We all know that without UKIP, and without Nigel Farage, this remarkable victory for Brexit would never have happened.

However, the cunning Tories, with the help of the Electoral Commission, managed to take over the leadership of the campaign, for Vote.Leave, sidelining UKIP and Leave.EU and G.O.. Their conduct of the campaign could have been much better and more forceful – indeed some fundamental, vote-winning issues were ignored, such as the effects of continued EU membership on our legal safeguards of personal freedom and our Magna Carta heritage which would have been trashed and replaced by the Napoleonic-inquisitorial system of Corpus Juris if we had voted to Remain…

Was it Lenin who said, “The best way to curb opposition is to lead it”?

Nevertheless we won! Albeit with a smaller margin than we should have had.

And now the cunning Tories have arranged things so that the new Prime Minister is not even a Tory who campaigned for “Leave”, but a Remainian! And they all seem to be falling in line behind her.

This in itself is outrageous.

Theresa May has made some reassuring noises. She has said “Brexit means Brexit”, “Juncker will discover that I am a bloody difficult woman”, “I am going to lead Britain out and make a success of it”.

However, rather than “watch her lips”, we should watch her fingers and see what she actually does. Judge her not on her words but on her actions. We can of course “wait and see” what she does now. However, we can get a damned good idea of what she is likely to do by seeing what she has done so far, and some of the things she has said too.

Just look at her recent remarks during her campaign for leadership, about the 3mn EU citizens now resident in the UK: “they may face deportation”, she hinted strongly. Nigel Farage, statesmanlike, had said that those already here legally had nothing to fear. Can you imagine anything more calculated to stir up trouble and social tensions in the country? And when Leadsom in reply echoed what Nigel had said, May riposted “She wants foreign criminals to be able to stay here!”. Totally absurd. Boris Johnson, in contrast, said that “Theresa May should reassure the 3mn EU nationals now living in the UK, that they will have no problems”.

Even more serious are her remarks about the “benefits” of shariah law. When she was Home Secretary she should have been clamping down on shariah courts and especially shariah patrols. Like hell she did! And  the horrors of Rotherham… on whose watch was that?

And who was the driving force promoting our reconfirmation of the iniquitous European Arrest Warrant and other EU JHA measures in November 2014? It was the Home Secretary – Theresa May.

And what about her tossing and turning over the European Convention on Human Rights? While campaigning to Remain in the EU, she tried to score a cheap political point by saying we should withdraw from the ECHR (knowing full well that being signed up to the ECHR is a precondition to EU membership). And then she changed again and now says we must not leave the ECHR. She either lacks the ability to think things through and join up some simple dots, or is deficient in principles.

And – most dangerous of all – her reply to Dominic Raab’s PQ in June 2012: “of course” she would welcome onto British soil “special intervention units from our EU allies”.

This means the lethally-armed, paramilitary EuroGendarmerie Force (see its own official website, for those who have never heard of it:  www.eurogendfor.eu). The EGF is loyal only to Brussels, which claimed supremacy over us in 2012. And it still does and still will, until the terms of our exit are finalised, probably not before two years. Once inside the country, they will not leave if asked to by a merely British authority, but will take orders only from Brussels. So we would be under an effective military occupation – as are nearly all continental countries, each one being militarily controlled by its own lethally-armed, paramilitary, police force, centrally recruited, stationed in every borough and hamlet, under central government command. Of course Brussels wants to replicate this model across all Europe, hence the EGF.

I cannot understand why nobody else seems to have picked up on this incredible statement by a Home Secretary… Her Labour predecessors cannily avoided answering a similar question when it was put to them. I can only suppose that England’s 350 years of peaceful transitions of government, and unarmed traditional “policing by consent”, have dulled our senses! We Brits have largely been trained to see the trees, but not the wood. So we do not think about the fact that the State is the sole body that can legally use violence on the bodies of the citizens. Once we have armed men controlled by Brussels on our streets, Brussels will have its State, and we will be just a province in their State. How could we possibly trust the judgement of a Home Secretary who was willing to allow that?

So what can we expect now when she goes off to Brussels for the famed negotiations?

Doubtless she will huff and puff and be long on rhetoric and self-promotion for home consumption,  (“I’m a bloody difficult woman…”). But, if the previous form of her Tory predecessors is anything to go by, she will be putty in the hands of Juncker and Merkel. They cannot wait to get their teeth into her, and are already telling her to hurry up.

Politics in Britain is played by and large according to the rules of cricket. So many of us are saying, “Oh well it’s May’s turn to bat now, let’s see how she does…”. On the continent – and this is the game now – they don’t use cricket bats to hit the ball but to hit the bowler and the wicket-keeper hard on the head.

It is curious how the leaders of the Leave side have all quit, one after the other. First Johnson, because he was unexpectedly “stabbed in the back” by Gove. Then Nigel, understandably exhausted after 23 years of hard slog crowned by success… though it would not be surprising if the dastardly threat by that rapper against his children were a factor. And now Leadsom. One is an event. Two is a coincidence. Three begins to look like a series.

So why did Leadsom suddenly quit? Insufficient support in Parliament? But she knew that from the start. Other  reasons? Anybody’s guess. Here in Italy, where politics is a very rough game indeed, and Machiavelli’s book is considered not a gangster’s handbook but a useful guide for politicians, some have said “Oh, Brussels must have had someone whisper in her ear ‘you’d better not carry on like that – just see what happened to Jo Cox. And you have just reminded us that you have 3 children… wouldn’t it be a pity if something nasty happened to them…’.”. I certainly hope that this was not the case. But one does wonder…

So, May might even invoke article 50, just to throw a sop to EU-sceptic opinion at home, to show that she “means business”. But that will give the EU two whole years of our continued membership, therefore our subjection to all their laws and decisions, though excluded from the decision-making, when they can do whatever they like to us: ruin our economy, re-arrange our politics, have us all arrested by the European Prosecutor under EAWs, treat us, in a word, like a colony.

Of one thing I’d say we can be pretty damn sure – May will never, ever, move to repeal the ECA72 unilaterally and set us free before those two years are up, no matter how dirty the other side plays. I would love to be proved wrong. But I fear that, while we will be using our bats to try to hit the ball, they will be using their bats to try to smash our heads in. This faculty of repealing the ECA72 unilaterally if the other side plays dirty, is something we must never give up.

Oh, and I wish to register my utter dismay at the 1000 barristers petitioning Parliament to disregard the Referendum result which they say is “based on misrepresentation of facts and false promises”. Well, freedom of speech and propaganda does mean that any election to Parliament can also be said to be based on that. Political manifestos are not binding contracts, as the law courts have confirmed. Electoral promises do not give rise to legitimate expectations – well, not legally enforceable ones. Yet in the same breath these petitioners have the gall to say “Parliament is the guardian of democracy”.

In effect these renegades are trying to sidestep and to disapply the fundamental, universal, principle that the sole source of legitimate authority is the will of the people. The only societies in the world today that oppose this principle are those based on shariah law.

[Ed: Don’t miss Part II which will be published tomorrow!]

Photo by usembassylondon

Print Friendly, PDF & Email