If undecided then vote out as an out vote is a sure way of getting rid of Cameron and Osborne this summer. Happy days could be here within a month!

If unsure then the logicalconclussion is to vote out.

The EU doesnt want us to leave, so if this out vote isn't beneficial we can always vote to go back in, and they would welcome us with open wallets, we won't get the out vote anytime again in my lifetime.

The region stretching from the NW coast of Africa right across to Turkey, Syria (and possibly Iran) is on the verge of being blown wide open. The people who have invested so much time, effort and resources in this plan aren't going to back out now. When the hammer fully drops (and I reckon this is no more than 18 months down the line - at most) these poor people are going to be running for their very lives.

I don't care how much of a humanitarian you claim you are - the thought of MILLIONS of folk streaming across EU borders in search of the first safe haven which will take them must give you cause for concern.

One thing is for sure - when the hits the fan you can bet anyone who votes to stay will be screaming bloody murder and insistent he was always in favor of Brexit. A bit like those millions of people who voted Tory and now deny doing so.

I wouldn't mind so much if it weren't for the fact that the Owners of this world, via their acolytes (Samuel P. Huntingdon, Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski etc. etc.), tell you decades in advance what their plans are.

People who pooh-pooh this stuff would do well to read [url=https://www.amazon.co.uk/Clash-Civilizations-Remaking-World-Order/dp/074323149XClash of Civilizations And The Remaking of World Order[/url, [url=https://www.amazon.co.uk/Grand-Chessboard-American-Geostrategic-Imperatives/dp/0465027261/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1464610617&sr=1-1&keywords=the+grand+chessboardThe Grand Chessboard And The Remaking of World Order[/url, [url=https://www.amazon.co.uk/Strategic-Vision-America-Crisis-Global-ebook/dp/B006ZOYM9K?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bcStrategic Vision: America And The Crisis of Global Power[/url, [url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/World-Order-Reflections-Character-Nations/dp/0141979003/ref=la_B00MC1YV4G_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1464610737&sr=1-1World Order - Reflections On The Character of Nations And The Course Of History[/url etc. etc.

You'd think the number of times the phrase "World Order" appears in the titles of just four books would be a dead giveaway.

So it's not like you people weren't given advance warning. These guys make plans and they stick to them.

Get rid of Cameron & Osborne and end up with Johnson as PM, a cabinet reinforced with brexiters and fixated on immigration, with no effective opposition? No thanks.

What exactly do you mean by a statement like that?

I find your posts very interesting, i'm undecided but perhaps open minded (perhaps is on purpose) but those sort of statements surely make you look a little arrogant, no?

I mean, where ultimately does that leave "us people"?

It could force a GE. As to opposition I thought Corbyn was the answer to most people's dreams on here?

It could force a GE. As to opposition I thought Corbyn was the answer to most people's dreams on here?

The plan (& that's what it is documented as) by the United Nations is to effectively force migration of peoples into the EU. Sovereignty is a myth. knock yourself out www.crossroad.to/articles2/006/migration-un.htm

The plan (& that's what it is documented as) by the United Nations is to effectively force migration of peoples into the EU. Sovereignty is a myth. knock yourself out www.crossroad.to/articles2/006/migration-un.htm

The guys I've mentioned (along with a host of others) are globalists. Whilst they wrap themselves in the flag and hum the national anthem on camera this is nothing more than political pragmatism. A means to an end. These people have no loyalties to any current state or government and the only ideology they respect is the one whereby the weak are dominated by the strong.

The fact that Kissinger, Brzezinski, Richard Pipes etc. all served in senior positions under successive American presidents shouldn't blind people to the fact that they have about as much in common with Democracy and what are perceived to be American "values" as Kim Jong-Un. Kissinger is representative of the German aristocratic class (circa Bismark) and undoubtedly a fascist. Both Brzezinski & Pipes are old-school Tsarists who fled the Bolsheviks and have made it their mission in life to return Russia to what is was under the Tsar.

Given their vested interests they should never have been allowed within the same postcode as Washington - and yet there they have sat for the past fifty years espousing policies which are clearly not in America's best interests. This tells us an awful lot about what politics actually is as opposed to what it is perceived to be.

You have to look at this issue from the perspective of those who Kissinger and company represent - big business. The only entities on the planet which have the resources and muscle to stop them from turning everyone into a Chinese sweatshop employee are governments. Which is why they are doing everything in their power to bring them to their knees.

People forget that back in the days of antiquity one of the reasons folk banded together to form city states was protection. Laws were codified so that the little guy had at least some chance of standing up to the excesses of power.



It's less arrogance than sheer bloody frustration. Eventually you just get fed up with people's inability to see something which is literally staring them in the face (and on the EU question it's been laid down in print for decades!). After years of banging my head against a brick wall I've arrived at a valuable conclusion:

[iPeople don't use facts to shape their understanding of how the world works. They use their understanding of how the world works to shape their facts. [/i

Whenever I say to people,[i "Look, WE are responsible for the waves of terrified immigrants flooding into Europe. WE are behind ISIS, Daesh (whatever ...)."[/i they scratch their heads and say, [i"Why would we do such a crazy thing when it will only harm us?"[/i

The mistake is in thinking the likes of Cameron, Blair etc. equate their interests with ours when anyone can see this isn't the case. When David Cameron steps down as PM he'll receive a pat on the head from his sponsors, a big fat thankyou cheque plus a healthy retainer and he won't give a damn that the country he's left behind is about to slide into the ocean.

As I've stated, almost the entire Mediterranean region is on the verge of falling into anarchy. Those nations we haven't already smashed up are teetering on the precipice. The strategy of creating tension by fomenting mass-migration is as old as the hills. But this current situation bears a striking resemblance to French Indo-China when the Americans forced 1,000,000 North Vietnamese to flee into the South. Within months the entire region was ablaze.



That depends on whether you want to take charge of your life or continue being a victim. And you WILL be a victim because the Kissingers of this world view the lot of us as expendable.

Take Brzezinski and the stuff he was writing back in the 60s and 70s. I haven't got the exact passage to hand (it's been a while since I could stomach wading through his bile) but he basically says ...

[i"People have too much spare time on their hands. With the threat of Soviet Russia diminishing we are going to have to reduce job security, wages etc., dramatically increase the number of distractions or we are going to have major problems retaining control". [/i

And ZB was by no means the only person saying the above. Noam Chomsky goes into great detail on this issue, BTW.

As for the current state of the EU and the issues which have lead to the Brexit question - I see this as one small component of a much bigger strategy which has been on the table certainly as far back as the Bolshevik revolution. I have a couple of brick-thick political journals which were written circa 1914 by some of the world's most famous statesmen and despite one or two differences it's amazing how similar the language and arguments are.

Wrong again. Churchill saw Britain being at the heart of it.

Ey up! Looks like the big boys are [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36446023weighing in[/url.

What is your source for that assertion? Churchill's September 1946 speech on the subject ended:

"The first step is to form a Council of Europe.

.....

.....

In all this urgent work, France and Germany must take the lead together.

Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America, and I trust a Soviet Russia - for then indeed all would be well - must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine."

Crapping themselves in case their bosses in the U.S. make them move to boring Frankfurt where they won't understand the language!

Testing the influence of Count Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi on the EU is very simple:

Compare what [iwas[/i proposed in the "Kalergi Plan" with what [iis[/i taking place right now.

As for Churchill ... he'd most likely be a supporter.

The main argument from the remain side seems to be 'yeah we know the EU is sh*t and it's only going to get worse but do you really want to risk a step into the unknown?'

The thought of Boris and Micheal ending up in charge of Britain scares the life out of me , however the hypocrisy being displayed by the ' in ' campaign is quite ridiculous

Short term pain for long term gain for me , out

What long term gain would that be, precisely?

I'll be voting to stay in as I am not any of the following:

1. Ill-informed
2. Xenophobic
3. Stupid
4. A conspiracy fruitcake
5. All of the above

Plus Brexiters make me embarrassed to be British.

I believe we will have no problems trading with the world including the EU after initially seeing short term issues

All entitled to an opinion I would hope , or perhaps not

Do you think the EU is a true democracy and are you happy with the unelected bureaucrats?

1. Why are all brexiters ill informed?
2. I love immigration and those voting to exit purely based on immigration also embarrass me.
3. There are some extremely bright brexiters and to call them all stupid does yourself a disservice
4. There are some i won't disagree

Giving future generations the right to self determination?

Self-determination is ALWAYS the right choice but I'm afraid both sides are deluding themselves here. Just look at the nations which have attempted to pursue a path of true self-determination over the last few decades (Iraq, Iran, Yugoslavia etc.) - not a pretty sight, is it?

From the beginning this vote has almost exclusively been about personalities rather than tangible policies. Which tells me it's a contrived wedge-issue specifically designed to make people think they really do have a say in the political process.

Basically, there's something big in the pipeline. Cameron has taken his full body burden of radioactivity and so it's time to bring in someone fresh whilst making sure that the public thinks it was their decision all along.

I've said it before but no decision which is as important as mainstream media currently emphasizes would ever be left to the whims of the unwashed masses.

Just look at some of the posts above. I wouldn't trust most of these morons to eat with a fork and not stab themselves in the eye. And now you wish to put DEMOCRACY itself in their hands?

And you instill confidence with your crazy theories ?