The Judge RANTS!
Date: 08/11/16
Divided We Stand?
I'm pretty sure that nothing will actually come of this proposal (although it's a classy bit of political trolling on the part of M. Goerens, whom the Daily Hitler will no doubt now refer to as 'Goering'), but the reaction of the opportunistic arseholes behind 'Brexit' illustrates the zenith of their mono-cellular unreason.
One Jayne Adye, described as 'chairman' (none of that pussying unisex nonsense here! This is Britain in 1935, I'll have you know!) of an organisation calling itself Get Britain Out ranted:
"This is an outrage."
Why's that, sweetie?
"The EU is now attempting to divide the great British public..."
Note that 'great British public'; it's a rhetorical device only ever used by demagogues and charlatans. And who, exactly, divided them in the first place? Perhaps the unhinged xenophobes who insisted on that fucking stupid referendum in the first place, forcing a weak Prime Minister into promising one?
"...at the exact moment we need unity."
And we can all see what you mean by 'unity', can't we m'dear? Everyone must be in agreement with your unhinged prejudices, otherwise they're 'enemies of the people', and a hundred thousand spivs and knuckle-draggers will march on their place of work. Remind us again: who demanded the referendum?
"17.4 million people voted to leave the EU...
Yes, they did. 17.4 million people voted for a unicorn with a golden coat, seemingly heedless of the very real likelihood that they'll end up with a donkey in a Pac-A-Mac. This isn't a game show called Brexit Factor, and people shouldn't have voted as if it were; larger numbers do not necessarily equate to higher levels of intelligence.
"It is totally unacceptable for certain citizens in the UK..."
'Certain citizens' is, of course, code for 'filthy rotten traitorous scum, and probably 'foreign' as well'. But go on dearie, do:
"...to subject themselves to laws which are created by politicians who are not accountable [to] the British people."
So unlike our own dear Westminster then, where the unelected element of the legislature outnumbers the elected part by 25 per cent (with the gap about to be deliberately widened in both directions), and where three quarters of the elected part effectively have jobs for life because their constituencies have hardly changed parties since Eden (Anthony, not Garden, although some areas would fit that as well).
Besides which, if people choose to avail themselves of any arrangement such as that suggested by M. Goerens, then why do you want to stop them? Is it arrogance, ignorance, bile or any combination thereof?
And finally, Fester:
"Discriminating against people based on their political views shows there are no depth the EU will not sink to."
In what way would it be discriminating, dahling? There would be nothing - nothing at all - which would stop the Leavites from applying for that dispensation as well. You know, like your Glorious Idol Mr. Farrago's kids have got (whisper it) German passports, so that they would still be able to go around the EU unhindered; an opportunity which you, Jayne Adye, and your fellow residents of Trumpton East wish to deny to everyone else's children forever.
The reaction by these gauleiters of guff to an eminently reasonable proposal to allow those of us who do not wish to be deprived of our valuable rights by a bunch of strident nativists, exceptionalists and the wilfully pig-ignorant to maintain them - as is our right - speaks far more of the disordered nature of their thinking than it does of anything which even begins to approach the reasonable. Unfortunately, the sheer volume of their screeching and yapping has drowned any possibility of a rational discussion. The decibels are all, and the rest of us are being intimidated into silence.
