Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[andysays]

I don't see why it should be controversial - whichever side of the brexit debate you find yourself on - to state that at the very least this government's actions put the GFA and the relative peace that rests upon it at risk.

I'd say if you wanted to pin them down the best one to go for is that the UK government is supposed to remain impartial and that can't be the case when their majority depends on confidence and supply agreement from the DUP.

Also think it would be strange to argue that the prospect of a hard border in Ireland will be seen as a provocation by some.

Then we've got whatserface saying none of the state killings in NI were crimes.

We might find out the packages were completely unrelated to brexit but I don't think it's too much of a leap to speculate that they might have been.

This is a far more measured and realistic assessment than some of the more hard-line Remainers are offering though.

 

[grit]

If we really wanted to stop the bombs we should cancel the fucking partition not brexit.

Yes please, fuck up your own country all you like, just give us back ours before you do it.

 

[Ranbay]

 

[Rimbaud]

Clue #2: Irish dissidents either send a warning or they don’t, either way their bombs are a little more sophisticated than a pack of Swan Vestas with an alarm click timer.

Not really, this isn't the IRA of the 1980s. An organisation calling itself the IRA has re-emerged, but they have nowhere near the operational capacity that they did 20 odd years ago, and nothing like the level of support. They are a few hardliners who never accepted the GFA, and some younger people who've been brought up with a romanticised version of the troubles.

Some of the trouble in Derry lately - a car bombing at a court house and shots fired at police during a few days of rioting a few months back - is as much about training up younger recruits and getting them experience as anything else.

BTW there was a bomb found in Botanic area of Belfast just yesterday and the street was evacuated. A few months back during the 12th I couldn't get home because the only road I could take was closed due to a pipe bomb being found. Such things happen regularly in Northern Ireland, but the explosives are decidedly amateur and don't work more often than not.

 

[CRI]

What about all the Brexit mouthbrething phonein nutjobs, threatening violence. Should we Shit our pants and change policy to accommodate them as well?

Uh, I guess you haven't noticed how often May and her chums have sited the threat of violence from just this contingent as one of the reasons that the country must proceed with Brexit?

 

[CRI]

Yes please, fuck up your own country all you like, just give us back ours before you do it.

Problem is, the UK Government not only wants to fuck up the UK, it seems determined to shit over Ireland, north and south, as much as possible, in the process.

 

[Pickman's model]

Problem is, the UK Government not only wants to fuck up the UK, it seems determined to shit over Ireland, north and south, as much as possible, in the process.

plus ca change

 

[DexterTCN]

Problem is, the UK Government not only wants to fuck up the UK, it seems determined to shit over Ireland, north and south, as much as possible, in the process.

I think it may be worse than wanting to fuck them up, it may just be an irrelevance to them.

 

[grit]

What about all the Brexit mouthbrething phonein nutjobs, threatening violence. Should we Shit our pants and change policy to accommodate them as well?

Pant shitting is optional, addressing legitimate concerns around disrupting the fragile state of peace (for want of a better word) in the north of Ireland would be prudent.

I'm starting to wonder if the phrase "legitimate target" is going to reenter the Irish lexicon.

 

[CRI]

I think it may be worse than wanting to fuck them up, it may just be an irrelevance to them.

Or, perhaps the ongoing disdain that is the legacy of being a former colonial power.

Whatever the intention, there are no words for the incompetence and sheer recklessness of the May Government.

In a similar vein, I spotted this on the Twitters - Facebook post from a former BBC script writer. Depressing, but helps explain why the BBC has become so overtly a mouthpiece of the Tory Government.

 

[Pickman's model]

Whatever the intention, there are no words for the incompetence and sheer recklessness of the May Government.

but there are

many of them

 

[ska invita]

In a similar vein, I spotted this on the Twitters - Facebook post from a former BBC script writer. Depressing, but helps explain why the BBC has become so overtly a mouthpiece of the Tory Government.

View attachment 163878

Interesting, but was ever so I expect

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

It was much better when Rod Liddle used to edit the Today show.

 

[CRI]

Interesting, but was ever so I expect

Maybe it's because I haven't had a tv in perhaps 15 years, and don't tend to listen to the radio so much in the car these days, but I definitely have noticed a "shift" in what the BBC chooses to report and how it pitches it in the past couple years. I've got used to getting information from a variety of sources online, so when I've stayed at a hotel, or turned on Radio 4 on a long car trip, I've been pretty gobsmacked about what's missing, how often blatant lies aren't challenged (none of the Jeremy Paxman broken record questioning of Michael Howard type situs), how leading some questions are (you can almost hear in the voices of some Radio Scotland reporters a "why the fuck am I asking this stupid question?") and how blatant some reporters are in stating their opinions - John Humphries, Andrew Neil, that Nicky guy something or other.

I think it was sometime last summer, I saw a segment on the news where they were interviewing someone - a professor of economics I think, who was explaining the potential negative impact of something related to leaving the European Union. For balance, they then gave equal time to someone whose only credentials were to be from some or other organisation like "Britain's Best," who did nothing but reply to everything the economist said with, "That's rubbish" or "That's just project fear," while throwing in the odd jingoistic blurb about Britain. You could see the economics woman making strange faces in response to what the other dude said, but he was still allowed to talk over her and never questioned or challenged by the presenter. Since then, I've noticed so many similar exchanges - mostly on radio.

Never expected the BBC to be totally impartial. They've always done the terrorist/freedom fighter loaded language shit, but now it seems to be that on steroids. Perhaps what is worse, is what they don't cover at all, or mention only in passing.

I've been baffled as to why so many people seem completely nonplussed about the impact of leaving the EU if we carry on the current track. I've raised it in a work-related context with people in terms of risk management, and almost always get either blank stares, like I've suggested they include dealing with an alien invasion in their risk registers, or unconvincing denials with, "Oh, I'm sure nothing much will change," as they look out the window, then try and change the subject.

If people rely on the media and the Government to tell them when there's a big snow storm coming, or a fuel embargo, a nasty strain of flu virus, or any other impending risk, I suppose I can see why some people are still in the, "Problem, what problem?" zone.

I really do hope the Government manages to pull a rabbit out of a hat somehow at the last minute, even though that won't unfuck the economy, or fix Britain's crap reputation internationally. But if they don't, and if even a smidgen of the worst predictions come to pass and, "Cheer up, it might never happen!" doesn't work anymore, well then what?

 

[ska invita]

Maybe it's because I haven't had a tv in perhaps 15 years, and don't tend to listen to the radio so much in the car these days, but I definitely have noticed a "shift" in what the BBC chooses to report and how it pitches it in the past couple years. I've got used to getting information from a variety of sources online, so when I've stayed at a hotel, or turned on Radio 4 on a long car trip, I've been pretty gobsmacked about what's missing, how often blatant lies aren't challenged (none of the Jeremy Paxman broken record questioning of Michael Howard type situs), how leading some questions are (you can almost hear in the voices of some Radio Scotland reporters a "why the fuck am I asking this stupid question?") and how blatant some reporters are in stating their opinions - John Humphries, Andrew Neil, that Nicky guy something or other.

I think it was sometime last summer, I saw a segment on the news where they were interviewing someone - a professor of economics I think, who was explaining the potential negative impact of something related to leaving the European Union. For balance, they then gave equal time to someone whose only credentials were to be from some or other organisation like "Britain's Best," who did nothing but reply to everything the economist said with, "That's rubbish" or "That's just project fear," while throwing in the odd jingoistic blurb about Britain. You could see the economics woman making strange faces in response to what the other dude said, but he was still allowed to talk over her and never questioned or challenged by the presenter. Since then, I've noticed so many similar exchanges - mostly on radio.

Never expected the BBC to be totally impartial. They've always done the terrorist/freedom fighter loaded language shit, but now it seems to be that on steroids. Perhaps what is worse, is what they don't cover at all, or mention only in passing.

I've been baffled as to why so many people seem completely nonplussed about the impact of leaving the EU if we carry on the current track. I've raised it in a work-related context with people in terms of risk management, and almost always get either blank stares, like I've suggested they include dealing with an alien invasion in their risk registers, or unconvincing denials with, "Oh, I'm sure nothing much will change," as they look out the window, then try and change the subject.

If people rely on the media and the Government to tell them when there's a big snow storm coming, or a fuel embargo, a nasty strain of flu virus, or any other impending risk, I suppose I can see why some people are still in the, "Problem, what problem?" zone.

I really do hope the Government manages to pull a rabbit out of a hat somehow at the last minute, even though that won't unfuck the economy, or fix Britain's crap reputation internationally. But if they don't, and if even a smidgen of the worst predictions come to pass and, "Cheer up, it might never happen!" doesn't work anymore, well then what?

HAvent read all of this, but dipped in and out and right from the get go the reason the BBC rose to prominence was because of its licensed role as a deep state communication channel
The BBC
Myth of a Public Service
by Tom Mills
Verso

 

[gosub]

There was a war. But there was famously no peace treaty, no bit of signed paper to wave about

British rarely get upset enough to declare war, The troubles were a bit troubling, the Falklands a conflict, and the US war of Independence an odd description of the French being well French

 

[CRI]

British rarely get upset enough to declare war, The troubles were a bit troubling, the Falklands a conflict, and the US war of Independence an odd description of the French being well French

By the by, I always found it curious that in the UK, it's referred to as the "War of Independence" but in the US they call it the "American Revolution." You'd think it would be the opposite way round.

 

[gosub]

By the by, I always found it curious that in the UK, it's referred to as the "War of Independence" but in the US they call it the "American Revolution." You'd think it would be the opposite way round.

Calling the Americans revolting would be quite rude.

 

[kebabking]

Calling the Americans revolting would be quite rude.

one doesn't need to describe them as revolting, merely saying it - Americans - does the job perfectly well....

 

[gosub]

This 'war' the Irish reckon they had... Prone to exaggerating a soipson. The potato crop failure was a famine apparently, its not a famine if there is perfectly good soup available and you decline to eat it. Irish fussy eating more like

 

[Crispy]

EU make "offer"



(5 tweet thread, but this is the crucial bit)

"You can pull out of the CU if you want, but NI must remain in it."

(EDIT: quotation marks added to first line of post)

 

[Kaka Tim]

It was much better when Rod Liddle used to edit the Today show.

Im pretty sure rod liddle was more of liberal lefty back in the days he was editing today - he used to have a column in the guardian or observer. he was still a twat - but cleary found penning right wing, gob shite, contrarian cobblers got him more attention.

 

[andysays]

EU make offer:



(5 tweet thread, but this is the crucial bit)

"You can pull out of the CU if you want, but NI must remain in it."

That looks like it will be interpreted as 'some of UK can pull out but NI must stay', so won't go down too well with, eg, the DUP

 

[brogdale]

so won't go down too well with, eg, the DUP

It has its merits, then.

 

[grit]

This 'war' the Irish reckon they had... Prone to exaggerating a soipson. The potato crop failure was a famine apparently, its not a famine if there is perfectly good soup available and you decline to eat it. Irish fussy eating more like

I can’t tell if this is a wind up.

 

[brogdale]

Punters say no.

 

[Pickman's model]

Punters say no.

View attachment 163890

The number of times punters have been wrong, tho...

 

[brogdale]

The number of times punters have been wrong, tho...

You're not wrong.
I don't bet; as a kid our poverty was accentuated by my Dad's gambling.

That said...I reckon the £ is right on this.

 

[alex_]

The number of times punters have been wrong, tho...

Including betfair where this data comes from, you could get 5:1 on betfair at 0200 on the night of the referendum.

Alex

 

[CRI]

Well, not a bit surprised at this. Shame they got away with it until it was too late.

The Banks Files: Brexit funder urged campaign to “press it harder” after Jo Cox murder

Leaked emails and documents reveal that despite an agreement by all groups to suspend campaigning in the aftermath of her death, the millionaire businessman instructed the social media team at Leave.EU to “boost” an existing sponsored ad on Facebook.

New evidence also reveals that his campaign discussed secretly exerting influence and control over other groups, pumping in cash not properly declared to authorities, in a potential breach of spending laws.

Banks secretly bankrolled Labour’s Eurosceptic movement Labour Leave, funding at least three figures on its executive board, an office and computers. Labour Leave is under investigation by the Electoral Commission.