Brexit and the Consequences

cantagril said:
....... .................... ................... ...................

I don't believe it is necessary to leave in this way when we could well have stuck around and got the greater part of the concessions we wanted, if it were not for that shite Cameron stamping his ineffectual foot. As it is, an irony of Brexit is that it has made it easier for the other members to fight their corner. New treaties could be in the offing and our absence is a loss to everyone.
Click to expand...

So true!
 
Just listening to the news and hear Foreign Secretary state UK would like continued strategic partnership after Brexit.

He stated EU has to decide whether they like a continued strategic partnership or competitive strategic relationship!

That's interesting distinction. Have been suggesting the same here that our relationship WILL go from cooperative to a competitive stance.

That switch will be key to determining all kinds of outcomes on many industries.


Hardcore brexiteers also softening stance. Why would they do that now?

Why are the Tories offering £1.6bn to Towns that voted Brexit? Surely, they are confident that Brexit will see them do so much better outside of Europe and why bother putting money in to areas that don't need European investment grants or support.

Why is it that areas that voted BetterIn aren't getting same budgets as those that voted out?


The brown stuff has 24 days to hit the fan and quite few is going to end up having a sticky time for the next decade or two. At least that's my forecast.

Time will reveal all. We live in exciting times :)
 
0007 said:
I see that TM has sent a couple of her underlings to Brussels this week in her attempts to ensure that we don't leave. Or have they just gone to wind up BMW with another Project Fear instalment?
Click to expand...

Project fear or reality... :unsure:

You keep playing this they are only bluffing game and see where all the jobs end up? :eek:

TM gave a tough Mansion House speech but look where she is now. The walk doesn't match the talk.

Fly crashing into a windscreen at 70mph scenario comes to mind, does it not? What do you think will be the last thing going through all those peoples minds, who work in the motor industries, when they get to walk out the gates for the last time?
 
Chatting with a work colleague about Brexit this evening, he voted remain. It became clear to me that he believes just about everything that the MSM states, he would not entertain any counter narrative to the mainstream narrative, he wasn't open to an alternative view and he didn't appear to be aware that there is an alternative media available to him, if he went looking.

I follow MSM to see what news stories they are producing and then I can balance that with whatever the alt news outlets are saying about the same subject so that I can reach my own conclusions and either discard, agree with or put a news story in the 'not quite sure about' pile.

With the sheer amount of fake news produced by so-called reputable MSM outlets on an hourly basis then we really are in the shtuck if there are millions of people that do not bother to attempt to understand the provenance of news stories and blindly believe the MSM without ever wishing to hear a counter narrative, lazy journalists, lazy readers = easy meat for MSM.

As much as fake news is a problem, making people more cognisant of how news is produced and spun and how alt news is suppressed and censored is a huge challenge.
 
Signalcalc said:
Chatting with a work colleague about Brexit this evening, he voted remain. It became clear to me that he believes just about everything that the MSM states, he would not entertain any counter narrative to the mainstream narrative, he wasn't open to an alternative view and he didn't appear to be aware that there is an alternative media available to him, if he went looking.

I follow MSM to see what news stories they are producing and then I can balance that with whatever the alt news outlets are saying about the same subject so that I can reach my own conclusions and either discard, agree with or put a news story in the 'not quite sure about' pile.

With the sheer amount of fake news produced by so-called reputable MSM outlets on an hourly basis then we really are in the shtuck if there are millions of people that do not bother to attempt to understand the provenance of news stories and blindly believe the MSM without ever wishing to hear a counter narrative, lazy journalists, lazy readers = easy meat for MSM.

As much as fake news is a problem, making people more cognisant of how news is produced and spun and how alt news is suppressed and censored is a huge challenge.
Click to expand...

If you google “which newspapers support Brexit” you will find that most of the national ones do with only the guardian and observer as strong remainers. So I’m not sure whom you consider as MSM who produce this fake news against Brexit which I assume carries the weight of your complaint. Funny really how both sides regard the other side as lying through their teeth with their own side pretty whiter than white. Anyone would think it's a football match
 
barjon said:
If you google “which newspapers support Brexit” you will find that most of the national ones do with only the guardian and observer as strong remainers. So I’m not sure whom you consider as MSM who produce this fake news against Brexit which I assume carries the weight of your complaint. Funny really how both sides regard the other side as lying through their teeth with their own side pretty whiter than white. Anyone would think it's a football match
Click to expand...
Hi Jon,
I assumed Sig' had the BBC in mind when he posted this. I've found the whole Brexit process illuminating on a number of fronts, but probably top of my list is how I now filter 'news'. Three years ago I would have stood up for the BBC as being the fairest, most impartial and most professional news organisation in the world. I now feel very foolish and naive to have ever believed that - as Sig's work colleague probably still does. It's no longer Brexiteers opinion that BBC is the biased, it's plain for anyone to see. Just look at the ratio of remain/leave supporting guests on its programs: Biased Beeb's Brexit Bashing
Tim.
 
The UK is a democracy and most remoaners would claim to be democrats so why haven't they trimmed their sails ?
The Party leaders should take a strong line with them and insist.
Looks to me that they have overiding egos and self importance to put their lost views before the referendum result.
To put themselves above the democratic process is approaching treason imho.
Why won't the FEEBLE leaderships sack them ?
There are plenty of real democrats who would love a cushy life in Parliament plus a new pay rise.
 
Last edited:
timsk said:
Hi Jon,
I assumed Sig' had the BBC in mind when he posted this. I've found the whole Brexit process illuminating on a number of fronts, but probably top of my list is how I now filter 'news'. Three years ago I would have stood up for the BBC as being the fairest, most impartial and most professional news organisation in the world. I now feel very foolish and naive to have ever believed that - as Sig's work colleague probably still does. It's no longer Brexiteers opinion that BBC is the biased, it's plain for anyone to see. Just look at the ratio of remain/leave supporting guests on its programs: Biased Beeb's Brexit Bashing
Tim.
Click to expand...
The British Brain Washing Corporation is the most depressing of news channels. Every gory detail of massacres, shootings etc are reported. Just what vile terrorists , murderers etc must ejloy ! Any good newa that is badly needed is dropped. Even Meghan's and Kate's latest dresses are given coverage on some. Boring but less depressing.
 
timsk said:
Hi Jon,
I assumed Sig' had the BBC in mind when he posted this. I've found the whole Brexit process illuminating on a number of fronts, but probably top of my list is how I now filter 'news'. Three years ago I would have stood up for the BBC as being the fairest, most impartial and most professional news organisation in the world. I now feel very foolish and naive to have ever believed that - as Sig's work colleague probably still does. It's no longer Brexiteers opinion that BBC is the biased, it's plain for anyone to see. Just look at the ratio of remain/leave supporting guests on its programs: Biased Beeb's Brexit Bashing
Tim.
Click to expand...

Blimey, anyone quoting The Sun as a fair and reliable source must be desperate :ROFLMAO:

Seriously, though, it seems that most voters think the beeb leans towards remain. The yougov poll showed 8% thought it pro-Brexit, 27% pro-remain and 65% neither or don’t know.

The best coverage should be a massive %age for neither or don’t know and on that basis Chanel 4 News comes out best with 79% here with pro-Brexit 3% and pro-remain 18%.

Mind you with brexiteers constantly writing off absolutely anything in any way critical of Brexit as “fake news” or “project fear” (unlike the warning of 60million Turks about to descend on the UK) they are bound to see bias under the bed.
 
Signalcalc said:
Chatting with a work colleague about Brexit this evening, he voted remain. It became clear to me that he believes just about everything that the MSM states, he would not entertain any counter narrative to the mainstream narrative, he wasn't open to an alternative view and he didn't appear to be aware that there is an alternative media available to him, if he went looking.

I follow MSM to see what news stories they are producing and then I can balance that with whatever the alt news outlets are saying about the same subject so that I can reach my own conclusions and either discard, agree with or put a news story in the 'not quite sure about' pile.

With the sheer amount of fake news produced by so-called reputable MSM outlets on an hourly basis then we really are in the shtuck if there are millions of people that do not bother to attempt to understand the provenance of news stories and blindly believe the MSM without ever wishing to hear a counter narrative, lazy journalists, lazy readers = easy meat for MSM.

As much as fake news is a problem, making people more cognisant of how news is produced and spun and how alt news is suppressed and censored is a huge challenge.
Click to expand...
barjon said:
Blimey, anyone quoting The Sun as a fair and reliable source must be desperate :ROFLMAO:

Seriously, though, it seems that most voters think the beeb leans towards remain. The yougov poll showed 8% thought it pro-Brexit, 27% pro-remain and 65% neither or don’t know.

The best coverage should be a massive %age for neither or don’t know and on that basis Chanel 4 News comes out best with 79% here with pro-Brexit 3% and pro-remain 18%.

Mind you with brexiteers constantly writing off absolutely anything in any way critical of Brexit as “fake news” or “project fear” (unlike the warning of 60million Turks about to descend on the UK) they are bound to see bias under the bed.
Click to expand...

Hmm....really!

More a reflection of how dim the general public are. Unsurprising though given they are likely bone idle, brain dead, moronic, ill informed, social media illiterate, soap watchers. There really is no hope.
 
counter_violent said:
Hmm....really!

More a reflection of how dim the general public are. Unsurprising though given they are likely bone idle, brain dead, moronic, ill informed, social media illiterate, soap watchers. There really is no hope.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sufficiently brain dead, moronic and ill informed to have voted for Brexit in the first place. Glad you recognise it ;)
 
barjon said:
Yeah, sufficiently brain dead, moronic and ill informed to have voted for Brexit in the first place. Glad you recognise it ;)
Click to expand...

On the contrary, gut feel is usually correct and in the case of Brexit, just in time before we became part of the federal states of Europe.
Phew!
I bet remainers think that Maddie McCann is a missing child too.
 
counter_violent said:
On the contrary, gut feel is usually correct and in the case of Brexit, just in time before we became part of the federal states of Europe.
Phew!
I bet remainers think that Maddie McCann is a missing child too.
Click to expand...

Sorry, cv, you can’t escape this time :p. You can’t possibly insist that politicians must act on the view of the general public when you have written them off as “bone idle, brain dead, moronic, ill informed, social media illiterate, soap watchers.”
 
barjon said:
Sorry, cv, you can’t escape this time :p. You can’t possibly insist that politicians must act on the view of the general public when you have written them off as “bone idle, brain dead, moronic, ill informed, social media illiterate, soap watchers.”
Click to expand...

Are you talking about the general public here or our current crop of MP's ?

Sorry to say, but I think you place too much faith in those lightweight career politicians who have been shown to be totally inept.

As for the brain dead general public, think of them as foot soldiers or cannon fodder. The generals wouldn't be generals if they didn't have minions to persuade and boss around.
 
barjon said:
Yeah, sufficiently brain dead, moronic and ill informed to have voted for Brexit in the first place. Glad you recognise it ;)
Click to expand...

....then again, almost 50% were sufficiently brain dead, moronic and ill informed to have voted Remain. I'm pleased that you and CV have managed to co-operate so fruitfully in establishing the fundamental reason why the referendum was truly the MOFU.:p
 
barjon said:
If you google “which newspapers support Brexit” you will find that most of the national ones do with only the guardian and observer as strong remainers. So I’m not sure whom you consider as MSM who produce this fake news against Brexit which I assume carries the weight of your complaint. Funny really how both sides regard the other side as lying through their teeth with their own side pretty whiter than white. Anyone would think it's a football match
Click to expand...

Let's examine this response:

Used google to search, google is one of the tech giants that has been involved in discrimination of certain sections of society and is politicised, it routinely uses it's search algorithms to censor points of view it disagrees with and/or at the behest of politicians, it also uses it's search algorithms to promote it's own ideological position. It is involved in the mass harvesting of people's data for profit and uses consumer hardware it sells to actively harvest or spy on consumers, mostly without consent (Nest alarm being a prime recent example, a device containing a microphone without mention of it in the instruction manual). Western governments are actively involved in pressurising google to release data to them with little control or oversight.

Google can be determined to be an MSM publisher because of it's partisan stance, although it avoids the rules and scrutiny applied to real publishers, which also suits the censors.

The google search returns results from 2016, we are 3 years on from that date, where are the latest studies and the latest updates to the positions of various newspapers on the subject? What happened 3 years ago is not necessarily the same today, you only need to look at the Daily Rag to see how they have switched sides at least once.

The isolated MSM newspaper example is a poor example to select, print media has been in decline since the internet took over news dissemination starting 20 years ago, it is a shell of its former self, people choose to read their news in digital format or watch it on youtube and the TV. There is not a single Alt News example that uses print, they don't have the resources, the only reason newspapers have survived is that MSM is run by billionaires and subsided by govts.

When govts are involved in funding MSM (Canada's Trudeau media bailout being a prime example dropping CAD600million onto Canadian MSM), then you can be sure that: 1. all Western governments are involved in the same activities (BBC prime example), 2. It is used to promote the govts message only i.e. propaganda

And then when you factor in let's say the UK's Counter disinformation programme, that is actively involved in writing fake news for British and foreign based MSM, then you can be sure there is no independence left in MSM, the use of Belingcat, Statecraft, charitable NGO's, Cambridge Analytica, Integrity Initiative, MI6 dossiers etc etc, these are just the one's we know about, all scandals in the making or already exposed.

So when I posted regarding MSM consumption, print media certainly wasn't uppermost in my mind, it does not reflect reality, I should have made it more clear that I meant digital consumption my original post.

The point really is that there are millions that are not yet awake, they have not moved beyond the MSM outlets, to do their own research, to look for counter-narratives, people are lazy, I get that, my colleague being a prime example.
 
Last edited:
Is this evidence of May's treachery? : (scroll down to John Piggott comments on this blog https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/democracy-soubry-style/ to see original - replicated below )

Yesterday an article appeared at the Bruges Group Site, detailing, or claiming to detail, the contact prior to Chequers between Theresa May and Angela Merkel. This morning it has been taken down.
There are only two reasons that I can think of why this article should be taken down so quickly. Both presume that a challenge was issued from above.
1. When challenged, the article was felt to be too much given to hearsay, or insufficiently supported by secondary documentation to bear the weight of its implications, and reluctantly the decision was taken to remove it from the site.
Or ...
2. The article is just too true, too revealing, and far too incendiary in its implications for the PM and her immediate coterie to tolerate in the public domain, and every conceivable threat has been made to the Tory MPs and Lords associated with the BG to bring pressure to bear and get it removed from the site.
The article can still be viewed here:
https://www.altnewsmedia.ne...

John Piggott's summary:
"For a taster, here is the meat of the allegation:
There is no doubt about the veracity of this account since documents have been seen.
On Monday July 9th 2018, several leading French, German and Dutch senior managers were called by EU officials to an urgent meeting.
The meeting was said to be private and those present were informed that Prime Minister May and Chancellor Merkel had reached an Agreement over Brexit. Knowledge of this was attained from the actual transcript of the meeting between May and Merkel.
1) The Agreement was couched in a way to ‘appease’ the Brexit voters.
2) The Agreement would enable May to get rid of those people in her party who were against progress and unity in the EU.
3) Both Merkel and May agreed that the likely course of events would be that UK would re-join the EU in full at some time after the next general election.
4) May agreed to keep as many EU laws and institutions as she could despite the current groundswell of ‘anti-EU hysteria’ in Britain (May’s own words, apparently.)
5) Merkel and May agreed that the only realistic future for the UK was within the EU.
The original Agreement draft was completed in May 2018 in Berlin and then sent to the UK Government Cabinet Office marked ‘Secret’. "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

U
European Level 2 question
Replies
1
Views
3K
theknifemac
theknifemac
C
New! eSignal MarketCenter 3
2 3
Replies
41
Views
9K
Ghost Dog
G
Atilla
Trump Presidency and the Consequences
160 161 162
Replies
3K
Views
362K
Atilla
Atilla
N
trading for prop shops
Replies
1
Views
7K
Directional
Directional
B
companies listed on more than one exchange
Replies
3
Views
2K
grantx
G
Top