The Truth About Brexit (2018)

The Truth About Brexit (2018), by Paul Joseph Watson.

Yep. Feelings are running high in the UK. This is huge, historical. Highly recommended.

Democracy is ignored yet again by the European elites — it’s standard operating procedure. The will of the people counts for nothing in a continent ruled by the globalist left.

Is this how democracy dies in the UK? Or will it win through?

hat-tip Scott of the Pacific

Brexit: We are witnessing a historic demoralisation of democracy

Brexit: We are witnessing a historic demoralisation of democracy, by Brendan O’Neill.

To grasp the magnitude of what has been done to Brexit, consider this: 17.4 million Britons voted to take back control from Brussels, and yet according to a leaked memo written by one of the EU’s deputy negotiators, Brussels will ‘retain all the controls’ as part of the deal agreed by Theresa May. As part of May’s agreement to keep the whole of the UK inside a ‘customs union arrangement’ – ie, inside the customs union – Britain must ‘align their rules but the EU will retain all the controls’, the memo starkly, arrogantly states.

Take this in. The people of Britain demand control – democratic, sovereign control, over borders, over immigration, over trade – and yet May cedes control to the EU.

The largest bloc of voters in the entire history of this nation calls for a clean, radical wresting of political sovereignty back from Brussels, and yet May sells off our sovereignty to Brussels.

We say, in our confident, teeming millions, ‘Leave the EU’; our political leaders say, ‘We’re staying in it. In its thrall, under its purview, beholden to its controls.’ …

Not since every British adult finally won the franchise in 1928 has a mass vote been so explicitly and wilfully overthrown.

Not since the dawning of democracy in the modern era – that hard-won, difficult dawning – has the British people’s voice not only been ignored or side-stepped, but silenced, overturned, shut down. …

Here we have a political class standing in direct opposition to the people’s democratic cry. The thing we voted for in a free, fair, mass and historic fashion – the re-energising of British sovereignty and of British democracy – is being flagrantly denied to us by the establishment.

Who’s in charge in Britain: the British voters, or the EU bureaucrats acting as proxies for the British establishment?

via Tip of the Spear

Rand Paul: Saudi Arabia is Number One at Spreading Terror

Rand Paul: Saudi Arabia is Number One at Spreading Terror, by The American Conservative.

Senator Rand Paul took sharp aim at Saudi Arabia in his keynote speech at The American Conservative’s fifth annual foreign policy conference Thursday, in particular blaming the Kingdom for the destruction of Yemen, for spreading extremist ideology across the globe, and for the grisly murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. …

Riyadh, he noted, has spent $100 billion exporting extreme Wahabbist Islam to places as far away as Indonesia and funding madrassas that teach hatred in nations like Pakistan and India.

“So if you ask me who’s the worst at spreading hatred and trying to engender terrorism around the world, it’s Saudi Arabia hands down,” Paul said. “And if you say which people is probably more likely to come to Western ways and more likely to train with us and like the West, it’s probably Iran.”

Iran and  Saudi Arabia are at loggerheads, one Shiite and one Sunni. Both spread Islamic fundamentalism. Yet the US sides with Saudi, and has done for several decades now — presumably because the Saudis in return insist on being paid in US dollars for their oil, which creates demand for the US dollar as the international trading currency. This effectively gives the US free stuff, because they print the currency and foreigners have to give real goods and services to obtain it. One cost to the US however is that the increased demand for US dollars ensures that their currency is perpetually overpriced — which reduced US exports and gutted US manufacturers.

Culturally, if it wasn’t for the Mullahs in charge, Iran would be much more harmonious with Western values.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Why 536 AD was the worst year to be alive: Scientists say a mysterious fog that blocked out the sun causing crop failures and widespread famine was the worst global disaster in history

Why 536 AD was the worst year to be alive: Scientists say a mysterious fog that blocked out the sun causing crop failures and widespread famine was the worst global disaster in history. By Joe Pinkstone.

Europe, the Middle East, and parts of Asia were plunged into 18 months of solid darkness by a mysterious fog.

It caused snowfall in China, continental-scale crop failure, extreme drought, famine and disease throughout most of the northern hemisphere.

The bleak year was triggered by a cataclysmic Icelandic eruption, scientists say, and was an ominous omen for a bleak century of suffering and death. Michael McCormick, a Harvard University archaeologist and medieval historian, told Science Magazine that the world did not show signs of recovery until 640AD. …

The eerie fog created a drab world with darkness residing over the northern hemisphere for 18 months, with an unrelenting dusk persevering through day and night.

Effects on the climate were so severe that the Irish chronicles tell of ‘a failure of bread from the years 536–539’.

The international devastation triggered by the unidentified fog gave rise to the moniker ‘The Dark Ages‘ which has been used to refer to this ominous time.

Causes of the event have remained a mystery to scientists since it was first discovered via tree ring analysis that the world’s temperature dipped for several years at this point in time.

Dr McCormick and glaciologist Paul Mayewski at the Climate Change Institute of The University of Maine (UM) in Orono believe to have finally put the riddle to bed.

In their study, published in the journal Antiquity, the researchers reveal it was likely caused by a cataclysmic volcanic eruption in Iceland.

It’s easy to cool the Earth, should it get too warm — just put some tiny reflective dust particles in the atmosphere, to reflect more of the incoming sunlight back out to space. For instance, this was inadvertently done by the 500 atmospheric nuclear tests from 1945 to 1980 (mainly halted by treaty in 1963), which kicked up dust into the stratosphere where it stays for a few years before falling out.

But we cannot warm the Earth if it gets too cool. For the last million years the Earth has been in a pattern of ice age for about 100,000 years, then an “interglacial” (a warmer period, like now) for 10,000 years. The last ice age ended about 10,000 years ago — you do the math. We do not really know what caused the ice ages — there are some leading theories that are pretty good, but none wholly satisfactory. We have no idea of how to warm the Earth when the next ice age comes around. Don’t bother saying “increase carbon dioxide”, because the effect is too small — the climate models exaggerate it (there is a mistake in all the climate models, book soon).

hat-tip Scott of the Pacific

It’s Never The Crime, It’s Always The Cover-Up: Australian Greens Set To Implode Over Sexual Assault Allegations

It’s Never The Crime, It’s Always The Cover-Up: Australian Greens Set To Implode Over Sexual Assault Allegations, by Chris Graham.

Let’s re-imagine, just for a minute, last week’s furore around the alleged sexual assault of ABC journalist Ashleigh Raper by former NSW Labor leader Luke Foley. …

You only need to know the story of Ella Buckland, a former Greens NSW staffer who earlier this year levelled startlingly similar allegations against Greens MP Jeremy Buckingham.

Like Ms Raper, Ms Buckland alleges that after a work function, she was sexually assaulted by a drunken politician.

Like Ms Raper, Ms Buckland alleges that following the alleged assault, she received a phone call from her alleged attacker.

Like Ms Raper, Ms Buckland waited a considerable period of time to air those allegations.

Like Ms Raper, Ms Buckland was the subject of defamation threats when the issue became public.

Those are the commonalities. The differences, however, are stark.

In Ms Raper’s case, Luke Foley allegedly slipped his hand down her dress and between her underpants, resting his hand on her bare buttocks. In Ms Buckland’s case, Mr Buckingham allegedly approached her from behind, grabbed her “roughly on the vagina” and kissed her neck.

In Ms Raper’s case, she was dragged into the public fray by a Coalition politician seeking to exploit a political advantage. In Ms Buckland’s case, her motivation in coming forward was publicly and falsely ascribed to her being involved in a factional move against Mr Buckingham. Ms Buckland has not been a member of the Greens for several years and has no day-to-day involvement in politics.

In Ms Raper’s case, she received a phone call from her alleged abuser, who apologised and promised to resign. In Ms Buckland’s case, she received a phone call from her alleged abuser who threatened that she should be ‘careful in her job’.

In Ms Raper’s case, she subsequently received threats of defamation when the issue became public, only to have those threats widely shouted down. In Ms Buckland’s case, she received threats of defamation before the issue even became public, and Mr Buckingham has gone on to threaten to sue – and actively sue – multiple people.

In Ms Raper’s case, there was a startlingly swift resolution to the issue. Luke Foley announced his resignation almost immediately. Ms Buckland made her complaint internally through the Greens in April. It took months to progress, but not before a subsequent internal investigation finally turned the blow torch on Ms Buckland herself, investigating the baseless allegations that she was a ‘promiscuous drug user’.

The other glaring differences, of course, included the reactions of media and politicians. …

Read it all for the details. But the hypocrisy is causing heads to explode:

Over the past week, anger at the difference in the treatment of Ms Buckland and Ms Raper has been blowing up on social media, with a growing number of people doing the job of the mainstream media by calling out the obvious hypocrisy between the two approaches.

Square in the gun of that growing public outrage has been the actions of Greens politicians, most of whom stayed silent for months over the Buckland allegations, but wasted no time in coming out to condemn Luke Foley.

Too many of the extreme left behave very poorly when they get near power — principles go out the window. It’s happened so often it’s become a stereotype. (This is, for instance, why Trump has be so “vulgar” to be effective. The rules of dignity and decorum are exploited mercilessly by unprincipled leftists, who apply them to others but not to themselves — like with Bush and Romney.)

Judge orders CNN’s Acosta be allowed back into White House

Judge orders CNN’s Acosta be allowed back into White House, by Jessica Gresko.

A federal judge ordered the Trump administration on Friday to immediately return the White House press credentials of CNN reporter Jim Acosta, though a lawsuit over the credentials’ revocation is continuing.

U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Kelly, an appointee of President Donald Trump, announced his decision at a hearing Friday morning. The judge said Acosta’s credentials must be reactivated to allow him access to the White House complex for press briefings and other events. …

[The judge] ordered Acosta’s pass returned for now in part because he said CNN was likely to prevail on its Fifth Amendment claim — that Acosta hadn’t received sufficient notice or explanation before his credentials were revoked or been given sufficient opportunity to respond before they were. …

Speaking to reporters after the decision, Trump said, “If they don’t listen to the rules and regulations, we will end up back in court and we will win.”

He later added: “We want total freedom of the press. It’s very important to me, more important to me than anybody would believe. But you have to act with respect when you’re in the White House, and when I see the way some of my people get treated at press conferences, it’s terrible. So we’re setting up a certain standard, which is what the court is requesting.”

Extraordinary. Now Trump isn’t even allowed to decide who gets invited into his workplace? The court has effectively ordered that he be subjected to insulting aggression and argumentation from Acosta. How bad would Acosta’s behavior have to be before he can legally be not given an invitation into the White House?

This is like when the judiciary suddenly changed the rules two years ago so that for the first time the President cannot decide who gets entry to the country — the “Muslim ban”. Now the judiciary is changing the rules on who can work in the White House. Like the former, the latter will eventually get overruled by later judges, presumably.

Another episode that shows that the deep state (a) are prepared to be incredibly biased politically, (b) hate Trump, and (c) are really running the show, subverting the will of the elected officials when it suits.

If Jim Acosta or CNN wish to compel the President to debate them, they should first go to the trouble of being elected to Congress — like anybody else.

Ed Driscoll: A quote from Jon Gabriel of Ricochet: “Only call on Acosta until the rest of the reporters demand his press pass is seized.”