Copyright © 2015 - 19 All rights reserved.

30th July, 2017

Sadiq Kahn's Second Referendum Ruse

Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London, declared yesterday (reported in the Guardian) that it was only possible to “trump the referendum” of 2016 in which 52% opted to leave the EU with a fresh, democratic vote, which could be delivered through the next general election or a national vote on the final "Brexit" deal.

This is the actual legal position as far as the EU are concerned; whose modus operandi is to continually push for Referendums, until they get their own way or, alternatively, to persuade the member state Parliaments to vote down a Referendum - in either case they continue on their own defined trajectory, through stealth and deception - regardless of any objections. They have so far failed to do either, and this current intervention is a "lawyer's confection" (to quote a member of the House of Lords - Lord Forsyth) deemed suitable, to get around, what the EU sees as a threat to its integrity, indeed potentially, to its very continued existence.

Clearly, Mayor Khan is working for the EU - against the best interests of the UK - unless anyone other than deluded Remainer's, consider that, being under legal control (Occupied) by the EU (Germany) is in Britain's best interests, or indeed in the best interests of any other EU member state - that is really the "bottom line".  Khan, a Blairite, was formerly part of the New Labour government, and also Ed Miliband's Shadow Justice Minister; is backed by the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP), and the Fabian Society - whose members established the EEC(EU), the Bilderberg Group and many other interconnected organisations, including the LSE, NUS, Progress, Migration Advisory Committee, UK Border Agency, the UN, and many more* - who part of the Fabian network - which is working towards the establishment of a Socialist World Government - not surprisingly, they are all staunch EU supporters. 

Chuka Umunna, another Blairite, from the PLP, led the recent "rebellion" within the Labour Party, as they try to force Jeremy Corbyn to keep Britain in the Single Market and Customs Union. How Britain could have ended up in this situation is down to the control of our Education System by the political Left, the support of the Trade Unions and the BBC - all with a common purpose.

What Khan is proposing is that for the next General Election the Labour Party's manifesto should include a pledge to hold a second Referendum on whether or not the UK should leave the EU, - a blatant attempt to thwart the will of the British people - as expressed by a vote of 17.4 million (52%) to 16.1 (48%), in the largest ever turnout (72%), on the 23rd of June, 2016.

The tenor of Khan's remarks - e.g. to "Trump the Referendum" - shows precisely his feelings and the disdain of those, of his supporters for Democracy, and suggest a large subversive element within our Parliament and the House of Lords, and more widely, who are more than happy to sell out their fellow countrymen to the highest bidder, but that is no surprise - the notion that they are looking after Britain's interests is without credibility or merit - they only looking after the interests of themselves and the EU.

Our Comment

You can't dismiss one Referendum and replace it with another Referendum on some perverse reasoning that Referendums are not the way make decisions; because whatever the shortcomings of one Referendum - they must equally apply to any Referendum.

A Referendum (direct Democracy) is not that different to any election of "Representatives" - the two or more parties set out their respective "stalls" and the population decides upon the merits of the arguments, supplemented by their own experiences, background and peer groups. The extent that what was set-out in their "stalls" turns out to be difficult to implement does not negate the original proposals or arguments.

The Article 50 negotiations are being made difficult because of unnecessary belligerence by the EU - there is no reason why the EU could not be accommodating, if wished to be so, and the reason for its belligerence has nothing to to with trade - only to do with its objectives - to rule over the EU members states in perpetuity. Even Khan has stated the he hopes that the EU flag would fly in front of the London Mayor's office forever - says it all really - why do we elect those who hate us, and wish to see the population of the UK under the subjugation of a foreign power?

We have already had a Referendum (2016), which was legal and properly constituted - full-stop; which the Establishment claimed was only "advisory", rather than "mandatory", in spite of all the published evidence to the contrary.

We also had a General Election on June the 8th, 2017, in which the Conservative Party and Labour Party  each stated that they would respect the EU Referendum, and leave the Single Market and Customs Union. The result was ~ 84% vote in favour of parties who supported leaving the EU, and a reduced vote (-19 seats) for the SNP, and a small (+3) increase for the LibDems, who campaigned either to Remain or for a second EU Referendum. 

So we have already had the vote that Khan is currently advocating, and ~84% of those voted to leave - the second Referendum was not offered, and if the people of the UK, having seen the behaviour of the EU during the Article 50 negotiations, still want to stay in the Totalitarian EU Dictatorship; which is doing everything it can to destroy the UK, then there is little hope for Britain. 

The idea that because the EU and its supporters don't like the result, that they are somehow entitled to seek means to subvert our Democracy - by whatever device - for their own purposes, on behalf of the EU, is a deep and damning indictment on those in our political system who seek the demise of our society, our political system and the enslavement of the British people.

They should be ashamed to show their face in public - they be marginalised as "crackpots" and not fit to serve our country.

The real problem with Khan's (aka EU's) attempt to bring about a second Referendum is that it will be deliberately manipulated, with changed terms of reference, conditions and an enlargement of the franchise to include the more easily led 16 year old voters - as any Glastonbury aficionado, celebrity or indeed, any Military General would attest. Those who were 16 years of age could also be given two votes each, according to EU Nick - but the 16 year old vote did not help the SNP with their Indy1Ref.

Corbyn has already figured out how to multiply the votes cast - just offer them anything - immediately before the vote - a couple of days before might suffice to avoid scrutiny  (but make sure they don't realise that you are lying).

Any changes would  immediately destroy the authenticity and integrity of any second EU Referendum - even if they didn't stop anyone over 40 voting - since it would not be comparable with the earlier referendum, and nothing more than a simple thwarting of the genuine EU Referendum (2016) by any other name. Which would lead to more disquiet, and force the EU to act, if they saw that it was not going their way - that would not bother those on the deceitful political Left though.

As a number of people have previously remarked

" If you are not a Socialist by the time you are 20 you have no heart, if you are not a Conservative by the time you are 40, you have no brain"

From which observations the political Left attempt to confine the voting age range, or give more votes to the youngest.

* A more complete list: in the event that any are referenced in the government's "glowing" reports about the EU.

The Royal Economic Society (RES)
The London School of Economics (LSE)
Imperial College London.
Chatham House (the Fabian Society in London)
The National Union of Students (NUS).
National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR).
London Business School (LBS).
The university of London.
Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).
Social Science Research Council (SSRC).
The John Smith Memorial Fund (JSMF).
The Runnymede Trust.
Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR).
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR).
The Smith Institute.
Policy Network.
The Creative Diversity Network (CDN).
Policy Exchange.
Global Forum on Migration and Development (GFMD).
British Future.
Migration Advisory Committee (MAC).
UK Border Agency (UKBA).