It was about the resignation letter of Owen Patterson back in December 2018;
The full resignation letter in here and it talks about an alternative deal offered by Donald Tusk that Theresa May rejected but according to Lord Crawford Falconer was the very best and…it is still on the table, I quote from the resignation letter:
“The government needs to consider more boldly the possible alternatives – to Th. May’s deal ed. notes – which might command that support. President Tusk offered just such an alternative in March: a wide-ranging, zero-tariff free trade agreement.
That deal foundered on the question of the Northern Ireland border, but existing techniques and processes can resolve this. From my October meeting with Michel Barnier, I know that a willingness exists on the EU side to explore these possibilities more fully. The meeting also confirmed that Tusk’s offer is still on the table.”
So then? Is this deal wide ranging zero tariff free trade agreement on the table?
Is Johnson in contact with Falconer and Patterson?
I trust Johnson is no bluffer.
If there is the honest will to do Brexit and a deal you can have Brexit and a deal before the 31 October and then, go forth.
Today I am very tired, in Italy Salvini fell, it is a hard time for the sovereignists, but now I have just one thought about the new move of the British Parliament, the Benn Bill: that is “no Brexit allowed unless the EU agrees a deal”; to outlaw no Deal Brexit.
I think I should bring the case to the High Court because Article 50 never mentioned any deal and the two years from triggering Article 50 have gone, according to the EU you can leave without a deal and moreover a country outside the EU with no deal can get a deal from the outside, it is untrue you must get a deal before leaving or you can’t leave. On the referendum ballot box there was written “Leave” or “Remain” no deal mentioned.
Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council [of the European Union], acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.
Point 3 is very important for our discussion, it states: The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date ofentry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification
“failing that” means that a State can leave with a withdrawal agreement or “failing that” without a withdrawal agreement; the period of extension has already gone, and three years negotiations instead of just two have already gone, so Britain waited three years and six months instead of just two and to delay again and again is just tiring and wearing people out: it is clear there’s no deal aka no withdrawal agreement and failing that you leave the same; also the Germans and the French agree.
To block Brexit “because there isn’t any deal” must be unconstitutional.
From Germany, good news of important people fed up with delaying came today: Marcel Fratzcher, President of the German Institute for Economic Research has claimed that allowing the UK to further delay its European Union departure will plunge the bloc into further business uncertainty. He proclaimed that a no-deal Brexit would be better in the long run than prolonging the deadlock for years to come link Also Emmanuel Macron has expressed his thoughts against prolonging the period before the departure.
I can’t see how this blocking Brexit in case of no-deal can be constitutional. Theresa May had two years or better three years to try to secure a deal and didn’t manage to do it, then obtained a 6 months period delay to try to see if Boris could do better than she and secure a deal, Boris understood quickly the situation was the same as for Mrs. May and gave up trying, now on the 31 October there should just be Brexit: Germany is ready, France is ready, see Macron, you can always do a trade deal after you’ve left like you do with USA, Australia & co. as a free independent country. Honestly I believe this “outlaw Brexit if no-deal” is illegal or unconstitutional. Boris is right.
GIUSEPPE CONTE, NICOLA ZINGARETTI, FRANCESCA GAGLIARDUCCI
I don’t often agree with Massimo Cacciari, but I share the logical schema of thought in this article: link
We cannot have Conte Prime Minister with the Right signing and approving Salvini’s Security Decrees and then Conte Prime Minister with the Left undoing and repealing Salvini’s Security Decrees, it is the end of politics: like this Conte is a Commissioner, a poor secretary of Mattarella – the President of the Republic – or of the “strong powers” – the unelected powerful ones whose identity is shadowy – and we should accept Italy to be under the control of a commissariat – read Soviet – why?
Massimo Cacciari – a supporter of the Italian Left and Professor of Philosophy – says that the Democratic Party will dissolve if there is the Conte-leftwing government and then DiMaio vicepremier again with the Left as he was with the Right, Nicola Zingaretti, President of the Leftwing party PD the Party that Cacciari votes, has succumbed to pressure from, I quote Cacciari: the Church, CGIL – the main trade unions – MPs (who do not want to go home) the EU – which he calls for delicacy and sympathy “Europe” whereas Europe is precisely what the EU is destroying – in short, all but us Italian sovereign people because the Church, the CGIL and the EU want power in Italy in our place:
they want power in my place and basically also in the place of Cacciari – who’s a leftwing elector and politician – in the place of those who have the rights of citizenship in Italy and it is we in fact who can vote and be voted – to decide what to do – in this Country.
Yes it is a surrender, a surrender of Democracy not only a surrender of the Democratic Party, a surrender that Zingaretti did not want to do, even the leftwing journalist Lucia Annunziata from the RAI television and the Huffington Post says “then let’s go to the vote” like Meloni, who’s a strong rightwing politician; there is a sense of expropriation, shared by leftwing and rightwing citizens in Italy: the fact that many Italians of different points of view feel that many people and institutions want to expropriate them of the control over Italy, with this Giuseppe Conte who does not believe in anything, neither in Christ nor in the Antichrist, nor to the NGOs nor to Salvini, neither to “save lives” and rescue migrants nor to defend the borders, at least Salvini believes in something, perhaps even Cacciari – perhaps the opposite – with the Security Decrees that Conte (a whore) can sign and unsign, do and undo, approve and repeal, however he and not another must be at Palazzo Chigi, the Headquarter of the PM – then even Draghi was better than that – he Conte instead of DiMaio or Salvini or Zingaretti because DiMaio, Salvini and Zingaretti are voted politicians, he isn’t -: it is clearly the end of Democracy.
And why do they do it?
Because if we vote Salvini wins because we Italians “the bastards” don’t want the migrants.
Link Wife sues husband who told her “it is your duty to give me sex” and assaulted her.
Poor chap, he thought he could do like Rhett Butler and Scarlett O’Hara in the final sexual scene of the movie “Gone with the Wind”, kind of he’s thinking “I am your husband and should have sex with me and not with Ashley!”
takes her forcefully and kisses her and …brings her into the bedroom, but the day after she confirmed she like dit with a pretty smile on her face, nonetheless he’s ashamed and finally splits from her.
Other times, other habits, what they do in Gone With The Wind is already illegal in Sweden and many other countries; the DailyMail on such a hot issue, if there is still a husband’s right to have sex from the wife, can only “moderate the comments in advance” I understand, I can imagine the loads of comments of tough old fashioned poor Britons who, under a ridiculous nickname and giving the wrong town of residence would say “yes, the husband’s right”. The husband’s wrong, because the husband is always wrong, it is wrong to be a husband, I say as a woman, if I were a man, I’d never be a husband: the husband is the sacrificial lamb of modern society and it is a species under threat of extinction: what man can really want to be a husband nowadays? They can’t have sex, just can’t; the wife can say no always, not just one time yes, one time no, or two times no, each one yes, moreover they can’t have sex outside marriage too like the happy bachelors because it is adultery while the happy bachelor is a freeman, and they, the husbands, if they have sex outside marriage, even if it is the wife who doesn’t want them, they risk to have to pay for it in cash and forever: any slut can divorce a man for adultery and receive half of his wage, property and custody of the children for the rest of her life “unless she marries again” aka unless she finds another sacrificial lamb to pay for her in the place of the first.
Whoever will marry with these rules?
The catholic and all conservative churches teach to wait marriage for sex.
Would you really?
They don’t give it the same and moreover you’d have to pay and if you go with another ’cause it is an illegal thing, if you are adulterer she wins the divorce trial.
God help the people in good faith. Good lads and good girls. If there are, we hope there are still some.
What do you think you’re doing, Rhett? You think you are the one who should have sex with your wife and not Ashley?
She can be adulterer and doesn’t pay, you’re adulterer you pay. And btw she was a slut.
Marriage can make the toughest guys end up crying…It destroys them economically and emotionally, bachelors at least keep their own right to have sex with whom they like and keep control of their own money.
When the Antichrist arrives to get rid of him and delay the end of the world will tell him: go and marry, dear Lucifer; he’ll end up in jail.
“Prince Andrew breaks silence on Epstein: I never ‘saw, witnessed or suspected’ anything illegal” source
Prince Charles was best friend with Jimmy Savile and Archbishop Bell, two cruel paedophiles and one of the two was a procurer of minors for orgy of upper class people…Charles and the Queen and maybe also Andrew were upper class enough for him and Pope JP II? and…never understood, also Charles, didn’t notice or see anything illegal, for sure, then if it is true the Royals are dumb. And should lose custody of their own children if they expose them to paedophiles’ company and don’t realise it. They may be abused; allegedly William and Harry are not abused because Diana didn’t want Jimmy Savile to be Harry’s Godfather and kept him away from them, Charles was so “dumb” or “ingenuous” to propose Savile as one of Harry’s Godfathers…Be careful to this man, Charles, dark rumours are that he was abused as a minor and wanted his own children to be abused too. I hope this is not true, but he did want Savile near Harry as Godparent.
The Royals slept in these dirty people’s homes, allowed them to sleep and to make parties in the castles and Palaces that the Britons pay for their monarchy, they went to private churches and special spiritual ceremonies led by paedophile priests but they didn’t understand or saw anything illegal. Therefore they are dumb. Which is the IQ of a Royal? The average? And which is the IQ of the people who select the few ones who can meet and mix with them? Those ones who allowed Meghan Markle to date Prince Harry and excluded Chelsy Davy from the list of the eligible girls to marry him because of her parents, who may have had contacts with a Zimbabwe’s dictator. Chelsy was better than Meghan after all, but I end it here, Harry has his private life.
Now this ridiculous statement: I saw nothing, I knew nothing, let’s say it “I understood nothing” and the answer is “because you’re dumb and you shouldn’t be a Royal, get a job, if you can”.
Of course they are lying, people think they’re all paedophiles, they and their secretaries who do the selection and check the background of the people they can meet and mix with, date and marry, so they don’t go too low and embarrass the Britons, but the selection went wrong. Come on: they didn’t know there were minors? they were all minors and we know there were children about 12 years old too.
Stop defending Charles about Savile and Andrew about Epstein: Angela Levin is right link, it is an insult to our intelligence. The Republic is a necessity. And also the Republic must be watched.
There’s a lot of fuss about whether we can see Illuminati traps everywhere and even some anti-NWO and anti-Illuminati powerful bloggers like Paul Watson – Paul Joseph – seem inclined to deny Fast & Furious’ actor Paul Walker was killed or got killed into an Illuminati conspiracy. I feel ashamed about being a conspiracy theorist but in reality there are two elements that make me think: yes, he got into the Illuminati – through Jordan Brewster who’s nothing-less-than the niece of the President of Yale University and Yale is the headquarter of the Skull & Bones, the upper level american Illuminati recruiter – where they trap rich boys – and because Porsche did pay Meadow Rain Walker a huge sum after she sued them because the Porsche Carrera GT had defects of stability and the security belt got blocked, Paul couldn’t get out of the car.
Point 1: Cercher la femme
Let’s see Jordana’s the christian – strange form of christian btw – role.
Jordana Brewster is everything but a poor ethnic minority Mexican looking girl, she is socially the opposite of Mia Toretto: she is the rich one with the Brewster part of the family deep inside the Illuminati and America’s aristocracy; independently from the fact that mummy is Brazilian….but daddy was a go go American anglosaxon Illuminati boy
Well, I think Jordana is well placed for being an Illuminati initiatrix – the woman used to initiate men in the Illuminati – and I have to add: we are racist, after all, we saw her not-so-white and we thought she’s good and innocent, while it is under everybody’s eyes she was the best connected to the high level freemasonry at Illuminati-level.
At a certain point many people started saying Jordana and Paul slept together, in certain interviews he looks almost in love with her, she’s not particularly beautiful, she even wears spectacles, she has thin lips, but Paul Walker wasn’t specifically attracted by very beautiful women, his own regular girlfriend went around with spectacles and looks fine but she is not the supermodel doll-like perfect woman a man like Paul Walker may date
probably he was one of those who feel sexually attracted by this kind of intriguing intellectual looking females more than by the average big lipped, big breast model or it was just causal. It is not uncommon among those very handsome people who work also as models, particularly men but also women – to be scared of being sucked into the model – world and choose a partner who doesn’t belong to it.
The way he looks at her the way she lets him touch her let many people say: she’s married, he has a regular girlfriend but they do it, they love each other; he looks even in love at a certain point; he even says in another interview “I love Jordana” not “I like” or “we are friends”. Nonetheless he goes on publicising that he is in love and wants to marry one day the regular girlfriend Jasmine Pilchard-Gosnell, nor does she Jordana split from the regular husband the producer Andrew Form notwithstanding they have no children, not only, while all this love-Paul love-Jordana goes on she orders…yes orders the family children to a surrogate mother not to be pregnant but to provide the heirs to her husband non-the-less, in the meantime, dumb people could say Fast & Furious actors are christians and they promote christianity; nuns here and there, the prayer, the christian confessions during the interview but Brewster was involved with promoting LGBT rights which are perceived as very anti-christian, I can remember The Vigilant Citizen telling us they did it with Britney Spears too: they create a Christian persona, an ostentatious christian identity for a singer or an actor – Britney even said she wanted to marry virgin because she was a real christian evangelical – to make christian American masses – that are powerful – identify with them and then bring them to support Illuminati causes like gay weddings and the Transagenda like sheep – if they can – kind of, look, good christian star of Fast & Furious Jordana Brewster helps the poor transpeople victims of trans-phobia: it is clear that Jordana is an Illuminati who tries to hook in the big mass of christian Americans to lead them to her cause.
At a certain point Paul Walker who used to laugh a lot in the interviews, to be cheerful, happy go lucky, starts looking serous, worried, in this interview Vin Diesel is cheerful as usual while Paul barely talks, and it’s not the only one
He used to be much more cheerful in the interviews after Fast 5 and he even laughs about the fact that he likes violence and feels repressed in his real life while he likes to be violent in the movies, so much that his regular girlfriend Jasmine told him “I don’t know who you are anymore” and they allegedly split for a while – because she dumped him –
They tried to put the blame for this radical change of mood on Paul on the fact that in Furious 6 there is the paternity issue etc. that’s important for his real life etc, but he looks sad, serious, worried, had a car incident on the set that brought him to hospital and then an incredible car crash in real life that brought him to death.
My interpretation is this one:
After Fast 5 he reveals he feels repressed in his real life about cruelty and violence – see interview – and wants to bring out the monster inside of him, Jordana Brewster smells the possibility of the temptation and brings him to join the Illuminati, but he’s just a big boy who likes violence in the movies but he is not corrupted enough to be cruel in real life as they are in the Yale-Skull & Bones circle, he sees something, he wants to talk for justice, he’s over.
Point 2: The Porsche
Porsche lost the cause against Meadow Rain Walker and had to pay because the car did have defects of stability – a Porsche – but they said, even paying, that the car didn’t have any construction defects that it was Paul not to do proper maintenance, now I’m not a US citizen but in Italy the yearly control of every car – let alone Porsches – is obligatory or they fine the owner, it’s the so called “car revision” – la revisione della macchina – to go around with a non revisioned car is a criminal offence because cars non revisioned may blow up. I don’t know whether in the USA there is such law but if Porsche paid it means Paul Walker was cleared of the accusations of not having revisioned the cars, though laws change from a country to another.
Meadow Walker insisted that the incident happened in plain daylight, it was 3:30 pm, on a smooth and dry road and that it didn’t go really so fast as it was claimed, that the security belt got blocked and Paul couldn’t exit the car in flames.
The dynamic of the incidents is strange: there is full daylight, a normal well maintained street and at a certain point the car crashes against the lamplight* – a tree ed. notes – at the side of the road, which may mean they couldn’t slow down or stop the car and Rodas, not to engender a car incident with the other vehicles tried to stop it steering towards the side of the road to avoid hitting other cars. Both Rodas and Walker were not drunk, they had gone for a charity event during the day – it is sad that Meadow Rain Walker wanted money also from Rodas’s family, because Rodas was driving, as if they hadn’t lost a son and a dear relative too, it is possible that Rodas crashed with the lamplight – tree ed. notes – to avoid crashing with other cars so killing other people, dear Meadow -.
But did the brakes work? Also in the case of Jörg Haider’s death they said the car crashed because it couldn’t be slowed down – as it happens in Speed, the movie with Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock – also in Haider’s case it was day and not night and he was not drunk: he was actually going to his mother’s 90th birthday party .
After all the fuss about Fast & Furious being “christian” Paul Walker’s funeral was non-denominational and I’m not sure Jordana Brewster even went there.
Also Wiz Khalifa’s hit song soundtrack of number 6 “we own it” is “one-eyed” signed.
Don’t spend your life living in a “gangsta’s paradise”…link
The alternative interpretation is that, though Fast & Furious’ cast was initiated into some Illuminati club, like many Hollywood’s actors btw and maybe Paul Walker too, Brewster didn’t have any special role due to her family’s name and connections etc. As for the incident….
He was unbearable, Prince Andrew, in 2011 was asked to cut relationship with paedophile procurer Epstein and he did the worst bored and twisted aristocrat’s part in history “Stop giving me a hard time. You’re such a puritan.” – sic – link Not even the French aristos before the French Revolution are reported to have talked with such a despise for poor exploited children like this and the French cut their heads.
The Queen is lurid, she defends him, but the truth comes out:
Epstein organised orgies in Balmoral when the Queen was present, there’s plenty of material on Daily Mail about it and now we have to rely on our cops and our agents for justice.
There’s a psychologic game of the “elites” to try to make us distrust the police officers and the institutions in general: they don’t want us to sue them.
Lately I’ve written about Hollywood’s Fast & Furious production and I said casually that I prefer when Brian was a cop then when he falls completely in the car robbing industry, it doesn’t make sense for me, I read that the same Vin Diesel had done a movie after The Fast & the Furious where he was an FBI agent fighting the Narcos and winning too, but … the movie wasn’t even distributed because of a “weak script”. Not even distributed? With all the shit that comes around from Hollywood? I have the impression that the so called “élite” are scared of us trusting the cops or FBI agents too much, yes, they wouldn’t like us to sue, so they say or let Hollywood say “they are corrupted, the same as the criminals, they are like the criminals, it’s useless to trust them, they are worse than the criminals…” etc. but that’s a game of the devil.
Yes there is corruption in the police, there is corruption in the FBI and in the institutions but why are they so scared? The rich ones? They’re scared of the good lad in the office who may do the job really? In the end, they, Cops, Army, FBI, are “Rome” and as Byron says “When Rome shall fall, the world” when Rome falls apart, everything will fall apart, and then they themselves rich ones will pay the cops to protect them asking us not to trust them instead, and their princesses will probably choose a lover among the security men, like Diana, as it is fashionable among the very upper class, first they marry a paedophile, homosexual aristocrat “for love” and then they cheat on him – who doesn’t like women anyway – with the bodyguard.
The point is we can do without the Royals and we must do without the Vatican, we can’t do without the cops. To whom do we sue? To a mafia mobster who wants protection money or makes us blow up with all the house and the dogs?
Look, I said it more than once about my background: I was called Paola after Saint Paul – and Saint Paul prays for the Empire to be a good one and asks to pray for and to trust the institutions, he even says that the thing that retains the AntiChrist from ravaging is the Empire, so…next point, I was given a classic education and I like Rome, everybody given classic education does, unless they are really corrupted already at sixteen, Boris Johnson does.
And look at what Vogue Paris publishes the same years:
“Cadeaux” means “presents” in French.
Poor little French girls brought with illegal visas to the USA to be used and abused by Jeffrey Epstein and the Vogue owners and directors who are always welcome in Buckingham Palace do the cover with the little girls dressed like sluts. We puritans don’t like it and “make it hard” for that shit of Andrew and also for her mother, don’t be fooled by the Queen, David Icke is right, she’s more corrupted than her sons. By the comments on the DailyMail it is apparent that many Britons want to get rid of the Monarchy. The Britons on average are clean people, this is why Her Majesty always goes to church with Andrew: to try to trick them.
Boys – and girls – go on:
FBI agent searching the Internet against porn paedo websites