Brexit discussion thread II

An Ciarraioch

A Little Pony wrote: »

The DUP if it wanted could pull the plug on HM Government tomorrow, it is not in the interests for Theresa May or the Conservative Party to get on the wrong side of the DUP. It would immediately set up a general election for next year. The Tories could not function as it is without the DUP deal right now, they are as weak as it is, without the DUP they will be finished as far as this government is concerned.

So with respect this Irish minister, it's kind of irrelevant what he is saying because politically it's not in the Tories interests to "shy" away from the DUP on this issue.

But is it in the DUP's interest to push for the hardest possible Brexit - ironically, the softer the Border, the more secure NI's position in the Union becomes, while conversely, the opposite alienates Catholics, Alliance voters and Green supporters.

A Little Pony

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

The DUP if it wanted could pull the plug on HM Government tomorrow, it is not in the interests for Theresa May or the Conservative Party to get on the wrong side of the DUP. It would immediately set up a general election for next year. The Tories could not function as it is without the DUP deal right now, they are as weak as it is, without the DUP they will be finished as far as this government is concerned.

So with respect this Irish minister, it's kind of irrelevant what he is saying because politically it's not in the Tories interests to "shy" away from the DUP on this issue.

But is it in the DUP's interest to push for the hardest possible Brexit - ironically, the softer the Border, the more secure NI's position in the Union becomes, while conversely, the opposite alienates Catholics, Alliance voters and Green supporters.

They will have to accept it, NI is part of the UK, we go with the "deal" with the rest of the UK. Everyone in the UK had a vote on the issue and the majority decided to leave.

Chips Lovell

While the DUP certainly do have some sway over the Conservatives regarding Brexit arrangements, they by no means have them over a barrel. They can threaten to pull the plug, but if they ever do, the likely alternative is a Corbyn-led Labour government, which I doubt they'd find very palatable.

murphaph

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think the point is that the only way to ensure some measure of prosperity for northern Ireland is to do whatever is feasible to keep them in the EU, surely?

No, not surely. NI is an integral part of the UK economy. Severing it in the Irish sea will clearly severely damage it.

I don't care too much about the prosperity of Northern Ireland though and am much more interested in our prosperity and I believe a sea border damages us less. NI would have to suck it up and refocus on the EU market and the markets the EU allows them preferential access to.

Sam Russell

steddyeddy wrote: »

It also brings to mind the problem of the common travel area. How will Britain limit immigration will having free movement from Dublin to Belfast in place?

The CTA is only relevant to citizens of Ireland and those of the UK. It has no relevance to anyone else.

FrancieBrady

murphaph wrote: »

No, not surely. NI is an integral part of the UK economy. Severing it in the Irish sea will clearly severely damage it.

I don't care too much about the prosperity of Northern Ireland though and am much more interested in our prosperity and I believe a sea border damages us less. NI would have to suck it up and refocus on the EU market and the markets the EU allows them preferential access to.

Surely severing it from the EU is going to cause the greatest austerity/poverty.

It is all about damage limitation and avoidance of contagion after that.
I care about the whole island (our welfare's are inextricably linked, most definitely in the case of Brexit) and was never selfish about it.

Enzokk

Sam Russell wrote: »

The CTA is only relevant to citizens of Ireland and those of the UK. It has no relevance to anyone else.

But there is no passport checks when you travel from Dublin to the UK (as far as I remember) so while other people may have no right to use the CTA, who will stop them as no one should be checking who comes into the UK from Ireland?

First Up

Sam Russell wrote:

The CTA is only relevant to citizens of Ireland and those of the UK. It has no relevance to anyone else.

Not sure what you mean by relevant but within Ireland people of all nationalities can travel freely and unchecked. In theory it is illegal for someone with only a visa for ROI to go to the North but they would need to draw a lot of attention to themselves to get into trouble.

Once in NI they could then hop a ferry from Larne to Scotland without any paperwork so I wouldn't call that irrelevant.

demfad

blanch152 wrote: »

I answered that already.

You stated that nobody had referenced articles of the GFA that would be affected by Brexit. That statement was false. If you wanted me to link to articles of the GFA that YOU AGREED were affected by Brexit you should have said and would not have bothered replying.

There is nothing in Brexit that affects either of those provisions and those lawyers are scaremongering.

With respect I would take the legal opinions of the most prominent Senior Council in the ROI and the most prominent Queens Council in NI above yours.

I agree with their opinion that the GFA would need to be renegotiated. Here is some other areas of GFA where European Union membership is implied. Note in the opening statement of the GFA it is categorically implied:

AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF
THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND
AND
THE GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND

The British and Irish Governments:
Welcoming the strong commitment to the Agreement reached on 10th April 1998 by themselves and other participants in the multi-party talks and set out in Annex 1 to this Agreement (hereinafter "the Multi-Party Agreement");
Considering that the Multi-Party Agreement offers an opportunity for a new beginning in relationships within Northern Ireland, within the island of Ireland and between the peoples of these islands;
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the closeco-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Reaffirming their total commitment to the principles of democracy and non-violence which have been fundamental to the multi-party talks;
Reaffirming their commitment to the principles of partnership, equality and mutual respect andto the protection of civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights in their respective jurisdictions;
Have agreed as follows:



Here is Article 1 (v) of GFA:

(vi) recognise the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they may so choose, and accordingly confirm that their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both Governments and would not be affected by any future change in the status of Northern Ireland.


Here are some more articles:

31. Terms will be agreed between appropriate Assembly representatives and the Government of the United Kingdom to ensure effective co-ordination and input by Ministers to national policy-making, including on EU issues.


3. The Council to meet in different formats:
(i) in plenary format twice a year, with Northern Ireland representation led by the First Minister and Deputy First Minister and the Irish Government led by the Taoiseach;
(ii) in specific sectoral formats on a regular and frequent basis with each side represented by the appropriate Minister;
(iii) in an appropriate format to consider institutional or cross-sectoral matters
(including in relation to the EU) and to resolve disagreement.


17. The Council to consider the European Union dimension of relevant matters, including the implementation of EU policies and programmes and proposals under consideration in the EU framework. Arrangements to be made to ensure that the views of the Council are taken into account and represented appropriately at relevant EU meetings.


5. The BIC will exchange information, discuss, consult and use best endeavours to reach agreement on co-operation on matters of mutual interest within the competence of the relevant Administrations. Suitable issues for early discussion in the BIC could include transport links, agricultural issues, environmental issues, cultural issues, health issues, education issues and approaches to EU issues. Suitable arrangements to be made for practical co-operation on agreed policies.

demfad

Theresa May has finally come out and attacked Russia for the ongoing cyber war. The mention of "meddling in elections" doesn't sound like much but it is significant and she is well aware that this raises a few ??? What about EU referendum? Is something about to come out?
Also this is notable as the first de-facto rebuke to Trump who stated be believed Putin's version only a few days ago.

“Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea was the first time since the Second World War that one sovereign nation has forcibly taken territory from another in Europe.
“Since then, Russia has fomented conflict in the Donbass, repeatedly violated the national airspace of several European countries, and mounted a sustained campaign of cyber espionage and disruption.
“This has included meddling in elections, and hacking the Danish Ministry of Defence and the Bundestag, among many others.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-5080065/Theresa-May-tells-Vladimir-Putin-We-know-doing.html#ixzz4yPzRwgmF
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

As an aside Daily Mail have also discovered Putin bots were used in Brexit and it may have influenced the results!!!!:

Cynically mocking the warnings of the Remain campaign, these are the messages posted on the day of the Brexit referendum and seen by many thousands of people as the UK decided its future.
But what voters won’t have known is the posts, which may have influenced the result, came from Vladimir Putin’s so-called ‘troll factory’.
Made to appear to originate in the UK or EU countries, the posts have only now been traced to the secret St Petersburg operation exposed by The Mail on Sunday last week.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5073643/The-toxic-tweets-Putin-s-pro-Brexit-troll-factory.html#ixzz4yQ2RDGxY
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The leaked story on Don Jrs communications with Wikileaks are interesting because Nigel Farage (who is a person of interest in Robert Muellers Trump-Russia investigation) was potentially the physical go between to Julian Assange. Is something about to be revealed here?

And last but not least we have again the 'Professor' (Russian agent) who communicated with young Papadopoulus in Trumps national security team.

Last week Boris said there wasn't 'a sausage' of evidence of Russian interference in Brexit. It was also reported that Professor Mifsud had stated he had a meeting with BoJo about Brexit at a dinner Bojo was speaking at.
BoJo denied ever having met him:
Then Gavin Sheridan found this:



Now..is that Mifsud on the left or is it a sausage? Perhaps both?

A Little Pony

The Russians are here, hide under the bed! 

demfad wrote: »

blanch152 wrote: »

I answered that already.

You stated that nobody had referenced articles of the GFA that would be affected by Brexit. That statement was false. If you wanted me to link to articles of the GFA that YOU AGREED were affected by Brexit you should have said and would not have bothered replying.

There is nothing in Brexit that affects either of those provisions and those lawyers are scaremongering.

With respect I would take the legal opinions of the most prominent Senior Council in the ROI and the most prominent Queens Council in NI above yours.

I agree with their opinion that the GFA would need to be renegotiated. Here is some other areas of GFA where European Union membership is implied. Note in the opening statement of the GFA it is categorically implied:

AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF
THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND
AND
THE GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND

The British and Irish Governments:
Welcoming the strong commitment to the Agreement reached on 10th April 1998 by themselves and other participants in the multi-party talks and set out in Annex 1 to this Agreement (hereinafter "the Multi-Party Agreement");
Considering that the Multi-Party Agreement offers an opportunity for a new beginning in relationships within Northern Ireland, within the island of Ireland and between the peoples of these islands;
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the closeco-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Reaffirming their total commitment to the principles of democracy and non-violence which have been fundamental to the multi-party talks;
Reaffirming their commitment to the principles of partnership, equality and mutual respect andto the protection of civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights in their respective jurisdictions;
Have agreed as follows:



Here is Article 1 (v) of GFA:

(vi) recognise the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they may so choose, and accordingly confirm that their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both Governments and would not be affected by any future change in the status of Northern Ireland.


Here are some more articles:

31. Terms will be agreed between appropriate Assembly representatives and the Government of the United Kingdom to ensure effective co-ordination and input by Ministers to national policy-making, including on EU issues.


3. The Council to meet in different formats:
(i) in plenary format twice a year, with Northern Ireland representation led by the First Minister and Deputy First Minister and the Irish Government led by the Taoiseach;
(ii) in specific sectoral formats on a regular and frequent basis with each side represented by the appropriate Minister;
(iii) in an appropriate format to consider institutional or cross-sectoral matters
(including in relation to the EU) and to resolve disagreement.


17. The Council to consider the European Union dimension of relevant matters, including the implementation of EU policies and programmes and proposals under consideration in the EU framework. Arrangements to be made to ensure that the views of the Council are taken into account and represented appropriately at relevant EU meetings.


5. The BIC will exchange information, discuss, consult and use best endeavours to reach agreement on co-operation on matters of mutual interest within the competence of the relevant Administrations. Suitable issues for early discussion in the BIC could include transport links, agricultural issues, environmental issues, cultural issues, health issues, education issues and approaches to EU issues. Suitable arrangements to be made for practical co-operation on agreed policies.

Wouldn't mind if it was ripped up, worst form of government in Europe and doesn't work, so it's not worth saving.

listermint

A Little Pony wrote: »

The Russians are here, hide under the bed! 


Wouldn't mind if it was ripped up, worst form of government in Europe and doesn't work, so it's not worth saving.

Ah, i see lets deploy the deflection tactics.

So are you disputing the evidence of involvement or trying to side track it like Trump has been ?

An Ciarraioch

A Little Pony wrote: »

The Russians are here, hide under the bed! 


Wouldn't mind if it was ripped up, worst form of government in Europe and doesn't work, so it's not worth saving.

And what would you prefer as a replacement - direct rule, or the return of Unionist majority Assemblies?

steddyeddy

Sam Russell wrote: »

The CTA is only relevant to citizens of Ireland and those of the UK. It has no relevance to anyone else.

But combined with the lack of a hard border it essentially meant free movement. Now it might mean that passports are checked on the border.

A Little Pony

listermint wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

The Russians are here, hide under the bed! 


Wouldn't mind if it was ripped up, worst form of government in Europe and doesn't work, so it's not worth saving.

Ah, i see lets deploy the deflection tactics.

So are you disputing  the evidence of involvement or trying to side track it like Trump has been ?

The remain campaign lost by something like a million votes. Remain lost fair and square, the leave campaign had better orators during the debates and got the message across better, even if you disagreed with that message or thought it was lies, it still worked. Russia had nothing to do with why the leave campaign won the referendum. 

Sometimes when you lose it's good to bow out gracefully. If Brexit was influenced by the Russians and it swung a million people to vote for Brexit including myself (wish I had seen this propaganda at the time) then I can only thank Putin for helping us out of the EU.

A Little Pony

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

The Russians are here, hide under the bed! 


Wouldn't mind if it was ripped up, worst form of government in Europe and doesn't work, so it's not worth saving.

And what would you prefer as a replacement - direct rule, or the return of Unionist majority Assemblies?

Have a government and an official opposition, be able to vote a party out of government and into government, put the emphasis on accountability.

Bigus

A Little Pony wrote: »

The remain campaign lost by something like a million votes. Remain lost fair and square, the leave campaign had better orators during the debates and got the message across better, even if you disagreed with that message or thought it was lies, it still worked. Russia had nothing to do with why the leave campaign won the referendum. 

Sometimes when you lose it's good to bow out gracefully. If Brexit was influenced by the Russians and it swung a million people to vote for Brexit including myself (wish I had seen this propaganda at the time) then I can only thank Putin for helping us out of the EU.

When all the students of voting age and young families with were away from the uk on their summer break(june23rd referendum day), and couldn't vote.

An Ciarraioch

A Little Pony wrote: »

Have a government and an official opposition, be able to vote a party out of government and into government, put the emphasis on accountability.

The problem is that the SDLP and UUP went into opposition, and Stormont still collapsed.

Anthracite

solodeogloria wrote: »

The EEA option is off the table because it doesn't honour the referendum result.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

This nonsense again.

The referendum was about withdrawing from the EU. It said NOTHING about the EEA.

listermint

A Little Pony wrote: »

The remain campaign lost by something like a million votes. Remain lost fair and square, the leave campaign had better orators during the debates and got the message across better, even if you disagreed with that message or thought it was lies, it still worked. Russia had nothing to do with why the leave campaign won the referendum. 

Sometimes when you lose it's good to bow out gracefully. If Brexit was influenced by the Russians and it swung a million people to vote for Brexit including myself (wish I had seen this propaganda at the time) then I can only thank Putin for helping us out of the EU.

Dont worry, you did. Chances are you were forwarding on here and on whatever other social platforms you frequent.


Nice that you dont mind a foreign power influencing your country but are giving out about a foreign power influencing your country.


Boggles

Anthracite

listermint wrote: »

Dont worry, you did. Chances are you were forwarding on here and on whatever other social platforms you frequent.


Nice that you dont mind a foreign power influencing your country but are giving out about a foreign power influencing your country.


Boggles

Russians aren't (formerly) Catholic though. Perhaps that is a factor.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Surely severing it from the EU is going to cause the greatest austerity/poverty.

How? Most of its trade is with the rest of the UK. All of its subsidy comes from the rest of the UK.

There is no doubt that leaving the EU will damage Northern Ireland, probably more so than other parts of the UK, but imposing a sea border, and all that entails is an absolute disaster for Northern Ireland.

A Little Pony

listermint wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

The remain campaign lost by something like a million votes. Remain lost fair and square, the leave campaign had better orators during the debates and got the message across better, even if you disagreed with that message or thought it was lies, it still worked. Russia had nothing to do with why the leave campaign won the referendum. 

Sometimes when you lose it's good to bow out gracefully. If Brexit was influenced by the Russians and it swung a million people to vote for Brexit including myself (wish I had seen this propaganda at the time) then I can only thank Putin for helping us out of the EU.

Dont worry, you did. Chances are you were forwarding on here and on whatever other social platforms you frequent.


Nice that you dont mind a foreign power influencing your country but are giving out about a foreign power influencing your country.


Boggles

And the Russians are hiding under my bed too. Amazes me that some are still buying this guff. Russia is the big evil state, Russia this and Russia that. I voted to leave based on my own views formulated over years and years of opposition to what the EU is or more so what it has become.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

How?

If you add up all they are set to lose and add the more difficult trading environment.

Most of its trade is with the rest of the UK. All of its subsidy comes from the rest of the UK.

There is no doubt that leaving the EU will damage Northern Ireland, probably more so than other parts of the UK, but imposing a sea border, and all that entails is an absolute disaster for Northern Ireland.

If the UK goes into recession there will be a drop off in demand and even more pressure on the subvention.
I think the notion that the UK will make up what is lost in EU subsidy to be a fantasy notion to be honest. But that is an opinion.

blanch152

demfad wrote: »

You stated that nobody had referenced articles of the GFA that would be affected by Brexit. That statement was false. If you wanted me to link to articles of the GFA that YOU AGREED were affected by Brexit you should have said and would not have bothered replying.



With respect I would take the legal opinions of the most prominent Senior Council in the ROI and the most prominent Queens Council in NI above yours.

I agree with their opinion that the GFA would need to be renegotiated. Here is some other areas of GFA where European Union membership is implied. Note in the opening statement of the GFA it is categorically implied:

AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF
THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND
AND
THE GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND

The British and Irish Governments:
Welcoming the strong commitment to the Agreement reached on 10th April 1998 by themselves and other participants in the multi-party talks and set out in Annex 1 to this Agreement (hereinafter "the Multi-Party Agreement");
Considering that the Multi-Party Agreement offers an opportunity for a new beginning in relationships within Northern Ireland, within the island of Ireland and between the peoples of these islands;
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the closeco-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Reaffirming their total commitment to the principles of democracy and non-violence which have been fundamental to the multi-party talks;
Reaffirming their commitment to the principles of partnership, equality and mutual respect andto the protection of civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights in their respective jurisdictions;
Have agreed as follows:



Here is Article 1 (v) of GFA:

(vi) recognise the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they may so choose, and accordingly confirm that their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both Governments and would not be affected by any future change in the status of Northern Ireland.


Here are some more articles:

31. Terms will be agreed between appropriate Assembly representatives and the Government of the United Kingdom to ensure effective co-ordination and input by Ministers to national policy-making, including on EU issues.


3. The Council to meet in different formats:
(i) in plenary format twice a year, with Northern Ireland representation led by the First Minister and Deputy First Minister and the Irish Government led by the Taoiseach;
(ii) in specific sectoral formats on a regular and frequent basis with each side represented by the appropriate Minister;
(iii) in an appropriate format to consider institutional or cross-sectoral matters
(including in relation to the EU) and to resolve disagreement.


17. The Council to consider the European Union dimension of relevant matters, including the implementation of EU policies and programmes and proposals under consideration in the EU framework. Arrangements to be made to ensure that the views of the Council are taken into account and represented appropriately at relevant EU meetings.


5. The BIC will exchange information, discuss, consult and use best endeavours to reach agreement on co-operation on matters of mutual interest within the competence of the relevant Administrations. Suitable issues for early discussion in the BIC could include transport links, agricultural issues, environmental issues, cultural issues, health issues, education issues and approaches to EU issues. Suitable arrangements to be made for practical co-operation on agreed policies.

Well, there is nothing that affects the citizenship issue. Look at Danish nationality law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_nationality_law

"Greenland joined the European Economic Community along with Denmark proper in 1973 but left in 1985. Although Greenland is not part of the EU, Danish citizens residing in Greenland are EU citizens"

Even those living in the Faroes can opt for EU passports.

As for the rest of the GFA, the provisions for discussions on EU are just that, provisions for discussions. They have no meaning.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think the notion that the UK will make up what is lost in EU subsidy to be a fantasy notion to be honest. But that is an opinion.

Who said that the UK will make up what is lost in EU subsidy?

It certainly seems to be a fantasy notion that I said that.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Who said that the UK will make up what is lost in EU subsidy?

It certainly seems to be a fantasy notion that I said that.

I didn't quote you did I? I was just referencing the UK's committment to make up the EU shortfall after Brexit.

ambro25

demfad wrote: »

<...>



Now..is that Mifsud on the left or is it a sausage? Perhaps both?

Worth noting in the context of this thread, is that the other individual to Boris' right, is Mr Prasenjit Kumar Singh, he of this fame.

In a section for overseas students, the Edinburgh college's website advises that, once their application has been accepted, they will be required to pay a £1500 deposit before being sent a letter of enrolment "which will facilitate you to secure a Visa".

Typical fees range from between £3900 for a one-year accredited course teaching communication skills, arithmetic, computing awareness and book-keeping, to £5000 for an accredited one-year international diploma in business.

Now, how could Brexit possibly benefit the owner of a string of private colleges and travel agencies specialising in 'importing' non-EU students, one wonders? :pac:

View

A Little Pony wrote: »

listermint wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

The Russians are here, hide under the bed! 


Wouldn't mind if it was ripped up, worst form of government in Europe and doesn't work, so it's not worth saving.

Ah, i see lets deploy the deflection tactics.

So are you disputing  the evidence of involvement or trying to side track it like Trump has been ?

The remain campaign lost by something like a million votes. Remain lost fair and square,

If there was outside interference then the result clearly wasn’t either fair or square.

A Little Pony wrote: »

If Brexit was influenced by the Russians and it swung a million people to vote for Brexit including myself (wish I had seen this propaganda at the time) then I can only thank Putin for helping us out of the EU.

Or, in other words, I couldn’t care less about what the will of the British people really is, merely that I got the result that I wanted and if that means siding with a foreign power over my own country to acheive it, then I am all for it.

A Little Pony

View wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

listermint wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

The Russians are here, hide under the bed! 


Wouldn't mind if it was ripped up, worst form of government in Europe and doesn't work, so it's not worth saving.

Ah, i see lets deploy the deflection tactics.

So are you disputing  the evidence of involvement or trying to side track it like Trump has been ?

The remain campaign lost by something like a million votes. Remain lost fair and square,

If there was outside interference then the result clearly wasn’t either fair or square.

A Little Pony wrote: »

If Brexit was influenced by the Russians and it swung a million people to vote for Brexit including myself (wish I had seen this propaganda at the time) then I can only thank Putin for helping us out of the EU.

Or, in other words, I couldn’t care less about what the will of the British people really is, merely that I got the result that I wanted and if that means siding with a foreign power over my own country to acheive it, then I am all for it.

Provide the evidence that a million people got influenced by Russian bots ordered on the instructions of Vladimir Putin to ruin Western elections so he can continue to under mine Western democracies and continue his destiny to rule the world.

demfad

A Little Pony wrote: »

The remain campaign lost by something like a million votes. Remain lost fair and square, the leave campaign had better orators during the debates and got the message across better, even if you disagreed with that message or thought it was lies, it still worked. Russia had nothing to do with why the leave campaign won the referendum. 

Sometimes when you lose it's good to bow out gracefully. If Brexit was influenced by the Russians and it swung a million people to vote for Brexit including myself (wish I had seen this propaganda at the time) then I can only thank Putin for helping us out of the EU.

Putin and Russia are enemies of the EU with hundreds of nuclear missiles pointed at British cities. Russia is also backing Scottish independence: RT have set up in Scotland and are posing as pro-EU to this end.
Putin is looking for the worst type of damage as a result of Brexit. He is looking for the British economy to collapse and the shock waves to hurt the EU with collatoral damage.

Could you please not say the 'Russians are coming' as if it is some kind of paranoia? The Russian Cyber war has been well established by European investigations with a body set up to counter it (UK is currently a member).

If you believe the Russians are not a threat then perhaps you were over exposed to their propaganda.

Incidently, they used 13,500 bots and trolls on Brexit. Some of these troll accounts were quoted and drove articles even in papers like the Guardian.

The messages were centred around immigration, the EU stealing the UKs sovereignty and other such sentiment aimed at stoking the emotional reaction of nationalism. If you were on SM you were exposed to it. The fact that you assume you weren't speaks volumes.

Junkyard Tom

A Little Pony wrote: »

Provide the evidence that a million people got influenced by...

Whatever numbers were influenced by Russian bots they're dwarfed by the numbers influenced by the sneering British print media and the myth of British greatness.

FrancieBrady

demfad wrote: »

The messages were centred around immigration, the EU stealing the UKs sovereignty and other such sentiment aimed at stoking the emotional reaction of nationalism. If you were on SM you were exposed to it. The fact that you assume you weren't speaks volumes.

Isn't that A Little Pony's main reasons for wanting out of the EU?

mayo.mick

A Little Pony wrote: »

You keep hearing "Hard Brexit", well that to me is Brexit, that is why I voted for Brexit. To leave the single market and customs union. It is what I expect the government to carry out.

"Dan Roberts‏Verified account
@RobertsDan
2h2 hours ago
More
Honda UK telling MPs it imports 2 million components a day from Europe on 350 trucks and holds 1 hours worth of stock. It would take 18 months to put customs admin in place but every 15 minutes of delay would cost £850,000 a hour. That's not including WTO tariffs of 10% and 4.5%."

Junkyard Tom

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Isn't that A Little Pony's main reasons for wanting out of the EU?

I think a lot of the more fundamentalist unionists have seized upon Brexit as their last play in trying to lock in partition and reverse the soft unification of Ireland that a friction-less border and the GFA engendered.

It won't work, if anything it would bring forward a pro-UI vote.

FrancieBrady

A paper setting out the issues and potential problems for the GFA if Brexit goes ahead.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/583116/IPOL_BRI(2017)583116_EN.pdf

demfad

A Little Pony wrote: »

Provide the evidence that a million people got influenced by Russian bots ordered on the instructions of Vladimir Putin to ruin Western elections so he can continue to under mine Western democracies and continue his destiny to rule the world.

Nobody said he intended to 'rule the world'. That is a strawman argument you are erecting. Putin wants to increase Russian influence and to stop the pan-western opposition to his plans to expand locally. He also is having great trouble with western sanctions against money laundering and other ilegal international crime. His regime is built on a pact with criminal oligarchs and he is in trouble if he cant provide them continued unregulated access to commit international crime.

It will be up to the powers that be to investigate, but investigate they must.
As many of the stories and fake news by these trolls made all the national publications including the Guardian its fair to say that most of the electorate were exposed to it in one way or another.

The commons committee on Fake news has already asked the SM giants for answers on Brexit.
There is an investigation into the source of Aaron Banks contributions into Leave.
There is an investigation into Leave.eu funding specifically re Cambridge Analytica. Cambridge were involved in work to ALL 5 leave campaigns.
Cambridge is being investigated in Trump-Russia for micro-targetting Russian fake news to US voters in swing states.
Cambridge contacted Wikileaks to ask could it diseminate the hacked Democratic emails for Wikileaks to aid TRump.
Farage, Banks and Wigmore are people of interest in Trump Russia.
Farage is known to be communicating and visiting Assange.
3 UK ministers were in contact with a KNOWN Russian spy Mifsud who was the handler for indicted Trump associate Papadopoulos.

Luckily the EU ref was advisory so the parlaiment can quickly undo the Brexit Bill. I dont see this going away especially as Theresa May herself is drawing attention to it.
There will have to be a second referendum so you wont be able to shout about democracy or whatever. Even if democracy was subverted in the first referendum. It wont be in referendum number 2.

Zubeneschamali

blanch152 wrote: »

The UK will not be able to accept the terms of any deal that the EU will be able to put forward.

That's a bit like hearing that the unions and CIE cannot agree and a strike is inevitable. Fine, so it is inevitable. Maybe a no-deal Brexit is inevitable.

But in April 2019 with no deal, the UK is in the position of the union members at CIE on strike. It costs and costs and costs them money, and there is no way to move on without real negotiations and a settlement.

demfad

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Isn't that A Little Pony's main reasons for wanting out of the EU?

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I think a lot of the more fundamentalist unionists have seized upon Brexit as their last play in trying to lock in partition and reverse the soft unification of Ireland that a friction-less border and the GFA engendered.

It won't work, if anything it would bring forward a pro-UI vote.

Thats true. Also the targetting was done by Cambridge analytica whose parent is SCL. SCL were used by militaries to destabilise enemy states (eg Afthghanistan) by using disinformation to fan nationalism.
Russia are expert here also. The bitter partisanship of the US and particularly Brexit UK has suprised many. Cambridge and Russia not though: extreme division is the symtoms of a successful campaign. Thats how it works.
Obviously, this type of propaganda works best and the already persuaded like far right Englanders or Unionists.
The nationalistic vitriol of sovereignty being stolen is a big symptom.
This appears massive overkill given EU only control 3% of UK laws.
UKIP are not able to achieve this alone. Yes RW media help, but the electoral expertise and microtargetting come from elsewhere.

View

A Little Pony wrote: »

View wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

listermint wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

The Russians are here, hide under the bed! 


Wouldn't mind if it was ripped up, worst form of government in Europe and doesn't work, so it's not worth saving.

Ah, i see lets deploy the deflection tactics.

So are you disputing  the evidence of involvement or trying to side track it like Trump has been ?

The remain campaign lost by something like a million votes. Remain lost fair and square,

If there was outside interference then the result clearly wasn’t either fair or square.

A Little Pony wrote: »

If Brexit was influenced by the Russians and it swung a million people to vote for Brexit including myself (wish I had seen this propaganda at the time) then I can only thank Putin for helping us out of the EU.

Or, in other words, I couldn’t care less about what the will of the British people really is, merely that I got the result that I wanted and if that means siding with a foreign power over my own country to acheive it, then I am all for it.

Provide the evidence that a million people got influenced by Russian bots ordered on the instructions of Vladimir Putin to ruin Western elections so he can continue to under mine Western democracies and continue his destiny to rule the world.

I am not the one making the claims about this. My point is that it should concern all people in Britain - who care enough about their democracy and their nation that is - whether the result was “fair and square” or not.

It is people like May who are making the accusations against Russia. I presume that you trust the person leading Brexit to be attempting to act in what they perceive as being Britain’s best interest?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A paper setting out the issues and potential problems for the GFA if Brexit goes ahead.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/583116/IPOL_BRI(2017)583116_EN.pdf

Very interesting and thank you very much for this. It appears to back up most of what I have said.

I note that the paper clearly states "That High Court in Belfast declared in October 2016 that it would be an over-statement to suggest that EU membership was a constitutional bulwark central to the Good Friday Agreement, which would be breached by notification of Article 50. This, the Court asserted, would be to ‘elevate ... [EU membership] over and beyond its true contextual position’.16 In its January 2017 verdict, the UK Supreme Court upheld the Belfast High Court position: the principle of consent for constitutional change contained in the Good Friday Agreement referred to whether Northern Ireland remained in the UK or unified with the rest of Ireland. It did not refer to EU membership or withdrawal."

I must look up these cases, as the Courts have clearly determined already that Brexit does not breach the GFA. We can close off this debate.

Then there is the suggestion:

"Brexit must surely require deletion and/or revision of the references to the EU within the Good Friday Agreement. As one of the signatories to the deal will no longer be part of the EU, it is unclear how the required ‘implementation of EU policies and programmes and proposals under consideration in the EU framework’, as outlined in para. 17 of Strand Two, can continue."

Why is this so? There are plenty of defunct clauses in international agreements all over the world. References to the League of Nations or the European Community etc. abound in various international treaties, yet neither organisation continues to exist. The rational conclusion, involving the least disruption is that there is no further discussion on EU programmes because they no longer apply to Northern Ireland.

As for the ECHR, there is confirmation that it is a separate manner and has no relation to Brexit:

"A further aspect of UK withdrawal relates to the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). The Convention is not an EU institution, but secession from the EU may embolden those in the UK Conservative Government seeking to replace adherence to the ECHR with a UK Bill of Rights."

A What if scenario if ever I saw one.

On citizenship, apart from saying that there has been an increase in applications, it does not say that Brexit affects the GFA provisions.

"One other important aspect of the Agreement is its confirmation of the right of anyone born on the island of Ireland to hold Irish, and thus EU, citizenship. The Agreement confirms (Constitutional Issues, para vi.) the right of Northern Ireland’s citizens to hold British and Irish citizenship and that this ‘would not be affected by any future change in the status of Northern Ireland’. In the five months following the Brexit referendum vote, there were 24,849 applications for an Irish passport from Northern Ireland (a 63 per cent increase on the same period in 2015)."

So to sum up:

- The Courts have determined that the GFA does not require continued UK membership of the EU, therefore Brexit in and of itself does not breach the GFA
- Citizenship rights are not affected
- The ECHR is a completely separate issue
- References to the EU in the GFA are complicated, the paper suggests they may have to be renegotiated, alternatively, as I suggest, they are just defunct. Either way, it is hardly relevant as the EU programmes will no longer apply to Northern Ireland, so why would the two nations discuss them?
- There are political issues around the GFA


I can't disagree with any of that.

A Little Pony

mayo.mick wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

You keep hearing "Hard Brexit", well that to me is Brexit, that is why I voted for Brexit. To leave the single market and customs union. It is what I expect the government to carry out.

"Dan Roberts‏Verified account
@RobertsDan
2h2 hours ago
More
Honda UK telling MPs it imports 2 million components a day from Europe on 350 trucks and holds 1 hours worth of stock. It would take 18 months to put customs admin in place but every 15 minutes of delay would cost £850,000 a hour. That's not including WTO tariffs of 10% and 4.5%."

As if I actually care about this?

demfad wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

The remain campaign lost by something like a million votes. Remain lost fair and square, the leave campaign had better orators during the debates and got the message across better, even if you disagreed with that message or thought it was lies, it still worked. Russia had nothing to do with why the leave campaign won the referendum. 

Sometimes when you lose it's good to bow out gracefully. If Brexit was influenced by the Russians and it swung a million people to vote for Brexit including myself (wish I had seen this propaganda at the time) then I can only thank Putin for helping us out of the EU.

Putin and Russia are enemies of the EU with hundreds of nuclear missiles pointed at British cities. Russia is also backing Scottish independence: RT have set up in Scotland and are posing as pro-EU to this end.
Putin is looking for the worst type of damage as a result of Brexit. He is looking for the British economy to collapse and the shock waves to hurt the EU with collatoral damage.

Could you please not say the 'Russians are coming' as if it is some kind of paranoia? The Russian Cyber war has been well established by European investigations with a body set up to counter it (UK is currently a member).

If you believe the Russians are not a threat then perhaps you were over exposed to their propaganda.

Incidently, they used 13,500 bots and trolls on Brexit. Some of these troll accounts were quoted and drove articles even in papers like the Guardian.

The messages were centred around immigration, the EU stealing the UKs sovereignty and other such sentiment aimed at stoking the emotional reaction of nationalism. If you were on SM you were exposed to it. The fact that you assume you weren't speaks volumes.

All issues that I have been in agreement about for years. So Russia used bots to try and influence me on things I already agreed with. What a waste of time that is. Although I do find it rather funny Westerners complaining about apparent Russian interference in elections/referendum when the US (no doubt helped by British intelligence)  is constantly trying to overthrow regimes and influence elections around the world and has been doing so for decades.

steddyeddy

blanch152 wrote: »

Very interesting and thank you very much for this. It appears to back up most of what I have said.

I note that the paper clearly states "That High Court in Belfast declared in October 2016 that it would be an over-statement to suggest that EU membership was a constitutional bulwark central to the Good Friday Agreement, which would be breached by notification of Article 50. This, the Court asserted, would be to ‘elevate ... [EU membership] over and beyond its true contextual position’.16 In its January 2017 verdict, the UK Supreme Court upheld the Belfast High Court position: the principle of consent for constitutional change contained in the Good Friday Agreement referred to whether Northern Ireland remained in the UK or unified with the rest of Ireland. It did not refer to EU membership or withdrawal."

I must look up these cases, as the Courts have clearly determined already that Brexit does not breach the GFA. We can close off this debate.

Then there is the suggestion:

"Brexit must surely require deletion and/or revision of the references to the EU within the Good Friday Agreement. As one of the signatories to the deal will no longer be part of the EU, it is unclear how the required ‘implementation of EU policies and programmes and proposals under consideration in the EU framework’, as outlined in para. 17 of Strand Two, can continue."

Why is this so? There are plenty of defunct clauses in international agreements all over the world. References to the League of Nations or the European Community etc. abound in various international treaties, yet neither organisation continues to exist. The rational conclusion, involving the least disruption is that there is no further discussion on EU programmes because they no longer apply to Northern Ireland.

As for the ECHR, there is confirmation that it is a separate manner and has no relation to Brexit:

"A further aspect of UK withdrawal relates to the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). The Convention is not an EU institution, but secession from the EU may embolden those in the UK Conservative Government seeking to replace adherence to the ECHR with a UK Bill of Rights."

A What if scenario if ever I saw one.

On citizenship, apart from saying that there has been an increase in applications, it does not say that Brexit affects the GFA provisions.

"One other important aspect of the Agreement is its confirmation of the right of anyone born on the island of Ireland to hold Irish, and thus EU, citizenship. The Agreement confirms (Constitutional Issues, para vi.) the right of Northern Ireland’s citizens to hold British and Irish citizenship and that this ‘would not be affected by any future change in the status of Northern Ireland’. In the five months following the Brexit referendum vote, there were 24,849 applications for an Irish passport from Northern Ireland (a 63 per cent increase on the same period in 2015)."

So to sum up:

- The Courts have determined that the GFA does not require continued UK membership of the EU, therefore Brexit in and of itself does not breach the GFA
- Citizenship rights are not affected
- The ECHR is a completely separate issue
- References to the EU in the GFA are complicated, the paper suggests they may have to be renegotiated, alternatively, as I suggest, they are just defunct. Either way, it is hardly relevant as the EU programmes will no longer apply to Northern Ireland, so why would the two nations discuss them?
- There are political issues around the GFA


I can't disagree with any of that.

Blanch just curious but why exactly do you get more agitated at the thought of a sea border than an Irish one? Do you not think the Republic should look after its own interests?

A Little Pony

Nobody said he intended to 'rule the world'. That is a strawman argument you are erecting. Putin wants to increase Russian influence and to stop the pan-western opposition to his plans to expand locally. He also is having great trouble with western sanctions against money laundering and other ilegal international crime. His regime is built on a pact with criminal oligarchs and he is in trouble if he cant provide them continued unregulated access to commit international crime.

If Russia wanted to expand and invade countries next to them they could easily do so and nothing would happen to them. Who is going to nuke Russia and start WW3? It isn't going to happen. You sometimes wonder if people actually think about what they say. A nuclear power like Russia is trying to expand but needs bots on the internet to achieve it by trying to influence elections when they could just send in tanks to these countries tomorrow or nuke them if they wanted.

A Little Pony

View wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

View wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

listermint wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

The Russians are here, hide under the bed! 


Wouldn't mind if it was ripped up, worst form of government in Europe and doesn't work, so it's not worth saving.

Ah, i see lets deploy the deflection tactics.

So are you disputing  the evidence of involvement or trying to side track it like Trump has been ?

The remain campaign lost by something like a million votes. Remain lost fair and square,

If there was outside interference then the result clearly wasn’t either fair or square.

A Little Pony wrote: »

If Brexit was influenced by the Russians and it swung a million people to vote for Brexit including myself (wish I had seen this propaganda at the time) then I can only thank Putin for helping us out of the EU.

Or, in other words, I couldn’t care less about what the will of the British people really is, merely that I got the result that I wanted and if that means siding with a foreign power over my own country to acheive it, then I am all for it.

Provide the evidence that a million people got influenced by Russian bots ordered on the instructions of Vladimir Putin to ruin Western elections so he can continue to under mine Western democracies and continue his destiny to rule the world.

I am not the one making the claims about this. My point is that it should concern all people in Britain - who care enough about their democracy and their nation that is - whether the result was “fair and square” or not.

It is people like May who are making the accusations against Russia. I presume that you trust the person leading Brexit to be attempting to act in what they perceive as being Britain’s best interest?

Why would I trust Theresa May who was a remainer and believes in globalism? I don't believe anything she says.

steddyeddy

A Little Pony wrote: »

Why would I trust Theresa May who was a remainer and believes in globalism? I don't believe anything she says.

There is no way on God's earth (if you believe in him) that Theresa is a remainer. Not with the Brexit negotiating team she appointed.

A Little Pony

steddyeddy wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Why would I trust Theresa May who was a remainer and believes in globalism? I don't believe anything she says.

There is no way on God's earth (if you believe in him) that Theresa is a remainer. Not with the Brexit negotiating team she appointed.

She campaigned for remain and voted remain, she appoints remainers to her cabinet, of course she is a remainer. The sooner she is gone the better and get a Brexiteer in and get all the remainers out of the cabinet.

steddyeddy

A Little Pony wrote: »

She campaigned for remain and voted remain, she appoints remainers to her cabinet, of course she is a remainer. The sooner she is gone the better and get a Brexiteer in and get all the remainers out of the cabinet.

But who do you have left? Boris and Mogg, two men of very low IQ to quote a Question Time guest.

A Little Pony

steddyeddy wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

She campaigned for remain and voted remain, she appoints remainers to her cabinet, of course she is a remainer. The sooner she is gone the better and get a Brexiteer in and get all the remainers out of the cabinet.

But who do you have left? Boris and Mogg, two men of very low IQ to quote a Question Time guest.

Doesn't matter who it is, the only requirement is they must believe in Brexit. And then preferably get rid of the remain squad.

steddyeddy

A Little Pony wrote: »

Doesn't matter who it is, the only requirement is they must believe in Brexit. And then preferably get rid of the remain squad.

But lots of people believe in Brexit. Take the negotiating team for example. They haven't managed to negotiate anything, with anyone at all. Who would you like to see in power?