Saturday, September 23, 2017

KASSAM: How May Plans to Blame Trump for Brexit’s Failure, and Why the Tory Party Needs to Remove Her NOW



Theresa May’s Brexit betrayal this week was just the tip of the iceberg. For people like me who have been confident of the UK leaving the European Union (EU), it is the first time we have felt genuine trepidation that the whole thing won’t happen at all.

If this is the first time, how do I know it’s just the start of a wider attempt to stop Brexit? It’s pretty easy to identify this chicanery because the Prime Minister played so many bad hands this week.
Look at the way she treated President Trump at the United Nations.
Instead of using her speech to promote Britain in the world, she used it to attack President Trump on immigration and refugees, as well as harping on about climate change deals and a long-deceased Pakistani prime minister. Not a single mention of the word “Brexit”.
This revealed to me what she truly hopes will happen. I spoke with diplomats, professors, and Conservative Party operatives in the wake of it. Some agreed, while others didn’t want to agree (but did in the end) that Mrs. May will use the United States and President Trump as a cudgel by which to break Brexit.
It’s the easiest route for her. Find someone reviled on the European stage (as Trump is) and blame them. I said to one friend of mine: “She’s going insult Trump to the point where the U.S. won’t want to do a deal with Britain, then she’ll blame Trump for being mercurial and say we need to water down, or abandon Brexit because Britain needs economic security”.
Just a few days later, in Florence, she begun that process.
Instead of standing by the British government’s promises during the referendum campaign — that Britain would implement Article 50 and leave the European Union if Britons rejected membership — she is now attempting to kick the can down the road, claiming no one is ready for such a commitment (or lack thereof it).
Read what she said:
…the fact is that, at that point, neither the UK – nor the EU and its Members States – will be in a position to implement smoothly many of the detailed arrangements that will underpin this new relationship we seek.
Neither is the European Union legally able to conclude an agreement with the UK as an external partner while it is itself still part of the European Union. And such an agreement on the future partnership will require the appropriate legal ratification, which would take time.
The UK will be, could easily be, in a position to part ways within the original time frame if we had economic and trading partners such as the United States and other Commonwealth nations. But Theresa May is scuppering this by launching into tirades against President Trump’s agenda.
She added:
How long the period is should be determined simply by how long it will take to prepare and implement the new processes and new systems that will underpin that future partnership.

As of today, these considerations point to an implementation period of around two years.
Not only does this add two years onto the Brexit process, it also leaves the door open for that period of time to be elongated — three years more… four years more… why not a decade?
Is this coming from the European Union? Is it coming from the bureaucrats in the British government? These answers are cop outs.
The fact is Theresa May is a globalist, a liberal, and an ardent Remainer. She hinted at it in her Florence speech:
It does not mean we are no longer a proud member of the family of European nations. And it does not mean we are turning our back on Europe; or worse that we do not wish the EU to succeed. The success of the EU is profoundly in our national interest and that of the wider world.
That is manifestly false to anyone with a conservative or nationalist worldview or philosophy.
Those opposed to Britain’s membership of the European Union should be opposed to the idea of the European Union in its current form as a whole. A political union, sucking sovereignty and cash from nation states, redistributing income and wealth, and building a globalist power bloc in accordance with liberal and socialist values.
That she “wishes the EU to succeed” is the giveaway that not only does she endorse global governance and centralization, she also couldn’t give two hoots about the sovereignty of the people of EU member states suffering at the hands of Eurocrats: in Greece, in Italy, in Hungary, in Poland… all across the EU and Eurozone.
The question the Conservative Party must now ask itself is simple: is it a party of globalism, or is a philosophically conservative party?
If the answer is the former — Tory MPs should be ready to face twenty years in electoral wilderness, or even the complete collapse of the party.
If the answer is the latter — they need to remove Theresa May as Prime Minister post-haste.

German government’s Scientific Office: “No legal basis for Merkel opening borders. Parliament should have decided”


An explosive report written by Germany’s Bundestag Scientific Office, a team of non-partisan legal experts, has established that parliament and not Chancellor Angela Merkel should have decided on opening Germany’s borders to refugees in September 2015, writes WELT.
They refer to a ruling by the Federal Constitutional Court, on refugees reuniting with their families in Germany. The ruling stated that:
“Parliament is obliged to decide on whether, and to what extent, the proportion of non-Germans in the population will be altered by the arrival of foreigners inside the country.”
Merkel made the decision to take in thousands of refugees who were stranded in Hungary on 4 September 2015 after consulting with only the most senior members of her cabinet. Parliament never voted on it.
The opinion of the Scientific Services also indicates that the Federal Government has so far not provided any information on the legal basis for its decision. In fact, refugees from the safe third country of Austria should have been rejected at the border.
An exception to this “obligation to refuse entry” is possible in the case of “the existence of a corresponding order of the Federal Ministry of the Interior“. However, such an arrangement did not exist. Also, the so-called Selbsteintrittsrecht, with which Germany can accept asylum seekers, who should actually reside in other countries, has never been officially appealed by the federal government.
The expert report is brisant because both the FDP and the AfD have announced that after a possible entry into the Bundestag, an investigative committee on the refugee policy of Merkel will be deployed.
The Left party (Die Linke) is not so much upset by Merkel’s decision in itself, but is mainly disconcerted that Merkel and her vice-Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel had carried out the policy in such a way ‘that they strengthened the far right (AfD)’.

The annual cost of Merkel’s decision would hit 20.4 billion euros in 2020, according to the Federal Finance Ministry in a report from 2016.

Jacob Rees-Mogg Draws ‘Red Line’, Demands May Clarifies European Court Jurisdiction During Transition


Jacob Rees-Mogg, normally a stalwart defender of Theresa May, has slammed the prime minister’s Florence speech, drawing a red line over the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) during the two-year ‘implementation’ period, and has demanded that Free Movement ends in 2019.

Brexit campaigner and MP tipped to be the future leader of the Conservative Party Rees-Mogg told the BBC’s Newsnight programme on Friday he had “three concerns” about May’s Brexit speech, notably that there would be “considerable dissatisfaction” in the country “if we are not outside the ECJ’s jurisdiction on the date of leaving”.
In her Florence speech, Mrs. May signed the UK up to a two-year transition period on membership terms until 2021, including ongoing supremacy for the ECJ in judgements and a considerable divorce bill.
“[The speech] hasn’t been made clear if during this implementation period we will still be subject to the European Court of Justice,” Mr. Rees-Mogg said.
“In my mind that is an absolute red line. If after March 2019 we have still not left the ECJ, we have not left the European Union and that would be undermining the vote in June 2016.”
After warning about the ECJ, he added: “We can improve the standard of living once we are outside the containment of the European Union. This is very exciting and delaying it is inevitably disappointing,” the MP for North East Somerset added.
A second concern was Freedom of Movement and the lack of clarity over whether it would end on March 29th, 2019, when the United Kingdom officially leaves the bloc, or 2021, at the end of Mrs. May’s proposed ‘implementation’, or transition, period.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4 on Friday, Secretary of State for Transport Chris Grayling said that Freedom of Movement would end in March 2019. However May’s speech reads: “During the implementation [transition] period, people will continue to be able to come and live and work in the UK” sounding much like Free Movement, with the UK staying subject to EU rules for another two years, for all intents and purposes.
Rees-Mogg asserted that Free Movement “ought to end at the end of March 2019” and cast doubt on the Home Office’s competence to enact post-Brexit immigration laws “because it hasn’t done very well in dealing with illegal immigrants so far, so the question is whether the Home Office will be ready in time to do the job properly”.
Photo published for UK Could Still Be Subject to European Court after Brexit

“The other area I am concerned about is that we should be promising money before we know the other side of the deal. They want money, we want trade, and for us to be guaranteeing money, which the speech does practically very early on, concerns me,” he said.
“If you are kind you would say that the prime minister has made a generous offer and put it to the Europeans to respond. If you were unkind, you would say there has been a series of concessions whilst the European Union has not made a single concession,” the MP added.
Photo published for Macron Rejects May's Brexit Speech, Demands EU Citizens' Rights, Divorce Bill Are 'Clarified' -...
Responses from European leaders and the supranational bloc have not been concessionary, however, with French Prime Minister Emmanuel Macron demandingclarity on the Irish border, EU citizens’ rights, and the divorce bill before the fourth round of negotiations begins Monday.

EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier also demanded “clarity” on the Irish border, and European Parliament Brexit negotiator Guy Verhofstadt said that whilst the “additional clarifications” in May’s speech were welcome, some “important questions remain” over exactly how much the UK will pay the bloc during the transition period and beyond.

Fake News: Hungary Blasts MSM for Claiming ‘Soros Plan’ for Mass Migration into Europe Doesn’t Exist

The Hungarian government has hit back at the mainstream media for claiming that the ‘Soros plan’ to open up Europe to mass immigration is an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory.

The Financial Times — the salmon pink establishment newspaper which is considered part of the unofficial uniform for City bankers and financiers in London, and is noted for its staunch support for the European Union and insistence that mass immigration is an unstoppable force which must be accepted — took aim at Hungarian leader Viktor Orbán for challenging billionaire financier and open borders campaigner George Soros.
“There is no such plan”, scoffed FT foreign affairs chief Gideon Rachman, in an article titled “Soros hatred is a global sickness”.
The same week, Soros spokesman Michael Vachon insisted “Soros’s position is entirely consistent with mainstream European values,” and “the claim that Soros is promoting a scheme to import a million illegal immigrants into Europe is Viktor Orbán’s fantasy.”But Dr. Zoltán Kovács, Hungary’s Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Prime Minister Orbán’s main spokesman, has responded robustly, writing: “These people just aren’t being straight with us.”
Dr. Kovács reminds readers that Prime Minister Orbán has addressed the genuineness of the ‘Soros Plan’ before: “It’s not something we’ve made up,” he told Hungarian radio earlier in 2017. “We didn’t reach this conclusion through divination, but the architect of the plan published it himself.”
Dr. Kovács goes on to point out that, indeed, “at the end of September 2015, [Soros] published an article in his own name entitled – wait for it – ‘George Soros: Here’s my plan to solve the asylum chaos’.”
Whilst Rachman scoffed at “an alleged ‘Soros plan’ to flood Hungary with Muslims”, Dr. Kovács notes that the first point of the financier’s September 2015 article does insist that “the EU has to accept at least a million asylum seekers annually for the foreseeable future”.
“Soros, in his own words, clearly has a plan to push immigration on the citizens of Europe, and he’s actively promoting it through his network of so-called ‘civic groups’, through his lobbying of the European Parliament, and in his secretive meetings with members of the European Commission,” the Hungarian concludes.
“Those who deny that the Soros Plan exists would prefer that we not talk about it, and they dread the idea that – God forbid! – the citizens of Europe should have a say.”

Iraqi Asylum Seeker Ahmed Hassan Accused of Buying Parsons Green Bomb Parts Online

The 18-year-old charged with attempted murder over the September 15th London underground terror attack is accused of buying bomb parts online.

The Iraqi asylum seeker, who media reports entered the country illegally in 2015, was charged with attempted murder at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Friday and was also charged with using the chemical compound TATP to cause an explosion likely to endanger life, reports The Telegraph.
The charges are both of a criminal nature, and are not brought from counter-terrorism acts on the UK’s statute books.
Prosecutor Lee Ingham alleged Hassan, who was living with foster carers in Sunbury-on-Thames, bought some of the “key ingredients” from online retailer Amazon.
The device, which failed to fully detonate but resulted in the injuries of nearly 30 people, contained a homemade explosive (acetone peroxide made with TATP), referred to as ‘Mother of Satan‘, an electronic timer, and metal shrapnel comprising of “knives, screws and similar items clearly designed to cause severe injuries and death to those nearby”, according to the prosecutor.
“The device did not function as intended. It did not function the TATP, probably due to inaccurate construction,” Mr. Ingham added.
The court heard that after searching the foster carers’ property, in the kitchen of which it is alleged Hassan built the bomb, more explosives were hidden down the back of a sofa.
The migrant spoke only to confirm his personal details, giving his full name as Ahmed Hassan Mohammad Ali.
Hassan was arrested at the port of Dover, Kent, at 7:50 am last Saturday. In total, six people were arrested in connection with the terror attack.
On Thursday, London police released 21-year-old ‘Man B’, identified in some media reports as Syrian origin Yahyah Farouk, who was arrested in Hounslow, London.
On the same day, police confirmed they released a 48-year-old arrested in Newport, South Wales.
Scotland Yard confirmed that a 17-year-old male arrested shortly after midnight on Thursday, who is living in a “halfway house” in Thornton Heath, South London, for asylum seekers and “troubled” teenagers, was released on Friday from police custody.
All three were released with no further action taken. Two other men from Newport, Wales, aged 25 and 30 and believed to be asylum seekers, are still being questioned.
Hassan will appear next at the Old Bailey on October 13th.