nations such as Poland.

Government policies have consequences. Britain is clearly in danger of losing its identity as a nation.

The Turkish Vote

Posted on by

Bloomberg posted an article yesterday about the results of the referendum in Turkey. The results of the election are not good news for freedom-loving people in Turkey or in the Middle East.

The article reports:

Turkey voted to hand Recep Tayyip Erdogan sweeping authority in the most radical overhaul since the republic was founded 93 years ago on the expectation he’ll safeguard security amid regional wars and kickstart the economy.

The referendum won approval of 51.3 percent to 48.7 percent of Turks, according to the state-run Anadolu news agency, as opposition parties alleged fraud and the European Union branded it as unfair. Once implemented, Erdogan will have authority to appoint ministers and top judges at his discretion and call elections at any time. It will also give him much greater sway over fiscal policy and may deepen investors’ concerns about the independence of the central bank.

The win “represents a blow to the assumption that liberal or even in some cases hybrid democracies are structured to prevent authoritarian figures from hijacking the political system,” Anthony Skinner, a director with U.K.-based forecasting company Verisk Maplecroft, said before the results were declared.

Erdogan triumphed by appealing to voters in the small towns that dot the Anatolian heartland where he won overwhelmingly. These Turks want a firm hand at the helm to combat the resurgence of terrorism, fight Kurdish separatism and Islamic State in Syria and defend Turkey’s global interests. The result is a victory not only for him, but for type of authoritarian system exemplified by Vladimir Putin that has gained admirers around the world.

It helps when looking at this situation to look at some of the history of Turkey and some of its current friends. Turkey is a member of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) as well as a member of NATO. The OIC describes itself as “the collective voice of the Muslim world” and works to “safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world in the spirit of promoting international peace and harmony.” It’s important to note here that the definition of peace under Sharia Law is the subjugation of all countries and people of the world to Sharia Law. This is not a group that favors democracy.

Historically, Turkey was the heart of the Ottoman Empire, which was defeated in World War I.  In 1924, Ataturk (Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, founder of the Republic of Turkey, serving as its first President from 1923 until his death in 1938) enacted a new constitution in Turkey. The new constitution instituted laws and jurisprudence much like European laws. There was also a thorough secularization of modernization of the administration. The dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and the secularization of Turkey caused Hassan al Banna to found the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt in 1928 with the purpose of unifying the Islamic states under a new caliphate.

We need to remember that the Ottoman Empire was dissolved less than one hundred years ago. There are still many Muslims who want to bring back the caliphate. I suspect that in addition to his desire to obtain more power and more control, Recep Tayyip Erdogan may well be moving in the direction he feels will bring back the caliphate.

 

 

The Story The Media Is Not Telling About The Netherlands

Posted on by

Narrative Collapse posted an article about the Netherlands‘ election today. As usual, they cut through the mainstream media spin to the actual facts.

The article reports:

The following is the number of seats in parliament each party will get.

VVD 33 (center-right)
PVV 20 (right-wing)
CDA 19 (center-right)
D66 19 (center-left)
SP 14 (left-wing)
GL 14 (left-wing)
PvdA 9 (center-left)
CU 5 (center-right)
PvdD 5 (left-wing)
50+ 4 (pensioner advocacy)
DENK 3 (left-wing)
SGP 3 (right-wing)
FvD 2 (right-wing)

Divided into four categories you have:
Center-right: 57/61 Right-wing: 25
Center-left: 28/32 Left-wing: 36

So, you basically have 54.5%-57.3% of parliament on the right and 42.7%-45.3% on the left.

What the English language media is telling people is that this is a humiliating defeat for conservatives because Geert Wilders party on got 13% of the vote. This is only disappointing if you look at polls from weeks ago that showed the PVV almost neck and neck with VVD.

The article reports that the election illustrates increased polarization of the voters in the Netherlands. It also notes the following:

What is actually demoralizing is reports that VVD intends to pick D66 as a coalition partner instead of PVV. This is the exact behavior associated with “RHINO” and “neo-con” Republicans in the United States. They run to the right during election season and then run back left the day after.

Geert Wilders is not a radical (as the media has tried to convince us). He is a man who loves his country and wants to see his country preserved. Unfortunately it may take many of his fellow countrymen some time to realize this. Hopefully, that realization will come before the Netherlands is destroyed.

The Double Standard Is Amazing!

Posted on by

Breitbart is reporting today that in 2011 President Obama’s State Department had imposed a freeze over the processing of Iraqi refugees for six months. The halt was the result of the discovery of two al-Qaida members admitted as refugees from Iraq who were living in Bowling Green, Kentucky and who had admitted to targeting U.S. troops in Iraq.

Somehow I don’t remember any uproar from the media when the freeze was put in place.

The article reports:

Trump’s executive order halts visas for 90 days for “immigrants and non-immigrants” from Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Yemen, Iran, and Iraq. The executive order further suspended the entry of all refugees for 120 days, indefinitely blocks Syrian refugees from entering and lowers the ceiling to 50,000 for refugees allowed to enter the U.S. during Fiscal Year 2017.

In response to the order, protests have taken place outside major U.S. airports while immigration lawyers from groups financed by billionaire George Soros, a champion of open border policies, were signatories to a lawsuit filed Saturday to block the order.

In response to the lawsuit, U.S. District Judge Ann Donnelly issued an emergency order that temporarily blocks U.S. authorities from deporting those from the nations listed in Trump’s executive order.

I would like to remind everyone what has happened in Europe as a result of the large number of Muslim refugees from the Middle East and from some parts of Africa. Terrorism is certainly a current concern, but we also have the example of the impact on a country when a large number of Middle Eastern refugees are admitted. Germany is reeling under the crime wave the migrants have brought with them.

The Gatestone Institute reminds us:

Gatestone Institute first reported Germany‘s migrant rape crisis in September 2015, when Merkel opened up the German border to tens of thousands of migrants stranded in Hungary. A follow-up report was published in March 2016, in the aftermath of mass attacks against German women by mobs of migrants in Cologne, Hamburg and other German cities.

Germany’s migrant rape crisis has now spread to cities and towns in all 16 of Germany’s federal states. Germany is effectively under siege; public spaces are becoming increasingly perilous. Police have warned about a potential breakdown of public order this summer, when young male migrants are likely to see women lightly dressed.

During the month of July 2016, hundreds of German women and children were sexually assaulted by migrants (see Appendix below). The youngest victim was nine; the oldest, 79. Attacks occurred at beaches, bike trails, cemeteries, discotheques, grocery stores, music festivals, parking garages, playgrounds, schools, shopping malls, taxis, public transportation (buses, trams, intercity express trains and subways), public parks, public squares, public swimming pools and public restrooms. Predators are lurking everywhere; safety nowhere.

Dozens of women and children have been assaulted by migrants at summer festivals and public swimming pools — staples of ordinary German life.

If we are going to take in large numbers of refugees, we need to make sure that they are willing to abide by western cultural standards regarding the treatment of women. You would not knowingly open the door of your home to a man whose culture would not respect your wife. Why would you open the gates to your country to men who do not understand proper respect for women?

The Global Establishment Will Not Go Gently Into The Night

Posted on by

Breitbart posted an article today about a new wrinkle in Britain‘s attempt to leave the European Union.

The article reports:

The government must consult parliament before invoking Article 50, the High Court has ruled.

The court ruled that Prime Minister Theresa May does not have the authority to use the Royal Prerogative to invoke the EU divorce process.

It is noteworthy that the people of Britain voted to leave the European Union. Has the High Court decided that the vote of the British citizens does not mean anything?

The article further reports:

However, the government has said it will appeal the decision.

A spokesman said: “The Government is disappointed by the decision.

“The country voted to leave the European Union in a referendum approved by Act of Parliament. And the Government is determined to respect the result of the referendum.”

The Supreme Court will likely hear the case on 7 December.

UKIP’s interim leader Nigel Farage said:

“I worry that a betrayal may be near at hand. Last night at the Spectator Parliamentary Awards I had a distinct feeling that our political class, who were out in force, do not accept the 23rd of June Referendum result.

“I now fear that every attempt will be made to block or delay the triggering of Article 50. If this is so, they have no idea of the level of public anger they will provoke.”

Speaking on BBC Radio 5 Live, he added that he feared Britain was heading for a “half Brexit”, and warned he would return to frontline politics if Britain had not left the EU by 2019.

“We are heading for a half Brexit….  I’m becoming increasingly worried.

“I see MPs from all parties saying, oh well, actually we should stay part of the single market, we should continue with our daily financial contributions.

“I think we could be at the beginning, with this ruling, of a process where there is  deliberate, wilful attempt by our political class to betray 17.4 million voters.”

The political elite is entrenched worldwide. They have become a class of people dedicated to increasing their own wealth. In Britain, they have tied their fortunes to staying in the European Union; in America, they have tied their fortunes to the election of Hillary Clinton. The names are different, but the actions and goals are the same. Brexit was one of the few opportunities to put the brakes on their plans, and the British are going to have to fight to have their voices heard. In America, November 8 will determine whether Americans are ready to toss out the political elite.

I wish the Brits (and the Americans) luck.

Why None Of The Normal Rules Apply To The Current Election Cycle

Posted on by

Yesterday Nigel Farage posted an article at the U.K. Telegraph containing his observations on the current American election.

Mr. Farage shares his story and observations:

When I arrived at the Republican Party convention in Cleveland, Ohio, back in July, I was amazed at the reaction to me over the Brexit result. Normally we follow trends in America, not the other way round, but it was clear that many of the delegates saw Brexit as an aspiration for what they see as the Trump “revolution” against the Establishment. I met many others who were not delegates or political anoraks, who were also keen to talk about Brexit. A group of retired US Navy veterans told me we should have done it years ago. Others were less impressed and shouted at me in the streets. Indeed, this weekend while I was in St Louis, I received some proper abuse on the Washington University campus. 

…Like him or loathe him, Trump is not a part of the political elite and he most certainly is not constrained by political correctness. When I spoke at one of his rallies in Jackson, Mississippi, I saw a fanatical gathering of his fans who want to give the Establishment a good hiding. “We want our country back” works as a slogan here, too. The first signs of a political rebellion took the form of the Tea Party. The satirist Ian Hislop once described it as rather like Ukip – but with God and guns. They not only railed against the Washington elites, but made the link between big business, Wall Street banks and Washington politics. The same story is behind the growth of new parties across the whole of the European Union and was an important feature in voters’ minds in the UK this June.

Not only did JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs help to fund the Remain campaign but they increasingly give the appearance of owning a whole section of our political class. When Berlusconi was forced to resign as the Italian prime minister, he was replaced by the unelected Mario Monti, a Goldman Sachs man. 

…I met many people at the rally in Jackson, Mississippi, who had never voted in their lives. They may produce an upset similar to Brexit. It does not matter what the opinion polls, bookmakers or markets say, because these new voters are hard to measure. 

I do not see the Brexit result in isolation. Instead, I believe we are witnessing a popular uprising against failed politics on a global scale. People want to vote for candidates with personality, faults and all. It is the same in the UK, America and much of the rest of Europe. The little people have had enough. They want change.

This is going to be an interesting election. If voter fraud is kept under control, Donald Trump will be our next President. If not, I can’t even imaging the darkness this country will go through–we will no longer be equal under the law–some will permanently be more equal than others. It is not a pretty picture.

 

The Consequences of Brexit

Posted on by

Investor’s Business Daily posted an article yesterday about the results of the Brexit election. Media predictions claimed that if Britain exited the European Union, awful things would happen. Well, they were wrong.

The article reports the facts:

Sovereignty: It’s hard to remember, but in the run-up and immediate aftermath of Britain’s Brexit vote on June 23, the prophets of doom were everywhere. They predicted everything from an end to London as a financial capital to the meltdown of the British economy to a disaster for the U.S. Sorry, didn’t happen.

Yes, here in the U.S. the stock market sold off immediately after Brexit, just as the doom-and-gloomers predicted. But then something funny happened: The markets snapped smartly back, with the benchmark S&P 500 Index up almost 3% since the day of the vote.

As for Britain, the predicted disaster never occurred. As Britain’s Express wrote in a Wednesday headline: “Remainers were WRONG! Wages up and unemployment down as Brexit Britain booms”.

The article continues:

The online Express, citing new government data, reports that unemployment plunged 52,000 between April and June, leaving the unemployment rate at 4.9% — the lowest level since 2005. The total employment rate now stands at 74.5% of the population — the highest ever. Meanwhile, the number of unemployment claims dropped 8,600 in July — the month after the Brexit vote — to 768,600, the first decline since February.

Oh yes, and workers’ average earnings jumped 2.4% in the first six months of the year, showing that if businesses were worried about Brexit, it sure wasn’t showing in how much they were paying workers.

We need to remember that much of the fear was media-driven. We also need to remember that the voters in Great Britain were smart enough to ignore the media–even after the election when the media tried to find ways to invalidate the election results.

The article concludes:

Countries in the EU have lived with a demographic death spiral, out of control spending and debt, absurd regulations that enrich no one and a regional economy that, as hard as it may be to believe, grows even more slowly than ours. From 2008, the peak year of the financial crisis, through 2015, EU GDP grew 2%, according to U.S. government data. No, that’s not 2% a year — 2% total. It’s been an utter disaster, and the EU’s clueless bureaucrats seem helpless to do anything about it other than blaming their own citizens.

Britain saved itself from decades of stagnation and decline by Brexiting the EU. As such, Britain may have given the other troubled members of the EU the greatest gift of all — a way to leave the dysfunctional EU and rediscover their lost sovereignty and growth.

Let’s compare that to the current election cycle in America. The media has already declared Hillary Clinton the winner. She is up by a million points (it makes you wonder who they actually talk to). If the polls are accurate, how come Donald Trump draws overflow crowds and Hillary can’t fill someone’s living room? As we get closer to the election, the pollsters will rediscover some form of honesty and the polls will become more accurate, but right now they are like the Brexit polls–a total joke. Take heart, there are less than three months to go!