We are watching as either principled former Cabinet Ministers resign because they cannot speak in support of an EU deal which virtually and specifically ties the UK’s hands with silken but steely-strong ropes: or as rats deserting a sinking, stinking ship-of-state, fearful that they will lose any chance of promotion in another Tory Government; led by a different Prime Minister. When Shakespeare wrote, in Julius Caesar, of the soothsayer warning Caesar about the IDES, or the fifteenth of the month; the ruler ignored him: for what could a soothsayer know? Theresa should have had the foresight to employ the equivalent of Mystic Meg to warn her that, in going to the Commons on the morning of the 15th, she would be making the mistake of her political life. She has broken too many promises, made too many concessions; the Ides will probably see the end of her premiership, or at least the beginning of that end!

Theresa May might be correct in stating that it (the Withdrawing Agreement) is about the best that Great Britain can expect. What she does not state is that Great Britain and Northern Ireland (GB&NI) has been outmanoeuvred from the beginning of these negotiations, partly by the betrayal from within by May’s own team, working behind the backs of the original Brexit Ministerial team, to produce a document which would find favour with the Europeans. With the amateurish briefings, the ‘red lines’ which suddenly became a ‘whiter shade of pale’, with the flood of concessions, all from Britain to a tough, united European Union negotiating team. With the Prime Minister’s hopeless and fruitless attempts to peel apart the solidified stance of the EU by visiting various EU capital cities and virtually pleading with various Presidents and Prime Ministers to give GB&NI some leverage, some breathing space. That whole exercise was a waste of jet fuel, as well as valuable bargaining time.

The mistakes which were made even before the Referendum took place have only now become apparent. The Government was so confident that they had made their case to the British people that they forgot that a Referendum question has only two answers: ‘yes’ or ‘no’. They forgot that a prudent Government makes plans, and someone should have tapped Cameron’s weasel shoulder, and politely suggested that, maybe the ‘Leavers’ had a point; maybe even not a very good point: but wasn’t it maybe a good idea to explore the (to the Triumphant Tory Toff) possibilities extant in ‘Leaving’? I recall awaking on June 24th, and being more than bemused to find that we had won! I was truly astonished, but perhaps not as much as our former, truly unmissed, Prime Minister.

I wrote on the morning of the Referendum vote those heartfelt words:-

Where a tiny bunch of powerful barons forced an autocratic King to face the limitations of his powers.

to this:-


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!

What we have been left with is a choice between further slowly solidifying control of GB&NI’s trading arrangements from an EU which never ever forgets, and crashing out in a NO DEAL scenario which will be economically bad, for at least two or more years, for the UK.

I leave you with a small piece I wrote over a year ago:-

In 1975, I was living in South Africa, raising a family; but news from the Country of my birth still filtered through, despite the newspapers being four/five days later than publication. I watched at second hand as the lies, the sheer hammer of the Elite Establishment pounded any opposition to British involvement in the European Common Market, as it was then known; into the dust. The slightest reverberation of dissent, of a call that the best way would be for Britain to shake off those ever-stronger European bonds, which were supposed to be silken, but turned out to be cast iron, was ruthlessly crushed, with those who spoke the truth as they saw it, being ‘rubbished’ and virtually vilified.

The Oxford Union debates have been memorable, but most have been hardly publicised outside a fairly exclusive circle. They have been the cockpit for the debates such as ‘”This House will in no circumstances fight for its King and Country”, as well as the strange feminist squeals from Camilla Batmanwhatever. But one of the most important debates in the last Century was the one entitled That this House would say ‘yes’ to Europe’; which question was referring to the Referendum on Britain’s membership of the European Economic Community. The speech which rings true as far as this observer recalls was hardly covered by most newspapers, brushed aside within the ‘learned commentariat’, and, in the end, firmly defeated in the debate. But the one word, spoken by Peter Shore, a Labour Politician, is and was echoed in another, much more recent Referendum which came to a very, very different conclusion. The conclusion of the later Referendum was that we should LEAVE the EU; and the echoed word? Why, it was simply ‘FEAR’. Now when was that term used, and how was it used in that later Referendum?

I give you Mr. Peter Shore, a prescient politician who, like many of his confreres both then and now, was dissed, insulted and virtually ostracised: for speaking the entire, unvarnished truth as he saw it!

12 comments for “BEWARE THE IDES OF………….NOVEMBER?

  1. November 15, 2018 at 1:48 pm


    “The Government was so confident that they had made their case to the British people that they forgot that a Referendum question has only two answers: ‘yes’ or ‘no’.”


  2. Errol
    November 15, 2018 at 8:30 pm

    They put their effort into trying to enforce Stay Chained under the pretence of Leave.

    Never again. I’ll spoil my paper rather than vote for these vile sewage.

    • Itellyounothing
      November 15, 2018 at 10:14 pm

      I’ve done that for years. It makes no difference. It’s not enough to feel and express contempt, you have to be sand in the gears. Vote tactically for a hung parliament that can’t achieve anything. Belgium had incredible economic growth during it’s recent interregnum.

      • Errol
        November 16, 2018 at 7:19 am

        There’s no point. Tommy Robinson tries that. They arrest him. We live in a police state where the political class think themselves vital, and at the top of the pyramid.

        They are lower than the sewers and irrelevant. We just don’t need them. Them nor the legions of wasters in councils.

  3. Pcar
    November 16, 2018 at 1:10 am

    Liam Fox, Secretary of State for International Trade – Brexiter

    Why has he not resigned? May’s surrender agreement makes his job & department irrelevant & powerless

    • Pcar
      November 18, 2018 at 12:22 am

      Liam “turncoat” Fox

      Re: For they have also negotiated something that is worse than leaving with No Deal.

      Agree as does TW, but not Liam Fox:

      The EU Says It’s A Take It Or Leave It Brexit Deal – OK, We’ll Leave It And Leave

      That dog’s breakfast of a Brexit deal that Theresa May is trying to get through, the European Union has insisted that this is a take it or leave it deal. To which the correct response is sure, we’ll leave it and we’ll leave.

      What is actually being offered isn’t in fact leaving anyway, it’s an agreement to be tied to the Brussels apron strings without any voice at all in what they insist we do. That’s not the action of a sovereign nation, that’s to be reduced to a lickspittle colony.

      Better that we take the hit of crashing out into a WTO terms deal and then rebuild from there…

      Straight to the point and spot on.

      Then we have Liam “turncoat” Fox
      “Speaking on Friday, Liam Fox – the International Trade Secretary – gave a speech in which he declared ‘a deal is better than no deal’. This is rather different to May’s old claim that ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’.”

  4. Pcar
    November 16, 2018 at 1:18 am

    “An EU deal which virtually and specifically ties the UK’s hands with silken but steely-strong ropes”

    May’s surrender agreement states UK can only leave Customs Union if EU bestows permission.

  5. Pcar
    November 16, 2018 at 1:29 am

    May’s surrender agreement

    We voted to leave the customs union
    “Great news, we’ve got a great deal to stay in the customs union!”

    We voted to leave the single market
    “Great news, we’ve got a great deal to stay in the single market!”

    We voted to be an independent United Kingdom
    “Great news, we’ve got a great deal to permit Dublin supremacy over NI!”

    May is worse than Chamberlain.

    Chamberlain “only” said UK didn’t want a war with Germany, he didn’t agree Germany allowed to rule UK

  6. Valentine Gray
    November 16, 2018 at 10:25 am

    Message to May, Brexit is not going away,never, never, never. Bullshit all you want. your time as PM is running out, I notice you have started to wear make up and dress in more colourful clothes but it just highlights how ugly you really are, personal insults yes, just like that fraudulent document insults the intelligence. Your behavior borders on the sinister.

  7. Pcar
    November 18, 2018 at 12:16 am

    The top 40 horrors lurking in the small print of Theresa May’s Brexit deal

    In summary:

    The supposed ‘transition period’ could last indefinitely or, more specifically, to an undefined date sometime this century (“up to 31 December 20XX”, Art. 132).

    We can only leave the transition positively with a deal. But we sign away the money. So the EU has no need to give us a deal, and certainly no incentive to make the one they offered ‘better’ than the backstop.

    The European Court of Justice remains sovereign, as repeatedly stipulated.

    Perhaps most damagingly of all, we agree to sign away the rights we would have, under international law, to unilaterally walk away.

    The top 40 horrors – I’ve picked out a few:

    May says her deal means the UK leaves the EU next March. The Withdrawal Agreement makes a mockery of this. “All references to Member States and competent authorities of Member States…shall be read as including the United Kingdom.” (Art 6). Not quite what most people understand by Brexit.

    The EU admits, in Art. 184, that it is in breach of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty which oblige it to “conclude an agreement” of the terms of UK leaving the EU. We must now, it seems, “negotiate expeditiously the agreements governing their future relationship.” And if the EU does not? We settle down to this Agreement.

    The UK is forbidden from revealing anything the EU told us or tells us about the finer points of deal and its operation. (Article 105).

    Any powers the UK parliament might have had to mitigate EU law are officially removed. (Article 128)

    The UK agrees to spend taxpayers’ money telling everyone how wonderful the agreement is. (Article 37)

    Art 40 defines Goods. It seems to includes Services and Agriculture. We may come to discover that actually ‘goods’ means everything. The “goods” and the term “services” we are promised the deal are not defined – or, rather, will be defined however the EU wishes them to be.

    The agreement will last as long as the country’s youngest baby lives. “the persons covered by this Part shall enjoy the rights provided for in the relevant Titles of this Part for their lifetime”. (Article 39).

    The UK agrees not to prosecute EU employees who are or who might be deemed in future, criminals (Art.101)

    The agreement will be policed by ‘the Authority’ – a new UK-based body with ‘powers equivalent to those of the European Commission’. (Article 159)

    Any disputes under the Agreement will be decided by EU law only – one of the most dangerous provisions. (Article 168). This cuts the UK off from International Law, something we’d never do with any foreign body.

    And, of course, the UK will agree to pay £40bn to receive all of these ‘privileges’. (Article 138)

    The more I read, the angrier and sadder I become. Truly horrendous

    Traitor May has internationally humiliated the UK with her surrender – I’ve seen several USA news saying “UK Humiliated”

    • Pcar
      November 18, 2018 at 12:23 am

      Re: “The UK is forbidden from revealing anything the EU told us or tells us about the finer points of deal and its operation. (Article 105).”

      Steven Woolfe alluded to this – “secret documents not seen” Here

  8. Pcar
    November 18, 2018 at 12:17 am

    Nigel Farage Appalled – EU Control May Linger Until 2030


    The Truth About Brexit 2018 by Paul Joseph Watson

    Theresa May’s Great Brexit Surrender Document UK in EU Army in all but name

    UK becomes a humiliated vassal state, might as well abolish/prorogue UK, NI, Scot & Wales Parliaments and replace with our ex-current MEPs

Comments are closed.