UK Column reports they consider Brexit's 'aim was to divide. The outcome was irrelevant'.

Going on to add that it's a distraction from what really matters, i.e. 'one world governance' The accusation, Boris and like, complicit in the process. Controlled. While 'sidelining UKIP'.

Particularly with the result going the way of 'out', fraudulently or otherwise, (I) don't – yet – believe the clutches of EU type superimposed mega-corp-ing will be significantly shifted by this vote.

Part of the process and certainly a domino in the right direction, but in of itself..?

A somewhat self-imposed hit. Bit like Ali on the ropes in that famous fight, bang-bang-bang – they believing they have more than enough 'knock out' when needed.

Unstoppable global financials breaking-out in the backdrop, central controllers are attempting to steer. Sometimes, this new world lot cannot bring the ordering they'd like. In many ways, they cannot. Knowing periods, of more let-go. Offices full of geeks, analysing analytics; for cold, damp executives, bowing to their angels of death.

For a short-while they accept this less control will involve, non-Globalist/s – those not ruling the UK-City of London-US alliance – battling for second division control in these opportunities and realms of less cetralised-stabilty.

Russia and China baying toward their nuclear-pushing, counter alliance, takeover. (This isn't to suggest firm lines. And Globalists may have secret technology to – excuse the use/term – to 'trump' everyone into a deal, under their final controlling dreams, once rockets are let off). Or so they believe...

But God… Oh. BUT God...

Overall Bexit succeeded for good, albeit – was/is – a stage-managed charade. Actors and a plot appear on the google-boxes to weave their wicked – MUST BE STOPPED – madness.

'Leave' overturned in essence/ignored is in its main aim, a set up for a West-driven world-wide 'financial readjustment'.

And now the so-thought, battles begin, with a petition to have the UK Govt. overturn the result, presumably re-ballot. Division – no joy. For what?:

To have us fighting online and the streets. In the UK, not since the industrial revolution. This is what it's all about, and Mike/UKColumn rightly spark up.

Two barriers; free-ish-speech and national borders.

My contention, conviction – is Donald T and the Brexit process, is being used by God to bring judgement.

Good judgement.

The ever-the-quote, 'all that's needed… is for… good men… to do…' is the rock. We need somewhere to stand. Together, but for such cynics and haters who want no convergence, only destruction.

And Jesus is The rock, this is built on.

Disregard there's a living and loving God but there's a social dynamic that is the ground for hope. The church was/is supposed to be a place where those divided have a space to speak.

(Syria before it completely collapsed, early in the invasion, modelled this. The testimony by Mother Agnes Mariam from those days, spelt this out).

Donald T, for example, isn't a judgement because of what he says. Not God speaking, through his ideas etc in themselves, (necessarily/at all). It's what they do – to... 'us'. In us.

Especially the haters of...

For “Don's alright-ers” – Donald should, with any wits about us, say something disagreeable, let alone the considerable likelihood he will bitterly disappoint.

For those on 'that side' there are voices, sadly shut-out the 'alt. right' discourse (note; this has now become the new pop. currency label – what happened to Libertarian?).

While at it/state the obv: The Right have no more to do with Libertarianism than Anarchy.Although assumptions seem otherwise. The 'Right' are not for any real libertarian ideals but do like to co-opt the rhetoric into their establishment darkness.

But this m'plea; Can we talk about our assumptions and standpoints? 'With' those who differ? Not always 'about' and never hearing direct?

Our complacency and lack of engagement with whichever is the 'other' lot is the problem.

Truthers online for instance, talking to… 'who?'

Note the decline in comments overall, the unnecessary belligerence and hostility, frustrations projected, spewing negativity and 'getting personal' with strangers behind a tag. Illuminati trash strat.

The ONE thing that is, the 'good men do nothing'? Remain unconnected through – “good word comes to mind” – less or no, 'praxis'.

(Theoria (thinking), poiesis (making), and praxis(doing))

Somewhow we need to be stirred up to come together, fearless in our passionate perspectives. But what happens? We camp up and divide apart.

Theoretical unity in diversity is an illusion. God wants those with platforms to welcome those opposing.

But this is threatening. This requires stopping addressing those 'out there' and talking to those in the midst. But not in the 'party'.

Being an utterly rejected Christian (inc. by many Christians) makes this easier for me. Being wildly unpopular and a bit of a public fool at times/when intoxicated – all a doddle. Handling squabbles and scathing attacks is a breeze.

I heard 'Milo' say that he has no idea what 'being offended' feels like. Join the club.

Concluding:

When Joseph suffered attempted murder by his brothers he eventually reconciled himself to them and this:

'You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.'

So was the outcome irrelevant and the referendum vote? No it's 'good to accomplish' some genuine disconcertion with those, and a common enemy. Neighbours. And masses of em.

And of course, 'good to accomplish' in what it purported to be Biblically about, depends on our world-view and where/if there's a 'god' and what this – one – is all about?

A human analogy? Suppose unbeknown to the rogues running things a group of mutineer-ing 'patriots for the people' were conspiring to overturn the expected outcomes. What if?

God has only one word and it certainly isn't “in” -or- “out” the EU, it's a question that requires his gracious judgement to inspire answers. Donald and the many calling out one way or other during this referendum? They are mirrors. Means for us to see us.

“Who you talking to?” is more than a Travis Bickle line. It's the question, all comment-ers and commentators, for a start, should ask.

Mike at UK Column, Mark at truthscoop: Who to, why and what's our communication achieving?

The judgement is we need Donald and Brexit to ask to be provoked in asking ourselves. Are we talking to those across the fence or only our mates and some imaginary listening, boss-types?

Jesus has it, (always):

If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that?