Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

Strazdas

PropJoe10 wrote: »

You can see what Tusk is trying to do here, but it looks like it's only going to entrench the hardline Brexiteers even more. Looks like a no deal situation is inevitable at this stage. It's getting messier and messier by the day!

Indeed, but who even cares at this point? They're a bunch of loons and cannot be reasoned with.

demfad

Folkstonian wrote: »

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/02/tusk-selmayr-and-the-eus-twitter-diplomacy/

An interesting article from Fraser Nelson of the Spectator today in light of the twitter (un)diplomacy we are witnessing more and more from Trump and the EU.

I hope people read it even if they have a distrust for the Spectator as a publication as it definitely makes some compelling points about the use of twitter not just to spread key messages, but also to engage in ‘trolling’

I think it’s unwise and unhelpful. The ‘one-upmanship’ strategy of the EU on social media leaves a bitter taste in the mouth for me with stunts like the sneaky ‘no cherry picking’ Snapchat ambush on Theresa May.

But that’s just a personal opinion obviously, it just seems unnecessarily sneaky

Do people mind that the likes of Selmayr and Sabine Weyand, as unelected civil servants, are manoeuvring themselves into being social media champions of the European Union almost, or is it simply the new normal for international diplomacy?

Please construct your posts with reference to the 1000s of episodes of trolling by pro-Brexit sides. Refer also to the £3.5m in Vote Leave funds dedicated to Aggregate IQ which specialises in dark ads often promoting snippets from "politicians".

Note also aggregate IQ worked for 3 other campaigns.

Nigel Farage had expelled Russian asset Kevin Ellul Bonici upload his videos from the EP to RT and other RW sites.

Note that Cambridge Analytica who are the back end of AIQ worked with LeaveEU again ingraining the same messages.

Mote that #moggmentum was backed by the full Russian troll army in consort with RW funders to get Mogg ( a nobody) to be a contender.

Note the recent comments of the Polish born MP recived similar treatment.

Note Johnson and Gove were in full control of Vote Leave's activity including the biggest fraud in UK electoral history where they pretended beLeave was a different campaign to cheat another £1m into their campaign in the last week. (Paid to AIQ ofcourse)

And youre having a go for Donald Tusk for telling the truth?

It is you who are spreading disinformation.

Shelga

Is everyone here now thinking that no deal is inevitable?

I was back visiting the UK at the weekend, and feeling nostalgic for the country that welcomed me with open arms when Ireland was in the grips of recession. How on earth has it come to this...

jm08

Interesting letter in Irish Times today from American Brexit Committee (a new one on me!) Looks like they are going to open up plenty of cans of worms for British Gov.

When the UK comes with its begging bowl for a bilateral trade deal it can expect questions about its obstruction of legacy investigations called for in the Stormont House Agreement (2014), its proposal of amnesty for British soldiers involved in killing innocent civilians in Northern Ireland and its disregard for the European Convention of Human Rights.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/brexit-the-us-dimension-1.3783127

breatheme

Shelga wrote: »

Is everyone here now thinking that no deal is inevitable?

I was back visiting the UK at the weekend, and feeling nostalgic for the country that welcomed me with open arms when Ireland was in the grips of recession. How on earth has it come to this...

No one has been brave enough to stop this nonsense. Will of the people and all. They are scared of getting disliked by bringing up facts and figures (you know, screw the experts) and it's way easier to fan the fire than to stop it.

Bit cynical

Christy42 wrote: »

Again. We can't exactly force the UK to sign an agreement. We have no idea what would be acceptable to them and their protests around the current one is with the soft border. Since we want the soft border as part of any agreement we can't concede any ground and still get anything we want.

It is true that with the requirement of the Meaningful Vote we can't immediately assume that what is agreed by the PM will automatically be ratified in the UK Parliament, we can probably say that the backstop in its current form is the most contentious issue. But yes, the current weakness of the PM and parliamentary procedures introduced by Remainers in the UK makes it harder for us.

Professor Moriarty

Folkstonian wrote: »

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/02/tusk-selmayr-and-the-eus-twitter-diplomacy/

An interesting article from Fraser Nelson of the Spectator today in light of the twitter (un)diplomacy we are witnessing more and more from Trump and the EU.

I hope people read it even if they have a distrust for the Spectator as a publication as it definitely makes some compelling points about the use of twitter not just to spread key messages, but also to engage in ‘trolling’

I think it’s unwise and unhelpful. The ‘one-upmanship’ strategy of the EU on social media leaves a bitter taste in the mouth for me with stunts like the sneaky ‘no cherry picking’ Snapchat ambush on Theresa May.

But that’s just a personal opinion obviously, it just seems unnecessarily sneaky

Do people mind that the likes of Selmayr and Sabine Weyand, as unelected civil servants, are manoeuvring themselves into being social media champions of the European Union almost, or is it simply the new normal for international diplomacy?

Selmayr is Juncker's right hand man and is mandated to speak on behalf of Juncker. Weyand is the EU's deputy chief negotiator for Brexit and, as such, has a right and a duty to speak about Brexit.

Leroy42

Bit cynical wrote: »

It is true that with the requirement of the Meaningful Vote we can't immediately assume that what is agreed by the PM will automatically be ratified in the UK Parliament, we can probably say that the backstop in its current form is the most contentious issue. But yes, the current weakness of the PM and parliamentary procedures introduced by Remainers in the UK makes it harder for us.

The EU managed to get a single negotiation position from 27 individual member states and gave that position to Barnier to undertake the negotiations on that basis.

The UK sent over a number of different people with varying outlooks and ideas and when they finally agreed to a position went back and TM not only couldn't get her own party behind her, she then turned 180 on the agreement and wants to start all over again. But just as they did at the original start, the HoC haven't actually bothered to work out what they want.

So who do you think is at fault on this issue? Have you ever been in a negotiation and the other party just keeps telling you they don't have the authority to make a decision? Because there really is no point continuing until you either get to talk to the decision maker or the decision maker gives the person the final offer.

Infini

For reference for anyones interest the special place in hell Tusk would be referring would specifically be the 8th circle of Hell.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malebolge

Im sure Nigel and friends would get a great condo down there with all their earnings!

In a seriousness though they're right to cut loose. The Brits are being utter idiots and are about to commit a needless and utterly contemptuous act of self defeat for nothing but vain stupid pride. If they actually crash there literally will be hell to pay over it.

demfad

jm08 wrote: »

Interesting letter in Irish Times today from American Brexit Committee (a new one on me!) Looks like they are going to open up plenty of cans of worms for British Gov.


https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/brexit-the-us-dimension-1.3783127

Also:

We expect also to get answers from the Trump Administration on just what British trade staff have been up to in the Office of the US Trade Representative since they encamped there in July 2017.

Folkstonian

demfad wrote: »

Please construct your posts with reference to the 1000s of episodes of trolling by pro-Brexit sides. Refer also to the £3.5m in Vote Leave funds dedicated to Aggregate IQ which specialises in dark ads often promoting snippets from "politicians".

Note also aggregate IQ worked for 3 other campaigns.

Nigel Farage had expelled Russian asset Kevin Ellul Bonici upload his videos from the EP to RT and other RW sites.

Note that Cambridge Analytica who are the back end of AIQ worked with LeaveEU again ingraining the same messages.

Mote that #moggmentum was backed by the full Russian troll army in consort with RW funders to get Mogg ( a nobody) to be a contender.

Note the recent comments of the Polish born MP recived similar treatment.

Note Johnson and Gove were in full control of Vote Leave's activity including the biggest fraud in UK electoral history where they pretended beLeave was a different campaign to cheat another £1m into their campaign in the last week. (Paid to AIQ ofcourse)

And youre having a go for Donald Tusk for telling the truth?

It is you who are spreading disinformation.

Do you get paid for moving the goal posts? You are extremely good at it. Why not try to focus on the linked article and my reflections as opposed to crashing through with an unrelated point.

Folkstonian

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Selmayr is Juncker's right hand man and is mandated to speak on behalf of Juncker. Weyand is the EU's deputy chief negotiator for Brexit and, as such, has a right and a duty to speak about Brexit.

Sorry, no that is not what mandated means. They have no mandate because they are unelected civil servants. Until recently it was the case that civil servants were employed to advise, assist and administer from the background. This is apparently no longer the case for some in the EU, which was the whole point of the article.

Enzokk

Imreoir2 wrote: »

I think Tusk's comment was intentional and calculated. Diplomacy is an art and what is said and what is not said speaks volumes. That Tusk took a hard swipe at the Brexitters with only a few weeks left to Brexit day and with May on her way to Brussels tomorrow is a clear signal that time is up, May cannot expect any further assistance from the EU and can expect to be called out on any further fudging, backtracking or deflection.

Consider his statement earlier in his speach that acknolodged that Brexit is unstopable and that remain sentiment in the UK is not strong enough to overcome Brexit. This in the context of his often saying that he hopes that Brexit could be averted. This signals that EU intransigence not to be seen as a last ditch effort to avert Brexit. This suggests to a UK observer that the UK continuing in a game of chicken is not going to alter the EU's course.

Clearly, from Tusks statement, the EU are not going to cave at the last minute and it is now up to the sensible majority in the HoC to decide if they will allow the Brexiteer fringe drive them off a cliff or not.

The comments are interesting for me in that it attacks not the UK Government, not Theresa May nor Olly Robbins but it goes after Farage, JRM, Johnson and Davis. So Theresa May has gotten the message from the EU that she may as well not bother but they will not embarrass her again. She has gotten the message that the backstop is not up for discussion. But at the same time the message is that the EU understands she is doing this because there was no plan by those who initiated this and thus she has an impossible task.

Let us not forget that Raab, Davis and Johnson was put in positions to make a difference in Brexit but they fluffed their lines. Farage ran away and is not useful in any way and will be a waste for UK tax payers until he is gone and JRM has never taken responsibility in his political life and prefers to be a backseat driver.

Folkstonian wrote: »

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/02/tusk-selmayr-and-the-eus-twitter-diplomacy/

An interesting article from Fraser Nelson of the Spectator today in light of the twitter (un)diplomacy we are witnessing more and more from Trump and the EU.

I hope people read it even if they have a distrust for the Spectator as a publication as it definitely makes some compelling points about the use of twitter not just to spread key messages, but also to engage in ‘trolling’

I think it’s unwise and unhelpful. The ‘one-upmanship’ strategy of the EU on social media leaves a bitter taste in the mouth for me with stunts like the sneaky ‘no cherry picking’ Snapchat ambush on Theresa May.

But that’s just a personal opinion obviously, it just seems unnecessarily sneaky

Do people mind that the likes of Selmayr and Sabine Weyand, as unelected civil servants, are manoeuvring themselves into being social media champions of the European Union almost, or is it simply the new normal for international diplomacy?

Interesting link. Tell me, do you agree with him when he says Tusk is an "Unelected ‘presidents’"?

Do you also personally find the tweets of Selmayr and Weyand offensive and can you provide examples on why they should rather be avoiding twitter as unelected civil servants?

Lastly, what about Gavin Barwell?

LuckyLloyd

Folkstonian wrote: »

Do you get paid for moving the goal posts? You are extremely good at it. Why not try to focus on the linked article and my reflections as opposed to crashing through with an unrelated point.

It’s written by Fraser Nelson, who was opining in the Telegraph earlier this week that British people would take a bit of economic pain to be “free”. Asa Bennett is in the Telegraph today also with a length treatise on Selymar. It’s pretty clear that the ERG politicians who met with him and intended to spin that meeting were on the phone to their journalists after he came out to set the record straight about the meeting. It’s more Brexiteer narrative: ‘look at these vindictive unelected bureaucrats trying to frustrate 17.4m people’

Why should you be in the least surprised that we’ve rejected the latest emotive Brexiteer talking point out of hand? We rejected the emotive Brexit premise three + years ago. I’m all ears if you or they have something of actual substance to sell?

We’re transitioning into the end game here. At a certain point the EU was going to move to very direct talk. Sign the deal or don’t. We’re ready either way. We were always ready.

Hurrache

Folkstonian wrote: »

Sorry, no that is not what mandated means.

They have been mandated.

mandateDictionary result for mandate
verb
past tense: mandated; past participle: mandated
/manˈdeɪt/Submit
1.
give (someone) authority to act in a certain way.

Professor Moriarty

Folkstonian wrote: »

Sorry, no that is not what mandated means. They have no mandate because they are unelected civil servants. Until recently it was the case that civil servants were employed to advise, assist and administer from the background. This is apparently no longer the case for some in the EU, which was the whole point of the article.

I think you are missing the point of the EU. These people speak on behalf of the EU precisely because they are mandated civil servants. The EU is not a nation state, it is a union of nation states and as such requires civil servants to represent it. Why else do you think they speak on behalf of the EU and are allowed to continue to do so?

Water John

Throw in the IEA found guilty of breaking its charitable status by promoting Brexit.

Tusk was specific in clubbing May and Corbyn together as Leavers. He above all has sent a clear signal that Brexiteers promoting the idea of the EU caving at the last minute are wrong.
Basically those who for example did not back the Grieve or Cooper/Dromey motions because they were persuaded not to, in order to keep pressure on the EU and give May a stronger hand, know that holds no longer.

Mezcita

josip wrote: »

I does feel like a burden has been lifted somewhat with the acknowledgement that it will now be a no deal Brexit.

Not quite. No deal Brexit still at 3.85.

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics

While a number of us here seem to think that the UK are about to drive off the cliff the markets still have it priced at unlikely.

josip

Folkstonian wrote: »

Do you get paid for moving the goal posts? You are extremely good at it. Why not try to focus on the linked article and my reflections as opposed to crashing through with an unrelated point.

Why did you misquote Donald Tusk?

AtomicHorror

Every time someone from the EU comments on Brexit, the "unelected" thing gets thrown out. Setting aside the direct vs. indirect democracy argument, I saw Guy Verhofstadt's comments had Brexiteers asking who had ever voted to put him in power.

LuckyLloyd

Mezcita wrote: »

Not quite. No deal Brexit still at 3.85.

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics

While a number of us here seem to think that the UK are about to drive off the cliff the markets still have it priced at unlikely.

They’re wrong. We are in completely unprecedented territory. There is a full blown constitutional crisis in the UK and the incentives involved have created an essential death loop. It’s the perfect mixture to lead them off the cliff edge.

The market is pricing in rational assumptions that simply do not apply. When a very credible figure like Sir Ivan Rogers is warning in public that everyone is underestimating the chances of No Deal beware.

Folkstonian

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It’s written by Fraser Nelson, who was opining in the Telegraph earlier this week that British people would take a bit of economic pain to be “free”. Asa Bennett is in the Telegraph today also with a length treatise on Selymar. It’s pretty clear that the ERG politicians who met with him and intended to spin that meeting were on the phone to their journalists after he came out to set the record straight about the meeting. It’s more Brexiteer narrative: ‘look at these vindictive unelected bureaucrats trying to frustrate 17.4m people’

Why should you be in the least surprised that we’ve rejected the latest emotive Brexiteer talking point out of hand? We rejected the emotive Brexit premise three + years ago. I’m all ears if you or they have something of actual substance to sell?

We’re transitioning into the end game here. At a certain point the EU was going to move to very direct talk. Sign the deal or don’t. We’re ready either way. We were always ready.

What, sorry? So what are you saying in response to the use of social media by EU civil servants? Yes you have no problem with it, or no you’d prefer they left digital diplomacy to others?

Your last line sounds like the strap line to a Predator movie.

seamus

jm08 wrote: »

Interesting letter in Irish Times today from American Brexit Committee (a new one on me!) Looks like they are going to open up plenty of cans of worms for British Gov.
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/brexit-the-us-dimension-1.3783127

There's something of a bitter irony in the US's position. They've been making all sorts of kissy-faces at the UK, but once the UK has left the EU, the US will backtrack on whatever promises they made about trade deals and offer the UK a terrible deal that they have no choice but to accept.
Which, given the UK's own backtracking on promises and refusal to accept the best deal available, makes it all the more sad.

Mezcita wrote: »

Not quite. No deal Brexit still at 3.85.

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics

While a number of us here seem to think that the UK are about to drive off the cliff the markets still have it priced at unlikely.

While I'm as guilty as anyone of using the markets as a political weathervane, we mustn't forget how badly wrong they get it, on a frequent basis. The markets didn't see Brexit coming in the first place, so their confidence about no-deal shouldn't be overestimated.

Hurrache

What's great about what Tusk said is that while it was aimed only at those without a plan (although were there any other type) that promoted Brexit, it seems like every single person who was in favour of Brexit feels like the barb was pointed at them. Maybe because deep down they know too that they had no plan?

Mezcita

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

They’re wrong. We are in completely unprecedented territory. There is a full blown constitutional crisis in the UK and the incentives involved have created an essential death loop. It’s the perfect mixture to lead them off the cliff edge.

The market is pricing in rational assumptions that simply do not apply. When a very credible figure like Sir Ivan Rogers is warning in public that everyone is underestimating the chances of No Deal beware.

I'd agree. Conscious of not dragging this off topic as this talk is better suited to the gambling forum. It does however represent a value bet in my opinion.

Professor Moriarty

Hurrache wrote: »

What's great about what Tusk said is that while it was aimed only at those without a plan (although were there any other type) that promoted Brexit, it seems like every single person who was in favour of Brexit feels like the barb was pointed at them. Maybe because deep down they know too that they had no plan?

They didn't have a plan. Every single person who voted Leave didn't know what they were actually voting for. They just voted Leave because reasons.

An Ciarraioch

Folkstonian wrote: »

What, sorry? So what are you saying in response to the use of social media by EU civil servants? Yes you have no problem with it, or no you’d prefer they left digital diplomacy to others?

Your last line sounds like the strap line to a Predator movie.

Adam Fleming of the BBC tweeted an interpretation of the meeting that (presumably unintentionally) proved to be inaccurate, so Selmayr was entitled to correct the record.

Leroy42

Hurrache wrote: »

What's great about what Tusk said is that while it was aimed only at those without a plan (although were there any other type) that promoted Brexit, it seems like every single person who was in favour of Brexit feels like the barb was pointed at them. Maybe because deep down they know too that they had no plan?

I think you are bang on there. For them to really show disgust at the comment, not only do they need to show that the language used is poor but by starting on that point it inevitably leads to the question as to whether the premise of what he said is correct.

And the very fact that only last Monday a new committee was set up to review alternative arrangements and that there is no overall position wither within the HoC, the governing parties or indeed even the cabinet, only goes to prove the point that they didn't have a plan

LuckyLloyd

Folkstonian wrote: »

What, sorry? So what are you saying in response to the use of social media by EU civil servants? Yes you have no problem with it, or no you’d prefer they left digital diplomacy to others?

Your last line sounds like the strap line to a Predator movie.

My post was extremely clear. I read the Nelson piece, I read all the right wing politicos who long sold their soul to peddle nonsense on Brexit. I’m waiting for something worthwhile and I’ll no doubt be kept waiting. At all times EU officials have been open and upfront on the Brexit process. This week is nothing new. The EU have conducted these negotiations with a level of transparency sorely missing from the UK side. Indeed, the lack of transparency on the very real choices that must be made on Brexit continue to drive a national political crisis.

So no, the EU don’t have anything to work on here.

LordBasil

Everything about Brexit is so depressing. A never ending nightmare.

The 2010s started with Ireland being in complete political, economic and social disarray and now the UK is going through an even worse crisis. We are 7 weeks from catastrophe and no-one seems to know how to stop it.