Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
June 28, 2016

Blairites' Disdain For Labour Members Is One Reason For #Brexit Votes

TIMES POLL: Should Jeremy Corbyn resign?
Public: 49% Yes, 30% No
Labour voters: 54% No, 35% Yes
Lucy Fisher - 11:45 PM - 27 Jun 2016


Confirmed result from labour no confidence motion
172 for
40 against
4 spoilt ballots
13 didn't vote

Faisal Islam - 8:42 AM - 28 Jun 2016

One wonders how much money was paid and what threats were issued to push Labour MPs to vote against their successful and well regarded party leader.

All to no avail.

Corbyn will not give in to this coup attempt which has no legal basis at all. He demands a democratic vote by the party members:

I was democratically elected leader of our party for a new kind of politics by 60% of Labour members and supporters, and I will not betray them by resigning. Today's vote by MPs has no constitutional legitimacy.

It is amazing that just the moment the Conservative Party breaks down over the aftermath of the #Brexit vote Labour "elites" decided to fight their party instead of attacking their confused opponents.

Do they not understand that the #Brexit vote is a consequence of exactly such fatuous behavior?

Behind this is of course Tony Blair and his gang who use extremely dirty media setups to frame Corbyn.

Blair fears the release of the Chilcott report about his lies that led to the British participation in the war of Iraq. In two weeks  that report will comes out and the Labour leader will speak about it in Parliament. If that leader is Corbyn he will apologize and damn Blair and the people around him. Those folks have now pulled out all stops. They would rather see Corbyn dead than publicly condemning them for their crimes.

I hope that Jermey Corbyn has good bodyguards.

Posted by b on June 28, 2016 at 16:54 UTC | Permalink


fascinating! i watch in eager anticipation the though of blair ever being held accountable for all his despicable warmongering..

Posted by: james | Jun 28 2016 16:57 utc | 1

@ 1

Blair's greatest 'accomplishment' was destroying the integrity of BBC completely. Iraq was a close second.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Jun 28 2016 17:20 utc | 2

A motion of no confidence in Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has been passed by the party's MPs.

The 172-40 vote, which is not binding, follows resignations from the shadow cabinet and calls on Mr Corbyn to quit.

Mr Corbyn said the ballot had "no constitutional legitimacy" and said he would not "betray" the members who voted for him by resigning.

The leader's allies have told his critics to trigger a formal leadership contest if they want to challenge him.

Posted by: okie farmer | Jun 28 2016 17:33 utc | 3

Ah yes. The British. Their faux civilized political side show masks a long history of savage wanton mass murder of millions.

"8-10 million Iranians died over Great Famine caused by the British in late 1910s, documents reveal."

source -

Posted by: ALberto | Jun 28 2016 17:50 utc | 4

"One of the little-known chapters of history was the widespread famine in Iran during World War I, caused by the British presence in Iran. After the Russian Revolution of 1917, Britain became the main foreign power in Iran and this famine or–more accurately–‘genocide’ was committed by the British. The document in the American Archives, reporting the widespread famine and spread of epidemic disease in Iran, estimates the number of the deceased due to the famine to be about 8-10 million during 1917-19 (1), making this the greatest genocide of the 20th century and Iran the biggest victim of World War I (2)."


Posted by: ALberto | Jun 28 2016 17:53 utc | 5

Looks like lots of New Labour MPs will be losing their seats next election.

Posted by: karlof1 | Jun 28 2016 17:55 utc | 6

Seriously, does anyone with sound minds still believe in Democracy?

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 28 2016 17:56 utc | 7

Brexit vote prevailed, the resistance is possible!

Posted by: nmb | Jun 28 2016 18:02 utc | 8

When it comes to creating $trange Bedfellow$, bribery is hard to beat...

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 28 2016 19:03 utc | 9

Some awfully good points, very close to those made by Craig Murray a couple days ago:

No rational person would believe Brexit was Jeremy Corbyn’s fault. No rational person would believe that now is a good moment for the Labour Party to tear itself apart. Extraordinarily, the timing is determined by Chilcot.

As Murray implies, this no confidence vote is just an extension of the mindless anti-semitism row cooked up by the Zionists last month. If Chilcott so much as mentions Yisrael and if Corbyn is still head of Labour, he will surely turn the kleig light on the Zionists and go right off on the Bush-Blair-Netanyahu fuck-up commonly known as "the Iraq War."

Bush-Blair-Netanyahu -- that's why he's called "BiBi."

Posted by: Denis | Jun 28 2016 19:07 utc | 10

Thanks b, and thanks also to Denis, 10, for the link to that superb piece.

Posted by: Cortes | Jun 28 2016 19:38 utc | 11

If So many right wingers are are in the Labour Party, then why did Corbyn go into a party where he is outnumbered by his enemies.

Does Corbyn prefer betrayal instead of independence. Looks like he does.

Posted by: tom | Jun 28 2016 19:49 utc | 12

Also, how many right wing fucktard parties are being birthed due to the rage, hate and fear they feel, most of it despicably racist and bigoted with an intent to class warfare.

And yet we see leftists joining already corrupt and evil "Left" parties, where they don't want to revolutionise the existing corrupt evil party, but impossibly and Delusionally want to "reform" it.

Posted by: tom | Jun 28 2016 19:54 utc | 13

Tom at 11: the leadership Labour Party made a huge fuss (hugely fanned by Tories) during the late 1980s, the Indian Summer of the Thatcher premiership, about supposed left wing "entryism" all the while carefully vetted parliamentary candidates were "parachuted into" unwilling constituency parties. Like all parasitised "hosts" the Labour Party has essentially been hollowed out, consumed, destroyed by its parasites.
Corbyn is NOT one of the parasites.
For clarity, I'm not a Labour member, voter or supporter. Just relating what I've observed.

Posted by: Cortes | Jun 28 2016 20:02 utc | 14

@ Cortes

Your description of the parasites hollowing out the Labor Party can be extrapolated to thousands of political and NGO types of organizations around the world. These parasites exude from the core parasite of global private finance and those that own it.

Corbyn can be compared to Sanders who we may not have heard the end of either.

I think the summer is hotting up.....the wildfires in California have doubled in size.....

Posted by: psychohistorian | Jun 28 2016 20:28 utc | 15

The question I would like to ask is this one: Why did Rupert Murdoch endorse the Brexit vote through his mass circulation newspaper The Sun only a few days before the vote? And copies of the newspaper were free that day, at least in my area.

Posted by: Lochearn | Jun 28 2016 20:41 utc | 16

Yes Looks like lots of New Labor MPs will be losing their seats next election.
Because the young voters won't show up for the neck election, and many who voted from him won't show up either.

Posted by: okie farmer | Jun 28 2016 21:06 utc | 17

>> Seriously, does anyone with sound minds still believe in Democracy?
>> Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 28, 2016 1:56:51 PM | 7

I do. But, I don't know when it's been practiced in the past 1000 years by anyone but maybe some pre-capitalist First Americans.

Does anyone know?

Posted by: dumbass | Jun 28 2016 21:11 utc | 18

Storm in a tea cup. The parties will settle down to their previous levels (with a slight temporary bump for the UKIP) and the British will sit down negotiate new trade, labor and travel deals with the EU that look an awful lot like the previous ones (despite the posturing, both sides know that they need each other) and things will go on.

Meanwhile, when asked about Boris Johnson on his recent visit to the UK, Donald Trump replied "Who's Boris?".

But then again, he was only there on business...

Posted by: ralphieboy | Jun 28 2016 21:53 utc | 19

Posted by: Lochearn | Jun 28, 2016 4:41:05 PM | 16

Maybe because to make money he does not have to guess events but is in a position to shape them?

Some managers, however, nailed it going in. George Soros, who became famously rich by a bet against sterling in 1992 which resulted in the ejection of Britain’s currency from the European ERM, looks to make a killing this time around as well. Soros recently detailed his expectations for a Brexit and revealed long positions in gold stocks (including large stakes in Barrick Gold and Silver Wheaton) and short positions in a variety of equities in the U.K. and elsewhere. With gold up strongly and equity markets around the world reeling, Soros stands to make a great deal of money from Britain once again.

Hedge fund manager Crispin Odey also stands to do very well. Odey, who’s firm managed more than $10 billion and who strongly backed the Brexit movement, was heavily short financial markets and also long gold heading into the vote.

His flagship Odey European hedge fund was reportedly up more than 15% on Friday, according to Bloomberg data. The gain will be a much-needed boost for the money manager, a macro shop which has suffered greatly over the past year. Before today, the European fund was down more than 25% for the year to date. It lost 12.8% in 2015.

In late April, Odey – who is one of Britain’s richest men and was once briefly married to Rupert Murdoch’s daughter - was among 100 executives from Britain’s financial industry who signed a letter backing Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 28 2016 21:53 utc | 20

Daily Mail also came out for Brexit a couple of days before the vote.

Posted by: lysias | Jun 28 2016 22:53 utc | 21

10;No mercy from you huh?
Here's been a Labour party member for years.He probably only backed stay because his constituency was for it,as he is old Labour.not these new internationalist divide and conquer creeps.I like they guy,hope he keeps up the fight to expose Bliar,and in turn,the shrub.
ALberto,we could add up historical grievances from long ago and far away for a week,but don't have much relevancy to today and Zion uber alles.
Yes,a lot of peons,even British ones,paid for the crimes of empire.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 28 2016 23:01 utc | 22

Oppose the coup plot against Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn

It is striking that in the aftermath of a referendum—the result of a faction fight between two equally right-wing sections of the Tory Party—it is Labour that has been sent into free-fall. Under any other circumstances, it would be expected that Labour, whose party membership voted in the majority to remain in the EU, would be demanding an early election against a Tory Party that failed so signally to mobilise its base of support.

Instead, the majority of the parliamentary Labour Party is intent on removing its own leader.

Labour MPs pass no-confidence motion in Corbyn

In a dramatic development on Tuesday, a total of 172 Labour MPs voted against Corbyn and only 40 in favor out of 229 Labour lawmakers in the House of Commons lower house.

But the veteran Labour leader insisted he would not stand down over the Brexit, saying he will not “betray the trust” of his voters and that he would have to be defeated in a democratic election.

"I was democratically elected leader of our party for a new kind of politics by 60 percent of Labour members and supporters, and I will not betray them by resigning. Today's vote by MPs has no constitutional legitimacy," he said in a statement.

Can the majority of Englishmen and women who rejected the totalitarian EU reject Tory-Labour?

EU leaders call for rapid British exit and European military buildup

Now, threatened with being torn apart by the Brexit crisis, the EU is trying to survive by effecting a massive integration of its military and police forces, directed both at rising social anger at home and at external rivals, including the United States. This emerges clearly in documents prepared in advance of the EU summit that starts today—one by EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini and a second authored jointly by Steinmeier and French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault. Both are predicated on developing the EU’s ability to act militarily independently of Washington.

The Mogherini paper calls for “structured cooperation,” in which EU countries pool military equipment, units and their chains of command—essentially laying the basis for forming a common European army. “The EU will systematically encourage defense cooperation and strive to create a solid European defense industry, which is critical for Europe’s autonomy of decision and action,” the paper states.

The document reportedly indicates that Brexit will help repair the EU’s political and economic relations with Russia, which nosedived after Washington demanded that the EU impose punishing sanctions against Moscow. It says that the EU and Russia are “interdependent,” and pledges closer ties: “We will therefore engage Russia to discuss disagreements and to cooperate if and when our interests overlap.”

The Steinmeier-Ayrault paper, for its part, declares: “In an international environment ever more strongly characterized by diverging great power interests, France and Germany must work to develop the EU step by step as an independent global actor. The goal is to translate our knowledge and our civilian and military equipment into an ever more effective and realistic policy.”

Goodbye NATO? Are the bona fide Remainers in the EU using Brexit as the means to jettison the Americans along with the Anglos?

In the EU, European men and women are not represented at all, can the TNCs now revivify the EU and its new European Army and Police as a third force?

Posted by: jfl | Jun 28 2016 23:18 utc | 23

Lochearn @ 16:

It's the nature of predatory parasites like Rupert Murdoch to try to read the prevailing mood and the direction that society might be going in, and to try to latch onto that and ride it to their advantage. Ideology doesn't count unless it offers opportunities to enrich themselves. It's all about self-interest and self-preservation.

If you've read something of how Murdoch came to own newspapers and Sky News in Britain, and various media in the United States, from an unlikely start owning a provincial newspaper in South Australia (not exactly the leading state in Australia, now or in the past), you'll realise that Murdoch has always posed as an "outsider" gatecrashing the Establishment, exploiting and undermining its weaknesses and rivalries, milking it for all it was (or is) worth. He's still doing that even though his paradigm has long passed its expiry date and we can see it for what it is.

Posted by: Jen | Jun 28 2016 23:34 utc | 24

@jfl from #23: "Goodbye NATO? Are the bona fide Remainers in the EU using Brexit as the means to jettison the Americans along with the Anglos?"

NATO isn't going anywhere so I wouldn't get your hopes up. If there is an EU force it would almost certainly still be subservient to NATO policy. Aside from jihadists in the Middle East, whom both the US and the EU seem happy to back even if it causes them terror incidents in their own countries (there's no way to lose in that scenario as they can use them as an excuse for more military spending, more "security" spending, and more suspension of civil liberties), the only enemy they can both gin up to justify their military spending is Russia--and they're both onboard with more Russophobia. If the EU leadership was tied to manufacturing and actual businesses, it might push back on the Russia-baiting, but since it's run by financial types they don't care if agriculture and manufacturing businesses get hurt. When those businesses get hurt it pushes down labor participation, allowing them more "austerity" policies for workers while they continue to hand out free money in the form of negative/low interest rates for their cronies while keeping the bankrupt banks on a lifeline.

Posted by: WorldBLee | Jun 28 2016 23:54 utc | 25

Jen 24:

The review of British Imperial General Staff's conduct during WWI "Haig's Command" - author's name escapes me, but he relied on Australian sources which escaped the "cleansing" initiated and enforced by the FM and his pals - has insights into the career of Murdoch Pere which are worthy of a glance.

Posted by: Cortes | Jun 28 2016 23:54 utc | 26

brexit was a great move by Britain, WAR is coming with Hillary Clinton is she wins the Presidency of the U.S
The future is not looking to great for normal people.

Posted by: Jack | Jun 29 2016 0:18 utc | 27

The Middle East is about to explode, Africa, Central Asia, Eastern Europe, if you think the refugee crisis is bad now.
Wait to see what would happen in a year is going to quadruple.

Posted by: Jack | Jun 29 2016 0:25 utc | 28

@2 former t bear... thanks for that bit of info on blair being responsible for bbc going off the rails... they have been trying to do something similar here in canada while under harper, but we have a temporary respite thanks to the young trudeau..

Posted by: james | Jun 29 2016 2:00 utc | 29

cbc- is the canuck equivalent..

Posted by: james | Jun 29 2016 2:00 utc | 30

"Who is really behind the Labour coup?" reTweeted by David Graeber:

Posted by: wendy davis | Jun 29 2016 3:20 utc | 31

@ 18:

"Does anyone know?"

It is possible that the matrilineal/matrilocal governance systems used by Native Americans was quite democratic in substance. But the European genocide was pretty thorough. Many NA groups were converted to 'chiefdoms' because the Europeans wouldn't talk to women. I find it frankly ironic that the so-called women's movement hasn't bothered to highlight the NA governance systems. Imagine a government that functioned not on 'majority' voting but on unanimity? It would have to take into account all members of the group ... thus capitalism would not flourish in that sort of community/environment.

For the naysayers, allow me to agree that some of the NA empires were not at all democratic: Aztecs, Mayans, Incas, etc. IMHO the empires rose as the women were marginalized. Alas, today the women are as bad, if not worse, than the men: Clinton, Albright, et al.

Posted by: el indio | Jun 29 2016 3:31 utc | 32

@32 el indio - we're pretty far off topic but since it arises: I don't think the nature of woman has changed, and I don't think you mean to imply that. It's more that the system is now patriarchal, and bad female humans have only men as peers. And when was that ever enough for wisdom?

Bad women in a matriarchy would at least have wise female peers. it would make all the difference. And used to, once, so it is said.

And to bring this back to the matter of democracy, the voice of everyone is regarded as the wisest because of the averaging of the crowd-sourcing involved. It's the best we can do, lacking wisdom, and it's pretty good, I think, if allowed to work. But consider, if wisdom were to alight upon the Earth again, in the female principle long ago crushed under the jackboot of the male principle, perhaps the crowd-sourcing might give way to a simple cultural consensus focused around noble leaders. We see the shape of this ancient system in modern Russia.

I ramble on so I'll stop, but since this entire thread deals with aspects of the ancient war of the rich against the poor, it seems useful perhaps to include the even more ancient war which gave rise to it in the first place, that of the male against the female, energy against wisdom.

Posted by: Grieved | Jun 29 2016 4:05 utc | 33

james @ #29 & #30

What's behind South Park's depiction of Canuck's with mouths which go all the way around their heads? Is it Bigness, or something subtler?

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 29 2016 5:14 utc | 34

WorldBLee @25
Very good comment.

Posted by: okie farmer | Jun 29 2016 6:54 utc | 35

@el indio

I understand that Occupy and many other groups had consensus decision making and a progressive stack. Not really my thing, but I think that is what you mean.

The big issue with that is that you can't run a complex society with it. There are billions of decisions made every day regarding all kinds of things relating to production, laws etc.

Posted by: tony | Jun 29 2016 8:19 utc | 36

@26: Haig's Command by Denis Winter, Viking 1991. Having occasionally done research in the National Archive I was shocked at his evidence of deliberate document suppression.

Posted by: ChrisG | Jun 29 2016 8:57 utc | 37

What the Blairites (i.e. all the Parliamentary Labour Party except those who were members pre-Blair) fear is the Labour Party Conference in a coupla months. The membership will change policy from Neoliberalism to its antithesis, the Jezza Agenda.
That's why they've got to get rid of JC now.

Peter Mandelson has been visible orchestrating it.

Posted by: Stubbs | Jun 29 2016 9:51 utc | 38


The Australian Bruce Page wrote "The Murdoch Archipelago" which covers Keith Murdoch (Rupe's father) baptism into the techniques of Press Barons influencing and controlling politics when he played a junior role in Lloyd George's successful coup against PM Asquith in 1916.

Posted by: johnf | Jun 29 2016 10:35 utc | 39

See my original post about Margaret Hodge.

Margaret Eve Oppenheimer was born in 1944 in Cairo, Egypt, to Jewish refugee parents. The family moved to Orpington, London where the Oppenheimers started their family-owned steel-trading corporation Stemcor [Holdimg located on Jersey - Oui]. Dame Margaret Hodge is [?] still a major shareholder ...

    Stemcor, formerly controlled by the Oppenheimer family, was hard hit by the 2008 financial crisis and accumulated a large debt pile when it bought an iron ore asset in India.

Posted by: Oui | Jun 29 2016 11:08 utc | 40

Margaret Hodge – kickstarted yesterday’s vote of no confidence in Corbyn with a letter circulated to Labour MPs last week ...

A natural ally of and representative as a Blairite. Her letter started the no-confidence vote to remove Jeremy Corbyn as party leader before the coming General Election.

Posted by: Oui | Jun 29 2016 11:09 utc | 41

Voting record Labour MP Margaret Hodge

How Margaret Hodge voted on Foreign Policy and Defence #

Posted by: Oui | Jun 29 2016 11:10 utc | 42

Ms Hodge's Coup: A Labour Friend of Israel

According to right-wing press reports, Hodge’s coup plot has been brewing since May.

Hodge is a registered supporter of Labour Friends of Israel, an Israel lobby organization within the party. In the Blair years, it was seen as a must-join group for a sucessful career as a Labour MP, but its influence has been declining for years.

As covered in detail by The Electronic Intifada, the “crisis” has been almost entirely manufactured ....

Posted by: Oui | Jun 29 2016 11:13 utc | 43


I understand that Occupy and many other groups had consensus decision making and a progressive stack. Not really my thing, but I think that is what you mean.

The big issue with that is that you can't run a complex society with it. There are billions of decisions made every day regarding all kinds of things relating to production, laws etc.

That is all fine if all you are doing is occupying a public park. Running a nation, or an organization of nations means that there have to be methods in place for decision-making. Transparency, accountablility and and democracy should play a major role in electing or naming the decision-makers, but we cannot put every single decision up to a popular vote. We do not all live in a small village in the Swiss Alps.

Posted by: ralphieboy | Jun 29 2016 11:18 utc | 44

@jfl - #23

"Goodbye NATO? Are the bona fide Remainers in the EU using Brexit as the means to jettison the Americans along with the Anglos?"

Most definitely! You don't wonder why Obama and Kerry were rearing their heads after the Brexit vote. DC (David Cameron) has been demoted internationally and can forget any nice, comfortable and well-paid job ...

European Security Compact Initiative After Brexit - 'Leaked Memo'
Europe's Founders Call for Unity and Peace After Brexit

Posted by: Oui | Jun 29 2016 11:30 utc | 45

Watch and listen to the leaders of Poland and the Baltic states ... they're furieus! Observe who gets invited on the mass media talk shows [cq propaganda]. Even registered the return of our former nemesis, former British citizen and former FM of Poland Radek Sikorski.

His secretly taped conversation with expletives towards David Cameron proved to be right. ;-)

Polish MPs ridicule Cameron's 'stupid propaganda' aimed at Eurosceptics | The Guardian – June 2014 |

Posted by: Oui | Jun 29 2016 11:32 utc | 46

#’s 18, 32, 33, 36,

Still kind of OT but:

According to the Cornell HoneyBee researcher Thomas Seeley, HoneyBees do practice democracy especially when they swarm. The first thing they do is cluster on a nearby branch and then send out scouts to check out possible new locations/enclaves for their new home. Only after the scouts have checked out as many locations as possible within their range do they come together and apparently reach a consensus on which they all agree is the most desirable. Then the whole swarm follows the scouts to the new location and go about setting up their new home.

Fascinating and quite instructive. I think we could learn a lot about living in harmony with not only each other but our entire environment from paying closer attention to other beings on our planet, most of whom have successfully inhabited it far longer then we.

Posted by: juannie | Jun 29 2016 11:57 utc | 47


Why are you repeating what I just wrote?

Posted by: tony | Jun 29 2016 12:55 utc | 48

@18 dumbass

I don't know that it's ever been practiced, but it must be now. The oligarchs (the 1%) and their hangers on (the 15% - 30% depending on how you count them) are deaf, dumb, and blind - the 'leaders' willfully and others stupidly so, following the 'leaders' - with regard to the real-world consequences of the continuing operation of their ersatz counterfeit, financial world.

The only people attending to the real world at all are those of us who are suffering the consequences of the 16-31% abuses.

Being deaf, dunmb, and blind the financial 'elite' and wannabes are incapable even of seeing, let alone admitting the damage they've done and are doing. They will go to their graves embracing the problem and not the solution.

And that's why democracy - rule by all the people - is essential.

@32 el indio

Certainly things were on a much smaller scale in the days to which you refer. And the vast scale of 'government' at this point is indeed a very big part of the problem. How much trouble would the USA have caused post-WWII if it were not the continental size that it is, with all the power and money all the bubbling to the top?

Certainly to a great extent our collective future depends on our ability to stop this bubbling up of power, and on the re-distribution of responsiblity of government to a - literally - more human scale.

@36 tony, @43 ralphieboy

I agree that we need fulltime people to handle the day-to-day management of the complexity of physical administration of complex societies ... direct democracy everywhere and all-the-time is not practical ... but it must be clear that the people we've chosen as our representatives in that undertaking are technologists, not technocrats. They must administer, not rule, as they do now.

I think our role as democratic decision-makers at the nation-state and world levels will never be day-to-day, but we must always remain supreme, sovereign, at the pinnacle of power.

We must be able directly to undo the damage done by incompetent/partisan/malevolent decisions undertaken by our stewards; we must have the ability directly to dismiss and replace them when they have made egregious errors; and we must be able to legislate ourselves directly, when they prove incapable, for one reason or another, of doing so.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 29 2016 13:09 utc | 49

@46 juannie

I agree that we need to pay more attention to the simpler, perhaps higher, forms of life on earth. I am very impressed with the free living creatures collectively termed slime molds, which respond to stress by organizing.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 29 2016 13:16 utc | 50

WorldBLee @ 25: True that, good post...

Posted by: ben | Jun 29 2016 14:15 utc | 51

While the Chilcott report may be the proximate cause for this latest coup attempt, Corbyn has been targeted from day one because he represents a serious threat to the zionist control of the British political theatre. This is evidenced by the focus of the original attacks, an orchestrated smear campaign of anti-semitism. His support for the Palestinian cause and concomitant criticism of Israeli policies are a radical departure from the reflexive obsequiousness towards Israel demonstrated by the British political establishment.

As Craig Murray points out,(in the article posted by Denis @10):

Both of the first two to go, Hilary Benn and Heidi Alexander, are hardline supporters of Israel…

This fault line is very well defined. The manufactured row about “anti-Semitism” in the Labour Party shows exactly the same split. In my researches, 100% of those who have promoted accusations of anti-Semitism were supporters of the Iraq War and/or had demonstrable links to professional pro-Israel lobby groups.

Corbyn is clearly in the cross-hairs of, not only the Blairites, but the entire pro-Israeli establishment. His views on mid-east policy undermine the carefully nurtured pro-Israeli narrative and must not be allowed to enter mainstream political discourse.

The nightmare scenario for the zionists would be Corbyn leading Labour to victory in the next election resulting in a radical repositioning of British policy in regard to the mid-east generally and its Palestinian/Israeli position specifically. The global reverberations of such a repositioning would be nothing short of disastrous for Israel’s expansionary policies. This cannot be allowed.

To reiterate b’s closing statement : I too hope that Jermey Corbyn has good bodyguards.

Posted by: pantaraxia | Jun 29 2016 14:36 utc | 52

The Blairites disdain for Labour members seems similar to the disdain of the Germans and their sidekicks feel for all of Britain, post-Brexit ...

Tensions erupt at Brussels summit on British exit from EU

European Union officials adopted a hard line against David Cameron on Tuesday at the final EU summit to be attended by the outgoing British prime minister.

No agreement between Cameron and top EU officials on the Brexit crisis emerged from a working dinner, whose attendees included EU Council President Donald Tusk and EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker. The EU decided to exclude Britain from a second day of talks, though Britain is still technically an EU member state, and Cameron went home empty handed.

[L]eading EU officials, starting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, had the previous day issued a series of statements pressing for a rapid and punitive exit of Britain from the EU.

In an official address to the German parliament (Bundestag), Merkel adopted a harsh position vis-a-vis Great Britain. She said German officials were “conscious” that Great Britain “does not yet want to file” for Article 50. However, she continued, Great Britain should “be conscious that there can be no negotiations or preliminary discussions so long as the Article 50 procedures have not been launched.”

Barely concealing the implied threat in her remarks, the chancellor added, “I can only advise our British friends not to fool around as they prepare to take the decisions that must be taken in Great Britain.” Merkel stressed that even though Britain is one of “the closest allies in NATO,” Germany and the EU would negotiate with Britain “on the basis of their own interests.” She said Berlin would “orient its policy around the interests of German citizens and businesses.”

In an especially provocative part of her speech, which was applauded by all the parties present in the German parliament, Merkel said: “We should make sure that the negotiations do not proceed on the basis of cherry-picking. It must make and it will make a noticeable difference whether a country wants or refuses to be a part of the EU family. Anyone who wants to leave this family cannot expect that as all the responsibilities of EU membership are removed, all the rights remain.”

Dutch Finance Minister Jeroen Dijsselbloem echoed Merkel’s hard line, making clear that the EU intended Britain’s exit from the EU to damage that country’s international trade. He attacked Nigel Farage, the head of the UK Independence Party (UKIP), saying Farage was “living in his own world” if he thought Brexit meant Britain would be able to trade on better terms with the EU. Dijsselbloem chided that Farage “thinks Britain is still a world-spanning empire and can dictate everything, and it’s not going to happen like that.”

Reporting on the working dinner he had had with Cameron and Juncker, EU Council President Tusk confirmed that the EU aimed to inflict serious economic damage on Britain, even at the cost of provoking a global recession, in order to make an example of Britain for voting to leave the bloc. EU officials at the dinner made clear, Tusk said, “that Brexit means substantially lower growth in the UK, with a possible negative spillover all over the world.”

Juncker, for his part, turned on UKIP parliamentarians who applauded a statement calling for respect for the Brexit referendum vote and told them to leave Brussels. He snapped: “That’s the last time you are applauding here… To some extent I am really surprised that you are here. You were fighting for the exit, the British people voted in favour of the exit. Why are you here?”

These guys seem to have been sharpening their knives for the Brits for a long time.

How quickly things fall apart.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 29 2016 15:04 utc | 53

An attack on Corbyn was in the cards. Both Labour + Tories were severely split on Brexit.

Brexit jiggered in by Cameron, and I’m gessing a majority of Labour would have preferred it to have never surfaced, incl. Corbyn himself. What we are witnessing (I have been reading Brit comments, blogs, etc.), is, I think, the confrontation between two models that are shadowy, not well worked out, and certainly not presented ‘honestly’ to the public and possibly pol. colleagues as well.

Beyond Dave’s political machinations, this was truly a coin toss vote. Both models are neo-liberal, highly ‘capitalistic’, corporatist (some form of neo-fascism, another discussion.)

REMAIN is the Big Gvmt/Big Block/consensus model, dressed in unity of ppls discourse and some ‘genuine attempts’ to appease the top 35%: environment, workers hours, cultural projects, travel, hope for the future, teknotopia, Kumbaya, and so on.

It is also a hierarchical model, with Boss (USA), poodle (EU..NATO not to be neglected), and a neo-aristo leader overlord class in Brussels as intermediaries. Everyone is the ‘same’ (Poles, Brits, gender, etc.) and has ‘rights’ - in the structure WE decide holds sway. Geo-politically it was supposed to be submisive and strong enough (contradiction) to e.g. instrumentalise Ukraine to provoke an attack on Russia. (Failed ..)

LEAVE corresponds to the more libertarian, rapacious, nationalistic, risk-taking, less legalistic, super uncontrolled, form. It sets nations and national leaders/Gvmts. (elected or no, like corps) into stronger positions vis a vis their ‘serfs’, leaves room for new profitable alliances (scotched / resisted by REMAIN, see e.g. Russia sanctions and all the right-wing European parties being pro-Putin to some degree) and it is horrible news for workers. I suspect Farage supports TTIP - idk.

Corbyn as a long time EU-sceptic presents an obstacle to Blairites (third way, pro USA.) Remember it was Blair who signed on for massive Polish Plumber influx. (And the Iraq war..) A fight between the two models, and the knives are coming out.

LEAVE was only supported by two official GB parties, UKIP and the Communists. (Fringe right and left same position..)

Ilargi gathers up some pro-Brexit opinions.

The Brit communist position:

Posted by: Noirette | Jun 29 2016 15:35 utc | 54

@10 denis.. thanks for the craig murray link.

@19 ralphie boy.. i tend to see it the same way too.

@34 hoarsewhisperer.. i don't watch tv and am not up on south park...
i asked yahoo.. here and here might be some related answers.. let me know if you find the answer..

@51 pantaraxia.. thanks.. i agree with your analysis as well..

Posted by: james | Jun 29 2016 15:57 utc | 55

@52 Bravo Merkel, bravo Tusk, bravo Juncker!

The era of the UK sabotage of the UE in favour of the atlantis cabal must end now!

UE needs
1) rapprochement with Russia, Syria, Iran (already happening)
2) its own army to counter the NATO drug lords and warmongers
3) to stop that British-USA bastard monstrosity called TTIP
4) to block the blind support of he British judeo-masonic satanist-pedophile "elites" to the zionist criminal government bent on "final solution to the Palestinian cause"
5) to block the British military (BAE), intelligence and PMC (G4S) support for the terrorists butchering population of the ME helped by the British puppet states SA, Bahrain, Qatar, Turkey
6) to help Gibraltar, Cyprus, Malvinas, Scotland, Northern Ireland to regain independence form the anti-human The Crown Corporation hqed in the City of London
7) get rid of the British tax heaven giving refuge to all sorts of war criminals, banksters, frauds
8) isolate the criminal "financial center" of The City, in reality a den of speculators living off human suffering worldwide.

I hope the cleanse will start ASAP, no negotiations with that "trojan horse"!

Posted by: ProPeace | Jun 29 2016 16:59 utc | 56

Goddam good piece ProPeace @54.

Posted by: okie farmer | Jun 29 2016 18:02 utc | 57

@54 well said

Posted by: dan | Jun 29 2016 18:21 utc | 58

Thank you okie, sorry for the typos.

You know, I'm really fed up with all that EU bashing by the British, following blindly the lame-scream media (Murdoch and others) instead of taking a critical look at their own criminal government(s).

Let's look at recent history.

For as little peace it provides, the Minsk agreements have been a diplomatic success of Germany, France and Russia. Relief for the Novorussians and Eastern Ukrainians clearly could not have been provided if the British, the USians, of the Polish were involved.

And was it Germans who bombed Libya into oblivion or mainly the British?

Are those German special forces all over the ME supervising the "moderate butchers" or the British, among others?

Were those specials ops troops, disguised as Arabs, caught in Basra several years ago setting up explosives to kill civilians, German, Polish or the British SAS?

Is it Germany, or Poland selling billions worth of weapons to the bloody dictatorships of the Gulf, or the British? (German military for the zionist occupaiers is a blatant blackmail over WW2 so please do not argue about that)

Is the fake Muslim "imam" Anjem Chowdhary desperately trying to give a bad name to islam and incite violence based in Germany, Poland, or maybe in the UK under the care of the MI5?

Is Berlin, Warsaw or maybe London where that fake "Syrian" Observatory for "Huan Rights" resides spewing relentlessly its war-mongering, lying, perfidious propaganda from the MI6 script?

Is the Syces-Picot that have been setting the ME on fire for decades a German, Polish or maybe a British creation?

Was it Germans, Polish or maybe the British who pushed of invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq? (yes, I'm aware of the shameful role that Germany played in destroying the Balkans)

Has the British governments done anything positive in geopolitics recently (and the fake "vote against bombing Syria" does not count, it was obviously just for show, otherwise the British military would have been annihilated)?

They are clearly vocal about defending zionist criminals and expressing pride in having Jewish roots instead. Including that pathetic zionist, mischievous stooge and fake reformer Farage.

The most sober and sane voices about restoring normal relationship with Russia have been always coming from Germany (and also from Austria, Hungary, Italy) - the silence on the British part is resounding. Also in Germany I've seen the most opposition and critical voices against NATO.

The British are in NO FUCKING POSITION to criticize the EU when every day their "elites" are committing outrageous, horrifying crimes against humanity including the British society, when hundreds of children are "disappeared", raped, tortured, made into mind controlled slaves and often ritually murdered as this poor girl reveals:

Public outrage should be not against the EU, but against the cover up of those heinous crimes of the British oligarchy.

See the film in your eye. Clean your own house first.

Posted by: ProPeace | Jun 29 2016 18:46 utc | 59

"Watch and listen to the leaders of Poland and the Baltic states ... they're furieus!"

I do not know Estonian, Latvian, or Lithuanian, but in Polish... you would be surprised.

The ruling cretins (a) expressed satisfaction from Brexit outcome, and (b) blamed Donald Tusk, former PM and not a chief honcho in EU. Opposition commentators gloat that what passes for Polish diplomacy was based on having an ally in UK, now they are left with Orban (who presumably applauds disabling of the courts, attempts to muzzle the media etc., except that he did it better, but who is also cozy with Putin while the Polish ruling cretins raised Rusophobia to a dogma of national religion). In short, internal squabbles are hundred times more interesting to Poles than somewhat predictable outcome of Brexit referendum (after all, Radek Sikorski who is NOT THE BRIGHTEST BULB IN THE CEALING predicted it two years earlier in a taped private conversation).

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 29 2016 20:04 utc | 60


A double tip of the hat for two excellent posts!!

Posted by: Oui | Jun 29 2016 21:06 utc | 61

Posted by: jfl | Jun 29, 2016 11:04:59 AM | 53

I think you misinterpret this. Angela Merkel has given Cameron time to sort things out. She/Schäuble will have a problem to defend austerity in the EU without Britain's conservatives - a lot of EU policies are not national but along party lines like Merkel's stupid initial support for Timoshenko which only stopped when Timoshenko's views finally got translated to German. Or the treatment given to Greek's left government where Germany attempted a financial coup.

She/the EU now have the very real problem that Britain might not be the only country that wishes "out" and if Britain's exit terms are favourable others might wish to follow. Germany would have to negotiate its export market all over again.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 29 2016 22:14 utc | 62

@61 Oui: You are most welcome! :-)

@60 Piotr: Starikow ciekawie

Posted by: ProPeace | Jun 29 2016 22:58 utc | 63

If the EU can lose faith in the City of London then maybe losing faith in the Fed is next. Both countries have bloated economies that are over represented by finance, private finance masking as sovereign.

Where is the tipping point? It seems to be coming closer every day.

End private finance and kill the Gawd of Mammon!

Posted by: psychohistorian | Jun 30 2016 0:27 utc | 64

John Kerry-Heinz: Brexit could be walked back because Cameron “has no idea how he would do it.”

This is only the beginning of VERY serious and pompous people spouting laughably absurd 'reasons' why Brexit can't happen, all of which will be taken very seriously by the corporate media and politicians.

Like b said, it ain't gonna happen.

Posted by: fairleft | Jun 30 2016 0:36 utc | 65

The Trans-Atlantic Divide Explained ...

Gordon Brown: Globalisation Leaves People Out (UK)
Tony Blinken: Globalisation Is Our Savior (USA)

In short: the blind leading the blind

Posted by: Oui | Jun 30 2016 1:41 utc | 66

@64: is Kerry wrong? Hard to tell! So far, it has not been explains how Brexit will be done. For starters, the referendum does not have a legal power, only political one, so it requires the resolution in the Parliament that does not have majority of supporting MPs. The only people who would like it to happen soon are the English hoi polloi and British neighbors across the Channel and North Sea, being fed up with UK constantly re-negotiating this or that. UK being a de-facto vassal without voice in EU decisions is much better. Further away, authoritarians in Hungary and Poland would prefer UK in the EU, plus there is a wider worry in this part of Europe about the access to UK labor market. Humiliation of the contumely English offers a lot of political benefits on the Continent.

Cameron punted the ball, before any Brexit parliamentary vote there will be leadership election in Tory party. It is not particularly clear that a "leave" supporter will win. But it is highly possible. Then to get parliamentary majority for Brexit new elections may be needed. That is another few months, but there is a twist. Blairites/Fabians are currently swinging a wrecking ball in Labor, so the party will collapse in the near term, but that may favor UKIP over Tories. UKIP deputies would solidly favor Brexit, but that perspective may stop the next Tory leader from calling for new elections.

In the meantime, the following appetizing dish will be served by the Continentals: keep free trade with the Continent, contribute exactly as much as before to the budget and maintain the labor movement policy, and free all the seats in the European institutions. In other words, no promised gains to show AT ALL that can be presented to voters as an accomplishment. At that point, English public may change their minds and refuse to elect "leave" majority to the Parliament, and the whole incident will be mere epitaph to the glorious carrier of David Cameron.

I should stress, this is not a prediction but merely a scenario that seems plausible. When established routes offer no resolution, new routes appear, like de-selection of Parliament candidates, parties may cleave and coalesce etc. The spectacle may be so un-edifying that perhaps even North-Irish Protestants will support exit from UK, while the Scots talk about little else. Catholics of Northern Island wished that from the very start of English rule there and never stopped, Protestants are actually colonizers from Scotland, while "Scots" are actually Hibernians who conquered Caledonia.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 30 2016 11:31 utc | 67

This here is the full Mark Blyth interview on the Brexit

it is exellent.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 30 2016 13:26 utc | 68

How will the whole 'Brexit' play out and the FANG Elections.

Clearly there are a number of crucial elections coming up which will determine what happens.

The Conservative Leadership Election - will it being a supporter of "Leave" (Gove) or "Remain" (May) or someone else?

Labour Party - whoever wins the leadership after the leadership contest it is certain now the Labour Party will split - at least to some degree.

Clearly this is more likely if Corbyn wins. If Corbyn wins, most of the Labour MPs have an untenable position in Labour and will leave and form a new party - there is simply no other way forward in that scenario.

If Corbyn loses, there is some chance there will not be a split, but surely Corbyn and his supporters could not possibly remain in the party - what would be the point?

And then you have the FANG Elections.

France (May 2017) - Establishment (Francois Hollande/ Sarkozy/ Juppe) v Marine Le Pen (Insurgent)

America (November 2016) - Establishment (Hillary Clinton) v Donald Trump (Insurgent)

Netherlands (March 2017) - Establishment (Mark Rutte) v Geert Wilders (Insurgent)

Germany (September/ October 2017) - Establishment (Angela Merkel et al) v AFD (Insurgents)

So what will happen? No one knows - but if 2 Insurgents can win the EU is 100% finished. If 1 Insurgent wins - it is 90% finished - particularly if that insurgent is Marine Le Pen.

How does this relate to "Brexit"?

Clearly, the UK is advantaged and strengthens it's negotiating position with the EU by weakening the EU's bargaining position as much as possible.

So how do they easily mess up the EU's negotiating position? They withhold invoking Article 50 until the most opportune time? When is that? It is most certainly not in 2016 - it is likely to be during the Netherlands/ French Election campaigns - so most likely March/April 2017.

In the meantime - the new British Prime Minister - whoever it is - should make a point to meet the likes of Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen & Geert Wilders ASAP.

Give these people legitimacy and you make it much more likely they'll be elected and in turn you'll get a favourable deal from the EU - or whatever is left of it if anything!

I fear that Boris Johnson would instinctively know this - given his understanding of how to be the maverick and not "play by the rules" - however, now he has withdrawn his candidacy - I do fear the likes of Gove & May will play by the conventional playbook and stuff it up by not taking these opportunities.

It seems so obvious, but it seems many politicians simply do not understand the new paradigm politics has moved into with the 24 hour news cycle and incessant and never-ending social media cycle - Twitter, Facebook etc.

Meet Marine Le Pe.

Legitimise her as a potential President of France.

Strengthen your bargaining position with regards to the EU.

Meet Geert Wilders.

Legitimise him as a potential Prime Minister of the Netherlands.

Strengthen your bargaining position with regards to the EU.

By doing this the new UK PM will also enrage the likes of the Euro elites - Juncker, Tusk, Merkel, Hollande etc.


The more enraged the likes of these EU "leaders" get, the more likely they are to take punitive measures against the UK, or Le Pen, or Wilders, the more likely the people of these countries are to reflexively reject the mandates of the likes of Juncker and Merkel and the more likely the people are to rally to support the likes of Le Pen and Wilders.

It's a virtuous cycle for whoever the new UK PM is.

Will they do it? I have my doubts.

Swing the FANG Elections to favour the UK and deFANG the EU.

The EU will be deFANGed by the FANGs of the Brexiteers.

Posted by: Jules | Jun 30 2016 13:54 utc | 69

@61 Oui: You are most welcome! :-)

Posted by: ProPeace | Jun 30 2016 15:39 utc | 70

Pro peace @ 59.. Public outrage should be not against the EU, but against the cover up of those heinous crimes of the British oligarchy.

Yes, add + others. One of the reasons the campaigns/debate/ post-vote positions/discourse have been purposely obscured with trash talk about racism, young sweeties vs. crusty pensioners, Finance and the City, etc. The hidden agenda is not revealed, the reasons for it buried. I tried to outline one aspect (immigration, workers) of it in post 54. There are others having to do with world geo-politics.

ProPeace @ 56. Good list. point 6: to help Gibraltar, Cyprus, Malvinas, Scotland, Northern Ireland to regain independence from the anti-human The Crown Corporation hqed in the City of London .... is tricky though.

The EU’s plan (now more determined about that than ever!) is strengthening Central Control (EU) over a collection of Regions, all under the EU overlord, which becomes a necessity, to harmonise, prevent strife, write contract law, etc. A policy of divide-to-rule by guaranteeing ‘peace and harmony!’

Is Scotland (as the prime ex.) better off out of GB and in the EU? It would have to accept the Euro, as it would not be allowed to keep the pound or mint its own pennies (have its own currency) ? It would also have to accept the 4 ‘freedoms’ of the EU, to which it has not much been exposed until now, as it was protected by being part of GB (which had special deals, resisted in some areas, etc.) The benevolence and largesse of the EU towards Scotland will not ever now resemble what was done for S. Ireland in the past. OK, that is how things stand now but rapid change is in the cards.

Posted by: Noirette | Jun 30 2016 15:39 utc | 71

@Piotr Starikow ciekawie

Posted by: ProPeace | Jun 30 2016 16:10 utc | 72

@ Noirette Yes, but now without the US-UK "specialrelationship" tramping it EU can reform into much better organization.

Good point about the immigration "issue" - note that those who are the most aggressive against the refugees do want to hear about the true reason why many of them come to Europe, i.e. that the UK has almost destroyed their homelands...

Posted by: ProPeace | Jun 30 2016 16:14 utc | 73

Now, the state of British politics has been reduced to complete chaos. I liken it to Syria, but without the shooting. Everybody attacking everyone else.

Johnson was undercut this morning by Michael Gove, who decided to launch a candidature for the leadership of the Tory party (and thus prime minister). As a result Johnson withdrew. Leaving Gove as the Brexit candidate. But he is unelectable, as a rather unpleasant right-wing ideologue. That means Theresa May will get it. But she is pro-Remain. And otherwise a reasonable person. It'll be interesting to have a woman PM again. However I discovered today that she is a Type 1 diabetic, and has to inject four times a day. That's great, isn't it, the person with the finger on the nuclear button could fall into a diabetic coma at any moment.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jun 30 2016 16:53 utc | 74

PS. I exaggerated a bit, when I said May was a reasonable person. She is pushing through the law on internet surveillance. However she is more rational than some of the other Tories.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jun 30 2016 17:00 utc | 75

@74 @75 lg, 'However she is more rational than some of the other Tories.'

That would be, in your book, because 'she is pro-Remain' right?

@71 Noirette @73 pp

I certainly agree with your assessment of Britain, both Glen Ford and Nefta Freeman have a bit to add there, but the EU is the 'totalitarian future'. A pox on them both.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 30 2016 22:24 utc | 76

@68 somebody

Yes, I saw that and was going to post the link myself if now one else had. I agree with you on Mark Blyth, just starting Great Transformations, a follow-on to Karl Polyani's book of similar but singular name. Apparently his most recent work of popular acclaim is Austerity: the history of a dangerous idea. I'd never heard of him prior to post by Bryce Wellington of the link to the cut from the video. Thank you BW, wherever you are.

Posted by: jfl | Jul 1 2016 1:24 utc | 77

Meanwhile, when asked about Boris Johnson on his recent visit to the UK, Donald Trump replied "Who's Boris?".

But then again, he was only there on business...
Posted by: ralphieboy | Jun 28, 2016 5:53:03 PM | 19

In the hindsight, Trump was actually astute.


Would Scotland be better of in EU? First, a distance from Glasgow to London is 550 km, and to Brussels, 800 km, not a huge difference. Arbitrary in comprehensive rules can come from either place. If anything, parliamentary supremacy in London makes the English rule more unpredictable and arbitrary. Second, to a Scottish nationalism the primary goal is to liberate the land of bonny lassies and deep lochs from the English yoke, and personal goal of Nicole Sturgeon is to be a new, improved version of Robert Bruce. Third, the sentiments on economy and other non-symbolic issues are quite different in Scotland (SNP is quite leftist) than in Tory dominated England, fourth. But if you want independent Scotland, you need to motivate why now, and you need to explain how the country of five million inhabitants will manage in the wide world. Joining a block helps, and EU is a better fit than Shanghai organization (9000 km to Shanghai, this is a huge difference). Same in ANZUS and NAFTA.


@Piotr Starikow ciekawie
Posted by: ProPeace | Jun 30, 2016 12:10:37 PM | 72

Both Starikow and the guy who lovingly translated him to Polish are not so interesting. As far as understand them, one should preserve national (or imperial) identities, have balanced budgets and trade on the basis of barter, thus obviating any need for international banking. Since I was born long time ago and far away, I actually lived under a system that was pretty close to that. The good news is that this is not hell. But it is not heaven either. More complex trade patterns work much better with some sort of common currency. Thus soon after Lydians invented coins, the idea was quickly adopted by Greeks and Phoenicians and the rest was, as they say, history. And if you can create currency "from air", at least you do not need to abuse slaves in the mines of precious metals (the initial model).

Of course, creating the currency ex nihilo has a disconcerting aspect: (a) it has to be controlled to be worth something (b) the controllers intersperse proper stinginess with bouts of generosity like bailing out banks that gives rise to the suspicion that this is a "gigantic fraud". (In the hands of Jews, no less.) It is actually hard to understand how the creators of currency work except in simple situations that we have discussed recently: Tobruk central bank was promised some money from Benghazi central bank but much less than they expected, so they settled the difference by ordering to be printed in Russia. Then they negotiated mutual recognition of two versions of Libyan currency.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jul 1 2016 1:55 utc | 78

re 76

That would be, in your book, because 'she is pro-Remain' right?

Have you bothered looking at the Brexit leadership?

Posted by: Laguerre | Jul 1 2016 10:56 utc | 79

Brexit: the English and Welsh Enlightenment, good summary of the actual lay of the land concerning Brexit.

Posted by: jfl | Jul 3 2016 3:02 utc | 80

The comments to this entry are closed.