Not since Chicken Little has anyone — let alone a newspaper — gone into a panic such as has overcome the Financial Times at the prospect of Britain leaving Europe. Its latest geshrai is a call for the Mother of Parliaments to step in to delay the departure from Europe now set for October 31 and thus “save the UK” from Boris Johnson’s “no-deal Brexit folly.”

What does one figure the EU Mandarins are going to say when they read the pink paper this morning? We figure they’re going to say, “Hmmm, we were thinking of giving ground on some of our most obnoxious points. If an institution like the FT wants Parliament to stop Brexit, though, what’s the point? Maybe we don’t have to be reasonable. We can just wait.”

The FT fears — that’s its raison d’etre, to fear — that a no-deal Brexit has become “the default option.” Says the FT: “The government is preparing for it, and making the civil service do the same. Indeed, its unrealistic attitude towards reworking Britain’s withdrawal deal with Brussels makes the dash for no-deal appear less like a negotiating tactic and more like Downing Street’s preferred plan.”

The FT reckons this is a horrible betrayal by Mr. Johnson, who insisted during his quest to lead the Conservative Party — and thus become premier — that the chances of the UK escaping the EU without an agreement were a “million to one.” Now it fears Britain “is careering towards the precipice, with dire implications for its economy, security, and the union of nations it comprises.”

A “calamity,” in short. On the one hand, the FT argues that “to speak of the economic harm of a no-deal Brexit is not to reprise what the Leave campaign in 2016 falsely decried as ‘Project Fear.’” Yet that’s precisely what it is. The FT notes today that “nearly all reputable forecasters agree Brexit will damage Britain’s economy.” That’s just what we heard on the eve of the 2016 referendum.

The FT admits it wants a “second chance” at the Brexit decision. It claims a second chance is becoming “imperative.” It ends by deriding Mr. Johnson as an “unelected prime minister” — apparently because he was elevated by the party after Theresa May collapsed. The FT forgot that it was one of those “unelected” prime ministers who led Britain to victory in World War II. Another of those million to one shots.