‘Deal or No deal’, Prime Minister David Cameron comes back to the UK with his ‘thin gruel’ EU deal for the people to make a decision, the fundamental issue of control of the UK borders wasn’t even on the table, with Europe plunging towards war, and the military urging people to arm themselves, how is continued membership of the EU, the ‘best of both worlds’?

Dear All

When Prime Minister David Cameron decided to go to Europe and declare he would get a better deal for Britain, I thought, and I still do, what a waste of time.

What do people in the UK?

The people of the UK want control of our borders and the ability to regulate and decide who comes to the UK and in what numbers.

Are we getting that?

The answer is no, at present David Cameron is declaring that the ‘deal he has managed to get is the ‘best of both worlds’, this is lifted straight out of the Better Together Campaign for 2014.

And what he has got isn’t the ‘best of both worlds’ far from it, anti EU critics have described his deal in varying forms, Boris Johnson says it is “making the best out of a bad job". Although I don’t tend to agree with Johnson, he on this occasion has got it right.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, another Conservative said of the deal that Cameron had just two week to salvage his reputation, and liken the deal to ‘thin gruel’.

The mission to get a better deal for the UK has ended in failure, with ‘war clouds’ hanging over Europe, it is hardly likely that staying in Europe represents the ‘best of both worlds’, especially with the growth of the far right, and the impending violence that will sweep the continent. It isn’t just the threat of Islamic terrorists that the authorities will have to deal with, but the growth of ‘domestic terrorism’.

You see, a lot of people are going to end up, Angela Merkel has lost control of the situation, people aren’t willing to listen to her; the public mood has turned not just against the migrants but also against her.

Merkel has recently been outed as trying to dictate what the German media and people can say as free speech regarding the migrant crisis.

Why?

Because she doesn’t want the full extent of the criminality to be known and lose what control of the political agenda she has left. Merkel still wants other countries to take migrants, I would say that people will follow the Polish view and come out as a firm No!

At home, David Cameron is said to be facing his own backlash, as former defence secretary Liam Fox also predicted that as many as five cabinet ministers could campaign for a ‘Brexit’, which might also rise as Europe further sinks.

I came across something yesterday online, in Paris, the Police torn down a migrant camp in the city on a disused railway line in the city.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3429605/French-police-remove-350-Romani-gypsies-shanty-town-sprung-central-Paris-summer-continued-spread.html

Europe cannot cope with the current problems, and the problems of numbers will continue to grow, there is a lack of direction and political will, however the mood political in France has changed since the killings in Paris.

The French are becoming more hardline in their tactics, with a zero tolerance towards dissent.

 As to the deal by the EU and David Cameron, here is what it is in draft form.

Migrant benefits: Britain will be allowed an ‘emergency brake’ to limit in-work benefits paid to EU migrants in the UK for up to four years.

Child benefit: David Cameron has failed to win his original demand for a ban on EU migrants in Britain receiving child benefit payments if their children still live abroad.

Opt-out from ever-closer union: Britain didn’t get a complete opt-out from the EU principle of ‘ever-closer union’.

Treaty change: The draft agreement between the 28 member states is described as “legally-binding decision” but there is only a commitment to discuss the “possible” inclusion of some of the changes.

Sham marriages: In a surprise inclusion, the Prime Minister has won an agreement for a crackdown on ‘marriages of convenience’ used by non-EU nationals to abuse the EU’s freedom of movement rules.

Foreign criminals: The EU has signalled it is ready to allow member states a greater ability to prevent foreign criminals or those that present a security threat from using freedom of movement rules to move around the bloc.

EU rules: If powers are held in Brussels but are not being used, the EU will look at returning those powers to national parliaments.

‘Red card’ on Brussels legislation: National parliaments will be able to group together to block new EU laws if they represent more than 55 per cent of member states.

David Cameron got something, but a lot of the above problems could have been solved if he had gotten control of our border back, he didn’t and that means his ‘tacked measures’ don’t appeal, it is said that he has sent out his Ministers to sell this to the public.

I would say that his deal falls far short from what he would have wanted to deliver, I don’t blame him, he can’t change Europe and that is the nub of the problem, he may get support here and there on an issue but he can’t get enough.

So, what is the ‘best of both worlds’ regarding the United Kingdom and its EU membership, well it could be as people look at what is happening in Europe to be better off out of the European Union although.

There is simply no political will to change by the political elite, and with possible ‘civil war’ coming, who wants to stick around for that bunny.

http://speisa.com/modules/articles/index.php/item.2323/europe-on-the-verge-of-civil-war-swiss-army-chief-s-urgent-warning.html

It seems that Lieutenant-General André Blattmann has issued a warning to the Swiss people that society is dangerously close to collapse and advised those not already armed as part of the Swiss Army reserve to take steps to arm themselves.

As I keep saying sooner or later, everyone comes round to the George Laird view; I am just ahead of the curve.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University