Reluctant Remainer Theresa May Loses… Or Did She? Lord Buckethead Aside, the Biggest Loser May Be… Brexit

by Scott Creighton

“Theresa May publicly stated her support for the UK remaining in the EU during the 2016 referendum campaign” Telegraph April 2016

Lord Buckethead pictured in back row. See if you can figure out which one he is

Aside from Lord Buckethead’s poor performance, the big news out of the UK today is after a contentious, terrorism-filled 4 month campaign season, the results are in, and Theresa May’s Conservative party lost a total of 12 seats in yesterday’s snap election.

The Prime Minister called for an early election because she wanted to strengthen her hand for the Brexit negotiations scheduled to start in the next 10 days. So Labor voters and Corbyn fans are saying Theresa May lost big time in her efforts with this election.

But did she? I’m not so sure she did.

In 2015 the Tories won a clear majority with 330 seats in the House of Commons which allowed them to form a government on their own. Yesterday May lost that majority winning only 318 which will now force her to form a coalition government, probably (they already struck a deal actually) with the Democratic Unionist Party headed by Arlene Foster who won 10 seats, up from the 8 they already held.

The big winner yesterday was the Labor party headed by the populist “reluctant politician”, Jeremy Corbyn. They gained 32 seats moving up from 229 to 261. The Liberal Democrats picked up 4 seats (12) and the Scottish National Party lost about 20 (though they still won the majority of the Scottish vote)

While Nigel Farage runs around doing spots on Di$info Jone$’s show screeching about the “islamofascists”, his party lost the one seat they still had and are now out in the street… kinda like a band of refugees. Ironic, yes?

As is the custom, Theresa May will now go to the Queen and ask permission to form a government.

Heck of a “democracy” they have there, right? The Prime Minister can dissolve parliament whenever she wants a larger majority and in the end, the will of the people hangs on the say-so of an aging monarch.

Exit polls showed the Conservative party was going to lose ground very early on. Predictions were they would only win 314 seats. That’s pretty close. Of course, here in ‘Merika! we ignore such things because our glorious black-box voting machines can never be bothered with such out-dated notions like “transparency” or “accountability”

Hell of a “democracy” we have here, right?

Corbyn thinks May should step down. He believes (and he has an argument) that this is tantamount to a vote of no confidence from the people.

Theresa May is being criticized for running a “debacle” of a campaign. She refused to debate Corbyn, the Conservative Party manifesto read like it was designed to piss off the huddled masses and when given an opportunity to answer questions from the press, she acted like she had never taken a public speaking course in her life. Compare those performances to what she did as Prime Minister answering questions every week in a hostile Parliament and you have to wonder if she’s had a stroke or something.

Couple all of that with the fact that she’s the “law and order” candidate and in the end, every two weeks or so, some former Theresa May terrorist contractor blows something up or stabs someone with a knife… and you had the perfect trifecta of a storm to ensure the Conservatives lost seats.

All that said, the question of Brexit comes to the forefront today with talks to begin in just 10 days.

Theresa May’s previous position has been to take a hard line approach to the negotiations which would basically entail a “give us what we want or we simply walk with no agreement”

That tactic may now be “off the table” according to the complicit globalist press in the UK.

The Guardian put together a handy list of “5 Possible Outcomes” regarding Brexit. Here’s #4:

“A less likely option, but one that may still prove commercially necessary, is for Britain to try to stay clearly within the existing single market. In practical terms this would mean joining the European Free Trade Association, like Norway and Switzerland, and seeking to remain in the European Economic Area as a result.

The political costs of this are high. As Switzerland has found, this is not compatible with an independent immigration policy. It also requires accepting rules set by other EU members and the jurisdiction of the European court of justice – both of which have been clear red lines for the Conservative party” Guardian

Right. Keep free trade, keep open borders, keep rule by unelected technocrats in Brussels… in short: go ahead with Brexit while keeping all the worst globalist parts of the EU in place in order to placate London’s super wealthy elites.

Yeah, that’s one way to go. Of course, it’s not really a Brexit, but who’s watching.

Number 5 is the real interesting option (no wonder they saved it for last):

“With so many unpalatable choices ahead, there is still a considerable chance the British electorate will signal its desire for a more fundamental rethink of Brexit. The most likely vehicle for this would be a second referendum held at the end of the negotiating phase. If British negotiators come back from Brussels without a comprehensive free trade deal, or a highly watered down Brexit, it is quite possible the new parliament would have to put this to the country.

Another possible route to this dream scenario for remainers could theoretically come through further electoral upheaval in a second general election.” Guardian


Theresa May had a better majority, a clear majority, won in 2015 and not set for another election until 2020. Though she didn’t particularly WANT to follow through with Brexit, she was compelled to after her predecessor put it to the people for a referendum, which he thought the remainers would win. Turns out, he was wrong. And now he’s gone.

So the Conservatives owned a clear majority well past the two year deadline for Brexit.

And now, after this fiasco from Prime Minister May… they don’t.

And lo and behold… the confusion MAY JUST RESULT IN THE NEED FOR A NEW REFERENDUM.

Or at least they will  probably spin it that way.

There is no way a “leave and keep the worst parts of the EU” plan will work. Whatever party votes for that will be finished in Britain for the next 10 generations. The “soft Brexit”, the “Hard” Brexit and the “Car Crash” Brexit will certainly be debated back and forth for the next 12 months or so but with no clear party majority in Parliament, it will be hard to garner an agreement especially when you consider YET ANOTHER snap election could be called at any time.

Neoliberal technocrats love chaos. That’s why they create it in every country they regime change, coup or bomb into our versions of “freedom and democracy”

When the government is in a state of chaos, all sorts of unpopular things can be done while the people are terrified even worse things are possible. The entire Obama presidency is testimony to that. If I hear another fake dem say “but he HAD to compromise” one more time I’m going to vomit on my keyboard… again.

Chaos is what this election created. And chaos is exactly what Doctor Technocrat probably wanted.

Look at it this way: the Conservatives are neoliberal establishment and neoliberal establishment does not want Brexit to be followed through. They like free markets, privatization, cheap labor through open borders and outside arbitrators ruling on British law on their business interest’s behalf.

But like it was over here in the States not that long ago, the general rabble of the Conservative Party wanted to get the hell out of the EU and regain control of their own country.

Tough place for a Conservative Party to be in when they held a clear Parliamentary majority and an even clearer mandate from the citizenry.


Snap election. Abysmal performance by the party leader. A few bombs, a few knives and what do you have?


Chaos and a coalition government that is going to have to “compromise” on Brexit so no single party has to take responsibility for the whole thing and…

… the squabbling may eventually result in them either taking the globalist “leave BUT NOT REALLY” deal or…

a second referendum on Brexit.

Her last-minute support for staying in the European Union will have wider implications for any future Tory leadership contest that follows David Cameron’s eventual departure. One of the final two contenders will inevitably be someone who backed Brexit, forcing Theresa May – if she gets that far – to play the role of the “Eurosceptic Europhile”.

The Home Secretary is trying to cast herself as the reluctant Remainer..” Telegraph April 2016

Perhaps May wasn’t as reluctant as she let on. Like her friend Hillary Clinton, Theresa had a public and a private opinion which was made clear when someone leaked one of her talks she gave privately to a bunch of Goldman Sachs bankers (sound familiar?)

Theresa May privately warned that companies would leave the UK if the country voted for Brexit during a secret audience with investment bankers a month before the EU referendum.

A recording of her remarks to Goldman Sachs, leaked to the Guardian, reveals she had numerous concerns about Britain leaving the EU. It contrasts with her nuanced public speeches, which dismayed remain campaigners before the vote in June.

Speaking at the bank in London on 26 May, the then home secretary appeared to go further than her public remarks to explain more clearly the economic benefits of staying in the EU. She told staff it was time the UK took a lead in Europe, and that she hoped voters would look to the future rather than the past.

In an hour-long session before the City bankers, she also worried about the effect of Brexit on the British economy.” The Guardian, 2016

To be clear, she didn’t worry about the overall economy and the effects Brexit would have on the general voting population… she worried about the effects it would have on Britain’s business elites and bankers… whom she was addressing.

To me it is very clear Theresa May is more like Donald Trump than Jeremy Corbyn is in the sense that he tapped into a general mood of the electorate and spouted the words they wanted to hear, but in the end, he never had any real intention of following through on his promises. Kinda like Barack Obama and every other politician we vote for these days.

May needed a way out of Brexit without imploding the Conservative Party and all their neoliberal agenda items on their way out the door. Wouldn’t want to see them sitting around drinking cheap wine with the UKIP refugees for the next couple of decades.

So they found one.

Gotta give em credit. It was pretty damn clever.

Hold snap elections combined with a “debacle” of a campaign and sit back and wait for the chaos.

That beloved chaos the neoliberals thrive on to do their dirty little work all over the world.

Some say Theresa May lost. I’m not so sure about that.

Please help keep AE up and running if you can.

I really could use any help you can afford. Things are getting pretty bad

Thank you all so much

(For my mailing address, please email me at


40 Responses

  1. Very good analysis. When she called for new election my thought was “Do they want to lose and forgo the Brexit?”

  2. The real winner was the central bankers that can now rest comfortably that Brexit has been put on a death watch.

    May and the DUP is bad news for Yemen, since the DUP has some very nasty bedfellows.

  3. Sorry but I’m sure you’re wrong on this one Scott. May lost – simple as. She wanted a landslide victory and expected one so she could do as she liked. Instead she’s been found out. She’s a hopeless leader and debater and Jeremy Corbyn is massively underrated. But the Tories and their press lapdogs they believed in their own bs and thought the 20%+ poll advantage with just seven weeks of campaigning (that’s an incredibly short period even in Britain) combined with the unrelenting media campaign against JC (including a few swipes from within his own party) would see them through. But May et al still managed to fuck it up and so are now reliant on the parliamentary support of a party of political dinosaurs from Ulster to keep going. Most people think May is now fatally wounded and such a slim majority is unlikely to see them safely through the next few years.

    As for an end to Brexit – this is largely media spin. Both Labour and Tories fought on a Brexit ticket. There was actually very little difference in their manifestos on this issue. Whereas the only parties that stood strongly on a remain ticket were severely beaten. SNP were hammered in Scotland and the Lib Dems who fought on a second referendum ticket saw no bounce at all (they were so badly crushed two years ago but still only gained a pathetic handful of seats). A useful measure of the Lib Dem failure is what happened here in Sheffield where their former leader and one-time deputy PM (under the Con-Dem coalition), Nick Clegg, lost his seat to Labour. In fact, although I loathe the Lib Dems, I’m disappointed that they didn’t wipe out a few Tories in remain seats as had been expected – that might have put Corbyn into government.

    So, as I say, much of the “remoaner” media – BBC, Guardian, Independent, C4, etc – are already trying to spin this into an anti-Brexit vote but it’s a real stretch but there’s no supporting evidence. Instead, the biggest story is simply May’s astounding and frankly hilarious cock up (based on hubris and incompetence) and Corbyn’s unexpected (in many quarters) success. The resurgence of the true progressive left in fact. Sure he didn’t win but seven weeks ago it was expected he would be smashed. Instead, he played a blinder against all the odds and his base support rallied to the cause. The youth also came out in numbers whereas for many years they have stayed at home.

    One opinion gaining some traction already is that Corbyn should make an offer to the Tories to establish a cross-party group (Lab and Tories) to negotiate Brexit and thus guarantee some kind of stability in the months ahead. We shall see but it’s an idea I certainly support.

    There are of course powerful forces trying to prevent Britain leaving the EU who find any excuse they can to slow the process or stop it altogether. But Corbyn, whose own position is now hugely strengthened, is actually more pro-leave than May ever was. If May had got here landslide “mandate” I (like many others) believe she was ready to sell the electorate down the river. But being weakened at the polls actually makes it harder to sell out with such a sizeable contingent of genuine leavers inside the Tory party – and I gather the DUP are pro-Brexit too (although I’m no expert on Northern Irish politics).

    It’s an astonishing situation and over here everyone is still quite stunned actually. Positive in many, many ways even though the Tories are holding power by their fingertips still. As for stopping Brexit, I’m just saying don’t believe the hype – any of it!

    • You know, when I wrote about Tsipras being a neoliberal in progressive clothing, folks round here attacked me once again. They get mad when I cast doubt on their “victories”. Shit, I got kicked off a website I made with some friends because I dared do the same thing about Glorious Obama back in the day, so I’m used to it. And no worries, no one kicks me off of this one.

      I would LOVE to think “neoliberalism is dead” because of this election (some guy Tweeted that yesterday) but in all honesty, it isn’t. They start negotiations in 9 days. This whole thing was timed to create chaos in the UK’s negotiation team. Or at least the appearance of chaos.

      What gets me is you say the whole “Brexit is dead” meme coming out of this is “just the media spin” on it AS IF the media isn’t run by the same establishment that runs the government. They are part and parcel of the same system, so yes, as I pointed out yesterday, the media is ALREADY saying the “hard” Brexit is dead on arrival and now there will have to be a “compromise” to a “softer, more business-friendly” one.

      Plus, the Irish party they formed the government with is also already being blamed for it with many reporting they “must have” struck a deal with the Conservatives for a softer exit, one that pretty much means they keep the worst parts of EU membership.

      I’ll tell you one thing, I have already started seeing reports from folks saying it looks like she may have “wanted to lose”

      Like Tsipras and Obama… I’ll just sit back and wait for folks to catch up. I know you like thinking you won something, hell, just ask any Obamaite or Trumpster… but sometimes when you win, you don’t.

      • May did not want to lose PERIOD – but that doesn’t mean TPTB won’t attempt to work things to their advantage – they ALWAYS do. Look, I live in this country and all this stuff about May deliberately throwing the election is pure 100% horse manure. She was determined to win as was the media behind her – check out the abuse thrown at Corbyn throughout the last seven weeks. And then we had those twin “terror attacks” right on cue with follow up trying to smear Corbyn as a “terrorist sympathiser”. So yes, I concede that you were correct about Greece and I was wrong but fact is I don’t live in Greece – I live in Sheffield and this revisionism is pure bs. Please just drop it because it’s embarassing.

        • revisionism? lol. Yeah, she WANTED to win so she could lead the country through the transition that she herself and her friends at Goldman Sachs wanted to derail. And she did that because…?… because the will of the people means THAT MUCH to her? lol.

          Who is dealing in revisionism now? It’s magical thinking friend. It was so obvious they threw it, a blind Obamaite could it. Yeah, they staged those attacks.. and used their own people for it as well, knowing full well that would get out and pump up the anti-war side of the Corbyn crowd while at the same time, making her grasp on control look weak to others. Plus they could crack down, put soldiers on the streets, spend more on national security.. all the things they always do.

          No, they planned this. They didn’t want to increase the Conservative’s lead. What sense does that make? At worst they wanted a “soft, business friendly” Brexit which is NOT what the voters wanted, but it’s what her business friends did. To do that the Conservatives needed a reason, a justification… like this party they’ve formed the government with. They can blame them now. And if things go really well for them, if the press continues to turn this into a bigger and bigger crisis as the weeks and months drag on, then they get to say they HAVE to hold a second referendum. That’s what they really want.

          She had everything she needed. A majority. A mandate from the people. All she was missing… was a way out. And THAT is why they held the snap elections.

          • You weren’t here and you didn’t see how it played out. You didn’t see the kind of treatment Corbyn had to deal with. You didn’t see the pained faces of the Tories and the Blairites after they lost. They lost because of arrogance. They lost because Corbyn fought a tremendous camapaign. I was there okay – why can’t you accept that you are calling this one wrongly?

            • And to answer your other point – she didn’t have a mandate from her party. Her party is half full of MPs who genuinely want to leave the EU alongside a few phoneys who say they do like Boris Johnson.

              Look, all this said, I agree with you that there is a tremendous fight going on to secure Brexit but there always has been. All I’m trying to convince you is that this election fuck up was a fuck up and not part of any grander plan.

              • and all I am saying is, you’re wrong. but don’t tell me to “drop it because it’s embarrassing”… do I go to your website and tell you what you should and shouldn’t write about? who the fuck does that?

                what are you going to say when the shit gets all crazy and the media makes the whole thing into a tangled fucking mess and all of a sudden, in a year or so, May comes out and says you “have” to hold a new referendum because “the mandate isn’t clear anymore” or some other such bullshit?

                You gonna come back here and apologize? nah. you’ll just bite your lip like the Obamaites did for eight years and the Trumpsters have already STARTED doing.

                My question is… what is damn valuable about this election that you have to defend it’s integrity to the death anyway? Fucking Corbyn lost to that fucking monster… EVEN AFTER HER “KILL EM ALL AND TAKE THEIR MONEY” MANDATE… that even Conservatives said now appears like it was written to piss people off?

                What is so great about his performance? He lost by 50 seats? It’s not like he won the damn thing. Now, she’s in power AND she’s got a rabid band of far-far-right politicos from Ireland running it with her. And that’s a damn victory? lol

                man… i thought I our ‘democracy” was in bad shape.

                • You’re right and I apologise for writing that.

                  Regarding the election, what you say is true to an extent too. Corbyn didn’t win. Our democracy is fucked up. Our first past the post system is stupid and it makes it really hard for genuine alternative candidates to succeed. Like in your system, you’re basically stuck with two parties. So it’s amazing that we have managed to wrestle control from the Blairites within the Labour Party. That was corbyn’s original victory when he became leader and this election has considerably strengthened his own position within the party. If he had lost the election altogether then he would probably have been ousted and we would be faced with a new leadership election and the potential for a genuinely pro-EU leader of Labour.

                  Regarding my own position – I have already conceded that I was wrong about Tspiras but I was never wrong about Obama as you can read from posts about him. I knew he was a warmonger and a bankers’ boy.

                  Corbyn is a much truer progressive than Sanders. Please look at his remarkable record in opposition – he has voted against every war, against every clampdown on civil liberties, openly supports the Palestinians, fought against Apartheid, and many, many other issues. In Britain no-one seriously questions Corbyn’s integrity – not even his harshest opponents. It is not fair to compare him to either Tsipras or Obama who were deeply distrusted from the outset.

                  Finally, this alliance with the DUP is simply staggering. It is deeply embarrassing and a measure of the Tories abject failure. Most people here think it simply can’t last, but we shall see.

                  • Well, being an American, I can’t let you put us in second place: our “democracy” is more fucked up than yours. Not only did a career criminal STEAL the party nomination while under investigation by the feds, but then our “progressive” hero went to work for her… and he now blames “da ebil Rooskies” for stealing the election from her.

                    and… AND… half of our “liberal” party BELIEVES THAT SHIT.

                    You think you guys have a messed up system? Not even close my friend.

                    And, for the record, I agree with you about Corbyn. There’s not a single regime change op Sanders didn’t support tacitly by repeating various “he’s a bloody dictator” propaganda about Slobadan, Muammar and Basar. Corbyn doesn’t do that. Not that I know of anyway. He doesn’t tell the whole truth about them, but he’s not regurgitating Killary’s neocon lies about em like Bernie did… does… will always do.

                    so, in that we are in agreement.

                    Which probably explains why they didn’t let him actually win.

                    • Too right. Sanders has proven himself a total sellout. Didn’t take long sadly.

                      Okay, so if we can agree that Corbyn is not an asshole too – and he isn’t! Then I put it to you that what has happened here has empowered him when a modest electoral defeat would have very likely have undone him altogether and along with Corbyn, the whole progressive movement we have been steadily building against all the odds for the last two years.

                      If TPTB wanted to arrange things wouldn’t it make more sense to destroy him now rather than give him what appears to many as a victory of sorts?

                    • no.

                      May is looking at passing a hard Brexit. Just out the door and gone, which most Brits want, from my understanding. But she can’t do that. Her Goldman Sachs/London Stock Exchange backers don’t want it. So what does she do? Betray the Conservative voters who voted overwhelmingly for Brexit or betray her base of globalists who don’t?

                      The answer is… neither.

                      This next year, confusion and chaos will rule Parliament. All sorts of things are about to happen. it will be presented as “impossible” to govern from that or at least, to negotiate Brexit. If they had won a hundred new seats, the Conservatives would OWN Brexit. Which would mean…

                      Piss off the constituents and never get a Conservative Party member elected again or… Piss off Big Business and never get a nickel in support again.

                      So what did she do? She held the snap election “in good faith” looking to “improve her majority” and … oh shucks… she messed up.. oh wait, her aides messed up and now they’re gone. Bye bye.

                      And she gets all the chaos she and her advisors wanted all along. it’s a narrative they are building. one that will ultimately spell the end of Brexit. or, at most, you get a “business friendly” version which will keep all the things you guys voted against in the mandate.

                      Cameron fucked up. He did. he’s gone. She didn’t. She’s still there. See how that works? He fucked it up… she’s fixing it. And it’s damn smart to. hate to say it, but it is.

                      gotta run. i hope it works out over there. hope i’m wrong. i really do.

                  • oh, oh wait… I almost forgot…

                    Our lovely “progressives” are so true to the faith that they are believing the likes of the Daily Kos, Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann when they say the damn Russians are out to get us and we got to start that whole Cold War thing all over again…

                    AND…AND… our leftist party is currently holding the 2017 version of the House UnAmerican Activities hearings in BOTH the House and Senate.

                    Now, you think your left leaning party is THAT fucked up?


                    not even close man.

                    by the way, no hard feelings. I know you guys over there care about this election and this messed up world we live in. I know you do as well. just touched a nerve is all. God I hate Di$info Jone$

                    • Hate him too! How can anyone believe him after Trump? The mind boggles.

                      When I was a teenager I couldn’t understand American politics at all. It seemed like there were these two parties with identical political outlooks. Then , during the next three decades we gradually adopted your system too!

                      Thatcher mimicked Reagan. Then Mandelson and Blair took over the Labour Party and the left-right divide became a completely phoney war. But I genuinely feel we have pushed back a bit thanks to Corbyn – and it’s a hell of a fight. And this needs to be a worldwide effort.

                      No hard feelings. As I say, I appreciate and respect your work.

                      All the best!

            • maybe that’s why you can’t see it. too close to it. too personal. ever think of that?

    • What I find even more interesting, is the fact that you disparage me saying I am not paying attention to the “spin” from the MSM, yet, your argument is EXACTLY what they are all saying: it was a bad decision by May to improve her hand in the Brexit negotiations” while completely ignoring the fact that she wanted nothing to do with leaving the EU and is more than likely working hard to see it doesn’t happen.

      • The opinion that May wanted to “soften” Brexit is just that – it is my opinion and suspicion based on what I know about May. You have to factor in the tremendous divisions within the ranks of the Tory party about Europe (spilts that are now quite likely to rupture). By strengthening her majority, which she undoubtedly saw as a nailed on outcome, she could have more easily overriden dissent from within the party (as well as the country) when she backtracked on the “hard Brexit”.

        Can’t you accept that sometimes sreal fuck ups actually happen for TPTB? They fucked up when Cameron decided to call a referendum fully expecting to win, and now they have fucked up again… and it’s fucking hilarious. So please at least enjoy the laugh while it lasts and pay less attention to some of the right wing nutjobs associated with people like David Icke who see a plot behind every eventuality. And heap some fucking praise on Corbyn who is now within reach of real power and without doubt the most truly progressive leftist with any chance of power anywhere in our benighted western world. Take it from me, Corbyn is not Tspiras! Not by a long chalk. And neither is shadow chancellor John McDonnell. These guys are the real deal – look at their track record. What happened two nights ago is truly phenonemal – the only pity is that Scotland let the side down and allowed the Tories to squeak back into power. But this is all good news – things went right for a change and so it is fucking annoying to her this bs about May throwing the election. To end with an appropriate Britishism – that’s just bollocks!!!

      • My opinion that May wanted to “soften” Brexit is simply an opinion based on what I know and believe about May. But it totally explains why she tried to strengthen her hand when you take account of the huge rift within the ranks of the Tories about Europe.
        You don’t need whacky ideas about May or anyone else in the party trying to lose – they totally expected to win. It was supposedly nailed on.

        Corbyn is not Tspiras – not in any way comparable. Look at his record because it speaks for itself. Then look into shadow chancellor John McDonnell’s record – he’s even more radical than Corbyn. These are not phoney establishment figures.

        Finally, I worry that you are being led up the garden path by the likes of David Icke and other on the British equivalent of the Alt-right. They have an agenda that is not our own. And this crap about May throwing the election very likely suits that agenda. It is, as we like to say over here, total bollocks!

        • for your information, I haven’t listened to David Icke in years and only then it was a Youtube video I watched about 10 minutes of… thank you very much.

          No one “leads” me anywhere asshole. I think for myself and came up with this myself and only AFTER that, AFTER writing this article did I find out others were starting to get the same feeling.

          You go ahead and follow Tsipras like you did. You follow Corbyn or Sanders or whatever other fucking sheep-herder they manufacture for you. Be my guest. Hell, I didn’t even follow Obama in 2008, I got wise to their asses when Gore rang down the gavel on the 50 members of the Black Caucus trying to get someone, anyone to sign their request back in late 2000.

          Don’t EVER compare my fucking work to David Icke or the fucking alt-right again. Ever. Don’t give a shit how long you’ve been here.

          If you know ANYTHING about me, you already know how insulting that is.

          • Can’t we have a civil discussion? I’m not comparing your work to Icke. I respect what you do which is why I bother to comment on your site. Apologies for upsetting you.

            • actually, you said I was “following” him and his ilk. Is that not a form of comparison? A form that makes me look like some kind of Di$info Jone$ sheep or something? And for the record, you didn’t upset me, you insulted me. Big difference. Been doing this for quite sometime. Takes a little more to upset me. Insulting me however is easy. Disagree all you want, but try to insinuate a connection between me and those assholes? I wont suffer that.

  4. Craig Murray (former UK ambassador and anti-torture whistleblower) is staunchily pro-Scottish Independence and pro-EU. I am not. I am absolutely opposed to both.

    But Murray is politically astute and a maverick voice as well as a solid advocate for human rights, social justice, and an outspoken opponent of Israel, the “war on terror” and the police state. In any case, I highly recommend two of the most recent posts on his blog which offer insightful analysis and provide a proper context for this quite breathtaking election result:

  5. Nope. May gambled and lost. Crosby suffers hubris.

  6. And Corbyn is no Tsipras.

    • people told me “Tsipras is no Obama” back when he won and I put it to people it looked like he was a neoliberal in progressive garb. Lost a few readers back then. People don’t like it when their victories are questioned. Same with Sanders I guess. Course, he didn’t win… or at least, he wasn’t allowed to.. but then he sheep-dogged for Killary just the same. Corbyn is saying all the right things and who knows, maybe he believes em. But then again, she won 309 and seats and he took how many? 260ish?

      Did you know London’s richest district voted Corbyn? Why do you think that is? You think they all of a sudden went socialist?

      • So I’m also more cautious than optimistic at this point too. But that article you link to says Kensington, at last count, went for Labour by 35 votes — so just barely. Plus it describes (without giving numbers, unfortunately) the existence of growing inequality, as well as the significant presence of foreign-owned ghost mansions (owners can’t vote), which together doesn’t suggest the Labour votes came from the rich.

      • Sheepdogging is almost a cottage industry in its own right. I wonder how many repetitions there will be of Obama/Tsipras/Sanders around the world.

  7. You’re seriously suggesting that May, Timothy, Hill and Crosby threw the election on purpose, with the effect of their botched campaign somehow pitched perfectly to both achieve a minority government, but without risking losing to a potential Lab-SNP-Lib coalition?

    You’re giving them waaaay too much credit, they’re not that smart!

    Just look at their faces when the results came in! I suppose May is also in fact a secret Oscar-level method actress?

    I have sources close to the Cabinet, (various SPADs, civil servants, policy wonks and communications people – no I’m not going to divulge them here so I don’t expect you to believe me), and it’s a frankly unfounded assertion – the Cabinet were shocked and gutted and Hill was in tears at one point.

    If there *was* a plot to create a minority government situation, (which I doubt), then May and the Cabinet certainly weren’t in on it!

    Maybe a “PsyOp” by private interests or elements of the Intelligence underworld to pump Corbyn and disparage May on social media or something, but it would be nice to see some evidence before making the claims.

    I detect some confirmation bias here. If the Conservatives do well, the terror attacks were intended to shore them up as the “strong on national security – better vote for us to keep you safe now party”, if they do badly they were intended at undermining them by making them “look weak on their national security record”.

    If it’s not falsifiable, it’s not evidence.

    Just because verified PsyOps, Black Ops, False Flags and conspiracies exist, doesn’t mean everything is a PsyOp, Black Op, False Flag or conspiracy.

    “They” are not gods. And “they” have limited bandwidth and competing internal interests.

    You sometimes verge from the edge of being aware of the deep-state and skeptical of media narratives, to venturing into a “Conspiracism” mindset as dogmatic irrational world-view.

    Also note that part of the UK establishment *is* pro-Hard-Brexit – basically Murdoch, Dacre, some nostalgic/patriotic Aristos and some US-phile libertarian businessmen. They don’t come much more establishment than Jacob Rees-Mogg! They’re in a minority compared to the bulk of the finance world etc of course.

    • no one said everything is a fucking psyop.

      I might have thought you had a point… but of course, it’s well known at this point that Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission and strongly opposed to Brexit, instructed Theresa May she should call for snap elections to “strengthen her position”

      Let’s see…

      1. May was opposed to Brexit… she met with Goldman Sachs and delivered a speech saying it would harm Big Business in the UK…
      2. May was locked into Brexit by the mandate
      3. May met with Juncker who also opposed Brexit and they came up with the snap election plan…
      4. May comes out with the “dementia tax” to piss off and terrify older conservatives, the bread and butter of the Conservative Party
      5. May releases a manifesto for the party that looks like it was designed to piss off a number of other segments of their constituency…
      6. May refuses to debate Corbyn directly, making her look weak…
      7. May’s coalition is still “negotiating” and it looks like they will be “forced” to accept a “soft” or “Business Friendly” Brexit…
      8. if they don’t can Theresa May altogether and are “forced” to hold new elections and potentially another referendum on Brexit.

      Those are the fucking facts. You can call it “conspiracism” if you like, but paying attention to facts is what I do here.

      Dogmatic and irrational? Go screw yourself. You’re starting to sound like every other troll I’ve had visit me over the years.

      That’s my evidence for my theory. What’s yours? “they’re not that smart!” and “Just look at their faces” and of course… the old “appeal to authority” trick… “I have sources close to the Cabinet”

      I offer plain, observable facts and new details emerging about the plan coming from the EU itself, and you come back by slandering me just the same way as every old troll had done since I started writing about 9/11 and “just look at their faces”?

      And I’m the one who sounds dogmatic?

      • Well I certainly can’t fault you in the least on rejecting my argument from authority, (sources close to cabinet etc) – I would of course reject that too in your position!

        I’m not going to name friends of mine on here without their permission and I probably shouldn’t even have mentioned it, just reached a certain level of exasperation I guess.. still, I know what I know in that regard, which is good enough for me.

        “Look at their faces” is fair enough though, no? It is an empirical indicator after all. You’ve seen the footage of Mays’ initial remarks at her constituency count on election night? Her voice was cracking, and she was visible stressed and upset. I mean it could be acting, but it seems a bit unlikely to me given how wooden she is in front of the camera most of the time.

        The “dementia tax” was Nick Timothy’s baby – he’s a “red” Tory, (one nation/blue-collar Tory) and it’s supposed to be progressive, (working class taxpayers don’t pay for the care of older people with assets) – it’s “pro-JAM” and something he’s been pushing since even before the referendum – also note he stopped working for may during the referendum to campaign for Vote Leave, so he’s personally pro-Brexit it seems.

        As to Juncker’s advice to May – yes I noticed that, rather ironic and perhaps a cheeky attempt at undermining her through “evil council”, though May had advisors closer to home pushing for the same thing so it wasn’t necessarily talks with Junker that sealed her decision.

        Lots of what you say is factual, but it’s all pretty circumstantial.

        I’m not saying definitively that there wasn’t a plan to undermine her position, just that in my assessment it’s unlikely that she or her kitchen cabinet were personally in on it. Manipulated and ill-advised maybe, but tanking it on purpose and acting up a storm? Seems unlikely to me.

  8. Also in the last few days of Brexit watching, it looks like the push for “Soft-Brexit” has fizzled and is running out of steam already.

    Lab are broadly holding the line on Single Market withdrawal, as are most of May’s cabinet.

    Remainers/Soft-Brexiteers like Ruth Davidson, Philip Hammond etc are wasting their current political capital on the concept of “remaining in the Customs Union”, (not the Single Market), which appears to be largely through being ill-informed, (from the way they talk about it they seem to think the Customs Union is some kind of “Schengen for Goods”, which it isn’t, it’s just an agreement on Tariffs like you would have with any bespoke FTA, but somewhat less advantageous).

    The term “Soft-Brexit” has broadly morphed now from meaning “staying in the Single Market”, to meaning “leaving with a bespoke FTA rather than straight to WTO rules”. A year ago even the hardest of Brexiteers was operating under the assumption that there would be *some* kind of bespoke FTA and agreement on tariffs, so as far as I can tell, Soft-Brexit is as dead in the water as it was before the election.

    If there’s a Soft-Brexit insurgency going on, it’s not a very impressive one.

    Time will tell though. Perhaps there is a deep-state/finance interests plan to sow chaos, disrupt the talks and pull a second referendum out of the hat later down the line. Seems more likely than trying to get to an out-of-the-EU in-the-Single-Market destination.

    But if there is such a strategy, it has little to do with manipulating the day-to-day business of Cabinet Ministers and MPs like Ruth Davidson, who are more or less running round like a bunch of uncoordinated idiots at the moment, and again, I highly doubt that Ministers and MPs are in the loop on it!

    Cabinet Minsters don’t know much, to be honest, and aren’t really in the loop on behind the scenes machinations of the Civil Service and various Alphabet Soup agencies. They don’t know what the Deep State is or isn’t up to.

    It really is a bit like “Yes Minister” in my estimation, and I still think you give them too much credit.

  9. Reviewed my initial remarks, and it comes over a bit ad hominem I must admit!

    It’s no good accusing the other side in a debate of being irrational/dogmatic, because both sides could claim it equally, so sorry for that.

    Appreciate that you allow free commentary here and that we can agree sometimes and disagree others!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: