Brexit: Shakespeare Was Dead Right About Lawyers…

Dan Kitwood/Getty
“Kill all the lawyers.”

This has got to be my favourite line from Shakespeare – especially after the British High Court’s decision on the EU Referendum whereby a trio of left-leaning activist judges were able to overturn the democratic will of 17.4 million people by ruling: “No. That thing you all voted for. You can’t have it because obscure technical detail…”

Some cynics saw this coming a mile off, among them the redoubtable Peter Hitchens.

Before the referendum he correctly predicted what he now calls “the greatest constitutional crisis since the Abdication of Edward VIII.”

If – as I think we will – we vote to leave the EU on June 23, a democratically elected Parliament, which wants to stay, will confront a force as great as itself – a national vote, equally democratic, which wants to quit. Are we about to find out what actually happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?’

I’m not as pessimistic as Peter Hitchens, partly because no one ever could be, and partly because I don’t want to give succour to the enemy.

Face it, we Brexiteers have enjoyed more than four deliriously happy months bathing in bitter Remainer tears, feeding on their sorrow like misery-sucking vampires, relishing every moment of their denials, their tantrums, their toys-cast-from-prams. So it’s only natural that with the roles temporarily reversed, the Remaintards should seize their brief moment in the sun and begin crowing as if somehow those three lefty ponces in ermine (or whatever it is that left-wing High Court Judges wear: thongs? Gimp suits?) were now going to stop us exiting the EU.

What’s very important, though, in these circumstances is for us not to show we’re upset, like the Remaintards have been doing since June 24. As I delicately put it on Twitter yesterday, they’re already beating themselves off pretty frenziedly as it is – and the very last thing we should do is give them any more masturbatory material.

Anyway, I interrupted myself: the real purpose of this piece was to use a topical news item about Brexit as an excuse to reiterate how much I loathe and detest lawyers.

Some of them, it’s true, are my best friends – but that’s pretty inevitable if you’re university educated: of course lots of your contemporaries will inevitably have gone to the dark side. But doesn’t mean that I don’t view their profession in much the way I view the giant orange slugs that destroy my vegetable patch or the evil squirrels which insinuate their way into my fruit cage and eat my strawberries or the fungal infections I sometimes get between my toes or the swollen mite with a mauve body and purple legs I once found clinging to my left testicle in a bucket shower in the Western Sudan in 1984. And at least with a bit of soap and gentle easing I got rid of the mite; at least I can squash the slugs and decapitate the squirrels in my squirrel trap. Lawyers on the other hand just won’t go away…

Which is as good a way as any of introducing my latest Breitbart podcast with this week’s guest Gary Bell.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

New York Times Tries to Pin ‘Violence’ on Brexit Campaign

Let’s examine its argument in more detail, starting with the headline. I’ve put the New York Times’s words in bold; my comments appear below.

Britain Asks if Tone of ‘Brexit’ Campaign Made Violence Inevitable

New York Times Journalist States that Tone of ‘Brexit’ Campaign Made Violence Inevitable, taking lead from left-leaning Remain activists and commentators whose biased opinions he cherry-picks to support his threadbare thesis.

On the specific subject of ‘Tone’ see also: ‘Tone’ – the Liberal-Left’s codeword for ‘I hate free speech’

As the shock of the brutal murder of a young member of Parliament began to subside on Friday, there was a growing sense in Britain that something ominous had been unleashed in the country.

Whence grew this ‘growing sense’? The only people actually promulgating this line are left-leaning, pro-Remain activists who’ve seen a Rahm-Emanuel-style opportunity in the crisis of a mother-of-two’s senseless, brutal murder. Most normal people would much prefer it if Britain’s democratic future were debated on more relevant issues.

The increasingly ugly anti-immigrant tone to the campaign 

This is not a fact but a left-wing propaganda trope. Sure there have been odd lapses of taste, notably the somewhat crass Breaking Point poster. But for most of this referendum campaign the nastiness has been confined to the Remain side – whose Project Fear has been characterised by mendacity, ad hominems, snobbery and bullying. Leave, on the other hand, have sought to keep their tone as upbeat and positive as possible; as have UKIP and Nigel Farage. This is because they have been alive to the possibility that their respectable position on controlled immigration will inevitably be misrepresented by the left as xenophobia and racism. So what Erlanger is doing here isn’t journalism but propaganda: stating as fact something he might wish to be so but for which he can demonstrate little evidence other than hearsay from parti-pris commenters.

Coupled with the violence of English fans at the European soccer championships…

The high-water mark of English football violence was thirty years ago. Either Erlanger doesn’t know this – in which case why he is commenting on UK affairs? – or he is being deliberately misleading.

…has left many here feeling that the boundaries of acceptable behavior are breaking down.

“Many”? See above and below.

“What we are just seeing generally is a very disturbing shift in British politics,” said Simon Tilford, the deputy director of the Center for European Reform, which favors British membership. “It is quite upsetting to me what is happening.”

“As a pro-EU activist I will say anything to smear the other side.”

With next Thursday’s vote on the referendum only days away, campaigning was suspended as a gesture of mourning and respect for the victim, Jo Cox, 41, a rising star in the opposition Labour Party who, not coincidentally, was a strong backer of Britain’s remaining inside the bloc.

That “not coincidentally” is flat-out in contempt of court. You are ascribing motives to the killer which have yet to be established in a court of law. Also, you are trying to pin the murder on the entire Brexit cause. Low – really low.

While it is still too early to say how the attack will change the dynamics of the campaign, it has unquestionably shifted the focus from the growing momentum of those in favor of leaving to the anti-immigrant tactics they have employed as the vote has drawn closer.

No. The Leave campaign is not “anti-immigrant”: it has simply argued for controlled migration, which is something else entirely.

The suspect arrested in the killing, Thomas Mair, 52, has a history of mental illness.

Wow. An actual sentence stating the truth. But let’s wait for the inevitable “but”, shall we?

But he was also reported to have been in contact with far-right groups in the United States and Britain, and to have said, “Britain first!” several times as he attacked Ms. Cox. Britain First, a far-right nationalist group, denied any links with Mr. Mair, but a United States civil rights group said he had been associated with an American neo-Nazi organization called the National Alliance.

As Peter Hitchens notes in this must-read Mail piece, “disturbed people do sometimes embrace the wilder political and religious creeds. But it is their mental illness, not these barely understood ‘opinions’, that makes them capable of the dreadful act of killing – an act which separates them from the rest of humanity.” Around 30 million people – half Britain’s population – want to vote Leave. The idea, as Erlanger and others are hinting, that they might have anything remotely in common with this mentally ill man or his warped political associations is disgusting.

Read the rest at Breitbart.