S’funny how things pop into your mind!

As we are now deep into the minutiae of beginning to leave the European Union, I thought that I would track back, and view that which I wrote as the day for the Referendum drew ever nearer.  I began by reviewing my own post on the trial of Thomas Mair for the murder of Jo Cox, a Labour M.P. OoL readers might remember both the murder and the trial; but I concentrated on the alleged ‘Trial’, mainly because it was unlike any other trial ever recorded in British Judicial history,

As I wrote:- The defence counsel never even asked for his mental illness, or mental health, to be brought into the judicial equation, despite proof being available that he was seeking further treatment for his mental health, but instead of being given an initial evaluation, was told to ‘come back tomorrow’. Well he did ‘come back’, but with a very different outcome. Why was nothing of his mental health and/or illnesses mentioned in mitigation? Was he so very evil that he deserved the very Judicial Book being thrown at him? Was he virtually crucified on the altar of the Remoaners, because the EU Referendum was just weeks away? Nothing was put forward in that sick man’s defence to thin, or at least dilute, the thick and censorious porridge which was the travesty of the Prosecution. No-one could argue that he was not guilty of the murder; it was virtually filmed as it happened; but have we all forgotten the basic truth that mercy should be the prerogative of princes?

I also wrote of the ‘Grey Men’ when I asked:- Do we here within the borders of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, we proud British people, choose to regain our Sovereignty, our ability to choose who sets out how we are governed, and also regain the ability to kick those politicians out who collectively displease us: or do we stay within the Federalised Super State of the European Union, with no say in how we are governed; in a Super State of unelected and unaccountable Bureaucrats: in a true minority where we never, ever win or alter anything; where we are told what to do, who to allow into our borders, and, worst of all, have to kow-tow to a bunch of arrogant Krauts who literally rule that which they so comprehensively lost in two bloody World Wars?

As the date approached, using a quotation from Shakespeare’s Ceasar for mine own ends; I also stated:- “I would quote a paragraph from Mary Ellen Synon’s latest posting, to illustrate that of which I write:-

The British people can expect the same kind of fraud if they succeed in voting to leave the EU. They will be patronised, and frightened, by government and EU insistence that they did not know what they were doing. They will be told in effect that the British voters are too dense, too uneducated about the EU, too confused, too much under the influence of what the EU denounces as ‘dangerous nationalism,’ to understand the implications of their own vote.”

The Day being upon us, as we voted in our millions, for better or indeed, for worse; I typed the words:- Where, hopefully through today’s momentous vote, the mists will finally lift to bring back within our own borders and shores; the ability to write our own laws, free of a foreign court’s ability to overrule our own: to establish who runs our Nation, and who, in due course, we can dispossess by means of an unencumbered VOTE! Let us LEAVE!

I would, at this point in this essay, admit that there now appears a surmise; a story; solely a possibility, however remote, which I wrote and posted that very day of the Referendum. I place it  here, so that you might a) enjoy the very short story, b) consider the remote possibilities of this story having any basis in fact, c) and after reading the ultra-strong reactions of MANY POLITICIANS, all of whom have their own agendas; ask yourself if it is even within the bounds of reality!

 

Notes for a Novel

The scenes are set in the present, with two partisan sectors, with vastly differing ideas, opinions and motives: both attempting to capture the public’s minds and intentions before a vote, a referendum ballot; finally takes place to determine whether their Country stays within a large group of Nation States: or takes a decision to leave that group forever.

A tiny number of scheming but deeply cynical politicians, of varying political colours but with strongly-held views and ambitions, gather in a smoky room in a Georgian house in Lord North Street: all intent upon one thing and one thing only, to agree on a plan, a single act, which would bring public opinion strongly across towards their viewpoint.

The most cynical man in the group, a former advisor and master-spinner himself, addresses the group seated around the highly-polished table towards the conclusion of their secret debate. No notes were to be kept, all mobile phones had been switched off, batteries ejected, before the conspirators had departed their homes and offices before their separate anonymous journeys to a house which had already been ‘scrubbed’ and tested for electronic and recording devices; for this was one meeting which could not, and would never, be referred to again, once the meeting had concluded its truly terrible purpose.

The speaker tapped his pen against the exquisitely-cut and decorated crystal water jug, and the ringing tone sharpened the attentions of the listeners.

“We are agreed, gentlemen, on the proposal which has been discussed. As our plan calls for one, and only one, sacrificial ‘lamb’ for the stewpot, I will now access the names which have been placed in the bowl before us; one candidate from six of the main areas within the Kingdom. All preparations are in place, and the scapegoat ‘patsies’ already seeded and in place, with a formidable team to finally mould his mind, already tormented by his own mental instabilities, once the target has been chosen. The rest of the ‘patsies’ will receive the mental health treatment and medications which those unfortunate people should have received immediately their diagnoses were completed. The back-up evidence; of instability, of threats and of weaponry preparations, are already in place, via the Internet, so we can proceed.” As he finished his sentences, he leant forward, dipped his hand into the bowl, and brought out a single slip of paper, folded over three times. He spoke the name revealed by the paper, and the eldest of the six other men, one who had sat silently for most of the meeting whilst sat around the table; flinched, hesitated for maybe five seconds, then slowly nodded his assent to the choice.

The speaker remained standing. “Again, gentlemen, we are agreed, we do this terrible thing, because our opponents are gaining upon us in the race towards the Referendum Vote; we sacrifice this one; so that we might, by inference alone, blame this one death on our opponents: and the fools who follow us will leap upon this tragedy as if it were Manna from Above: and our Colleagues in Brussels, in all the capitals of Europe, will breathe easier because we, above all else, know that might is right!”

The chosen slip of paper, was gathered together with its five fellows, and deposited upon the flames of the wood-fuelled fire burning in the set-back fireplace. The word on the paper, shrivelling fast in the hungry flames, bore a single word; Cox.

 

S’funny and strange: how things pop into your mind!

5 comments for “S’funny how things pop into your mind!

  1. August 3, 2017 at 3:53 pm

    Could well be.

  2. graham wood
    August 4, 2017 at 9:25 am

    “The British people can expect the same kind of fraud if they succeed in voting to leave the EU.” Indeed Mike – never a truer word, and we have been seeing evidence of that ever since the vote last June.

    For a thorough and systematic dismantling of all ‘remainer’ arguments I strongly recommend looking at the ‘Spiked’ website daily, and particularly Mick Hume’s comment today. Don’t miss his excellent summary of the changing political scenario!.
    He is right in saying that the issue of democracy and Brexit cuts across and beyond party lines… and the old political language of left and right is largely redundant these days.
    Absolutely the case, and the real divide is between leavers and remainers. between establishment political careerists in parliament, and democratic MPs who will fight to leave the EU in line with the clearly expressed will of the British people.
    It may well be that the infamous ECJ may have the last word in our Brexit battle for national integrity and autonomy. The question arises; what if in the final analysis the EU Commission, backed by the ECJ finds some form of words, in some part of the impenetrable EU Treaty which in their view entirely nullifies the British vote? That is not fantasy, and an ex ECJ judge has said clearly that the ECJ may yet exercise its final veto over Brexit.
    Explanatory letter to my MP follows.

  3. graham wood
    August 4, 2017 at 9:30 am

    Self explanatory letter sent to My MP (for what its worth – no reply as yet, but I will keep pushing until I get one).

    To. Mr Julian Sturdy MP (York Outer)

    Dear Mr Sturdy.
    I am forwarding two comments in the British print media today of which you may not be aware, the first of which concerns a possible judgment by the ECJ on the outcome of a future settlement with the EU, and the serious consequences which an adverse judgment would have as a result.

    It illustrates incidentally how vital it is for Britain to reject entirely political moves from any quarter for the UK to remain subject to the ECJ if we are to regain our full independence and sovereignty.

    Sir David Edward is an ex-judge of the ECJ and so he will be well aware, and more qualified than most, to assess the legalities of any ‘deal’ with the EU being subject to ECJ jurisdiction as he states:

    “‘The terms of Article 50 come under the jurisdiction of Luxembourg. (ECJ) ‘Any agreement between the EU and the UK can be referred to the European Court and must be compatible with EU law,’
    (I strongly recommend you look at the whole article, as clearly any ruling by the ECJ would, as far as the EU is concerned, be irrevocable and final, even if what is considered to be a favourable deal for the UK is finally negotiated.)

    Clearly, this could be the unplanned for and un-anticipated “cliff edge” which would entirely destroy all Brexit hopes and would frustrate the democratic vote by the British electorate last June in the referendum. The implications are all too obvious and would lead to an unprecedented political and constitutional crisis, and not least a fresh mandate to be sought by government from the people.
    Granted, this is at present a hypothetical situation, but nonetheless an adverse ruling by the ECJ can by no means be ruled out.

    Connected with this is a second media comment today reporting:

    “Britain is planning for all eventualities in Brexit talks with the European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May’s spokeswoman said on Tuesday when asked whether the government had prepared for leaving the bloc without a deal” – Independent

    I write to ask therefore for clarification of the government’s position as regards the “all eventualities” scenario which clearly is vitally important and will no doubt be considered in detail in the coming weeks and months.

    As you know, the EU has already indicated it proposes raising a number of issues with a negotiating UK government, some of which have already been aired in the British media, namely a suggested Brexit “bill” of untold £Billions payable by UK taxpayers as a pre-negotiation issue, (although there is nothing in Article 50 of the TEU to authorise any conditional pre-negotiation issue), the future status of Gibraltar, and future reciprocal rights of UK/EU citizens amongst other things.

    Please confirm that the government will consider, and if necessary will invoke, clauses in the Vienna Convention on Treaties specifically relevant to treaty disputes, as a “planned eventuality” if the European Union is found to negotiate in bad faith in the coming negotiations.

  4. rapscallion
    August 4, 2017 at 4:44 pm

    Frankly, I wouldn’t put anything past those who want to deny us Brexit. In days of yore their heads would be on spikes.

  5. August 5, 2017 at 7:07 am

    I wonder how many British voters know the names of the various (or indeed ANY ) head bureaucrats in the Departments of State in Britain. Ministers come and go but the plans and processes, ideologies and underhanded shenannigans continue uninterrupted by ‘votes’.

Comments are closed.