Keir Starmer’s EU Reset: A Strategy Built on Falsehoods

[bradiston]

1 hour ago, herfiehandbag said:

Perhaps one should ask the people of Switzerland, Norway, and the Balkan states how they feel about EU influence, and the effective limitations it imposed upon their freedoms to run things the way they may wish.

 

Mind you, of course, asking the people is anathema to the EU! Which rather takes us back to my initial point.

I think the Balkan states have all applied for membership. Norway has so much natural gas it is quite happy staying "independent". And as for the Swiss? They seem happy to remain neutral on all matters, as ever.

[herfiehandbag]

25 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

They will do so when the march of demographic change removes the support their ‘Little Englander’ project.

I suppose it was only a question of time before "long march" memes started to be discussed in connection with Starmer.

[Chomper Higgot]

15 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

I suppose it was only a question of time before "long march" memes started to be discussed in connection with Starmer.

Memes?

 

I accept you are making an effort, but don’t think you are in meme territory, or ever will be.

 

 

[mokwit]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The Mail

The Express

The Sun

The Times

The Financial Times

The Spectator

 

https://www.vuelio.com/uk/blog/newspaper-circulation-linked-twitter-share/

FT has gone woke to the point that people like me who used to read it now regard it as the Financial Guardian. The change was almost overnight with the exit of Pearson as a shareholder. The first act of the new regime was to ban commenting from the people (including me) who punctured the narrative with their comments. Progressives have to censor because their narrative doesn't stand up to scrutiny. HTH.

Edited 12 hours ago by mokwit

[herfiehandbag]

On 10/5/2024 at 7:22 AM, herfiehandbag said:

So begins Starmer's long slow surrender to the demands of the EU. It will take several years, but it will be complete. You can bet your bottom dollar (Euro?) that it will be kept clear of Parliament, and all favours will be called in to ensure that it does not receive proper public or press scrutiny. It all has a familiar ring to It doesn't it?

 

The EU bureaucracy cannot tolerate a major independent economy, physically adjacent to it's own. It has to gain control of it, it's existential for them. 

 

The government know that it cannot rely on support from it's population, so will not consult or involve them.

 

 

Perhaps not formerly rejoining, but some sort of "two tier membership"?

[bradiston]

1 hour ago, mokwit said:

FT has gone woke to the point that people like me who used to read it now regard it as the Financial Guardian. The change was almost overnight with the exit of Pearson as a shareholder. The first act of the new regime was to ban commenting from the people (including me) who punctured the narrative with their comments. Progressives have to censor because their narrative doesn't stand up to scrutiny. HTH.

Er, what did you say that so pissed them off? And where did you say it? Are you really such a bigshot they actually gave a toss what you were saying? I think you flatter yourself.

[mokwit]

4 minutes ago, bradiston said:

Er, what did you say that so pissed them off? And where did you say it? Are you really such a bigshot they actually gave a toss what you were saying? I think you flatter yourself.

Learn to read before commenting on somebody else's post.

 

BTW I had one FT "journalist" formerly of The Guardian post under something that I had posted that he was going to have me banned (but I was actually banned as part of a group ban on those that punctured the narrative).

[Chomper Higgot]

3 hours ago, mokwit said:

The first act of the new regime was to ban commenting from the people (including me) who punctured the narrative with their comments.

Have you considered you might have overestimated your abilities?

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

Perhaps not formerly rejoining, but some sort of "two tier membership"?

What Starmer is doing is addressing all the barriers that need to be dealt with in readiness for the Tories returning to the center right where they will back rejoining the EU.

 

 

[bradiston]

1 hour ago, mokwit said:

Learn to read before commenting on somebody else's post.

 

BTW I had one FT "journalist" formerly of The Guardian post under something that I had posted that he was going to have me banned (but I was actually banned as part of a group ban on those that punctured the narrative).

Read what? All your previous drivel? Puncturing the narrative? Where do you get this garbage from?

[Will B Good]

On 10/5/2024 at 3:32 AM, Social Media said:

with critics arguing that his strategy is unlikely to secure a better deal for Britain

 

 

.........with critics arguing that his strategy is likely to secure a better deal for Britain........

 

That's the critics biggest worry.

 

 

 

 

 

[RayC]

6 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

The European Union itself is weaker without the UK, the second biggest economy it had, and the strongest defense partner. 

 

Utter lunacy on their behalf to not try and get the UK back in somehow. It's like the idiots have learnt nothing. 

 

You're right. The EU is weaker without the UK. As Michel Barnier said, "There are no winners with Brexit".

 

However, what was utter lunacy was the nonsensical notion promulgated by the Flat Earth Brigade (the ERG) that, 'they (the EU) need us more than we need them': The UK has lost more than the EU. There is a wealth of evidence showing the negative economic effect of Brexit on the UK economy. In addition, the UK's standing on the world stage is diminished as a result of Brexit: Washington and Beijing bypass London nowadays and go straight to Berlin, Brussels and Paris.

 

Let's not forgot that the UK left the EU, not vica versa, so it is natural to expect the UK to make the first move in any resetting of the relationship. In that regard, Starmer and, indeed, Sunak deserve credit for trying to repair the damage done by Johnson's foolhardy confrontational attitude to the EU.

[RayC]

8 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

Perhaps one should ask the people of Switzerland, Norway, and the Balkan states how they feel about EU influence, and the effective limitations it imposed upon their freedoms to run things the way they may wish.

 

Mind you, of course, asking the people is anathema to the EU! Which rather takes us back to my initial point.

 

How exactly are the EU limiting the freedoms of Switzerland, Norway and the Baltic States' to run things the way that they wish?

 

EU Parliamentary elections are held every five years. The electorate in all EU member states are eligible to vote in these elections.

 

Similarly, elections to the various national assemblies are held in the individual EU member states at various periodicity. Again, the respective national electorates are free to cast their vote for whomever they like.

 

Therefore, I don't understand how and why you conclude that, "... asking the people is anathema to the EU"?

[Homburg]

23 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Capital investment is not a ‘black hole’.

Agreed.  And the £22 billion "black hole" claimed by Reeves and the £22 billion previously unannounced capital investment is, of course, pure coincidence.

[mokwit]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Have you considered you might have overestimated your abilities?

Nope, as per a post above they banned in one move a number of people from the comments section including me who were puncturing the narrative of their "journalism". When I contacted them and asked what rule I had broken they couldn't/wouldn't tell me. . They even WROTE IN THE PAPER THAT THEY HAD DONE THIS (no I am not going to try and find it for someone like you, so don't bother asking me for a link. Always an insult of smear from you and all our other resident Political Commissars, isn't it?. I have yet to see you engage in debate, all you do is smear and post links and slink away when you can't answer.

Edited 6 hours ago by mokwit

[mokwit]

2 hours ago, bradiston said:

Read what? All your previous drivel? Puncturing the narrative? Where do you get this garbage from?

Always an insult or smear with the Left. Read what I wrote in the post that you quoted. I stated that they had banned a number of people from commenting, which makes you comment plain stupid.. I really hope for your sake that you are a cynical propagandist, because the alternative is that you are "useful".

Edited 6 hours ago by mokwit

[Chomper Higgot]

26 minutes ago, mokwit said:

Nope, as per a post above they banned in one move a number of people from the comments section including me who were puncturing the narrative of their "journalism". When I contacted them and asked what rule I had broken they couldn't/wouldn't tell me. . They even WROTE IN THE PAPER THAT THEY HAD DONE THIS (no I am not going to try and find it for someone like you, so don't bother asking me for a link. Always an insult of smear from you and all our other resident Political Commissars, isn't it?. I have yet to see you engage in debate, all you do is smear and post links and slink away when you can't answer.

So you got banned off a national newspaper’s comments sections for trolling and then you registered here and made your way directly to the news section. 
 

Did you try registering at the newspaper under a different username?

 

 

[mokwit]

43 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

So you got banned off a national newspaper’s comments sections for trolling and then you registered here and made your way directly to the news section. 
 

Did you try registering at the newspaper under a different username?

 

 

Gaslighting from you, if you look you will see many comments from me on threads on visas. where can I buy a a...? since 2003, whereas you have made 30,000 comments in a couple of years and only in the political/news threads.

 

Do you even live in Thailand?

 

No I didn't try registering under a different name because it wasn't that big a deal to me whether I commented or not. Politics is your life, it is not mine. I was apolitical until I saw the orchestrated propaganda campaign in 2016 for UK to accept a false narrative of "families fleeing war".

 

I never liked the Left because of the kind of people they are, but actually do not reject all their ideas - I have benefited in my life from things put in place by a Labour Govt.

Edited 5 hours ago by mokwit

[mokwit]

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Have you considered you might have overestimated your abilities?

Maybe my posts just go over your head. You seem to be incapable of actually thinking for yourself, all you can do is spout the party line, interestingly for both the UK and the US. Perhaps you are an "Internationalist" - you declined to answer what country you are a citizen of.

[mokwit]

45 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

So you got banned off a national newspaper’s comments sections for trolling and then you registered here and made your way directly to the news section. 
 

Did you try registering at the newspaper under a different username?

 

 

Since when has the bedrock of democracy of pointing out the flaws in an argument/reporting been "trolling"? - only the left showing their true colours call this "trolling". This is why some of us are so bitterly opposed to the Left - we see you as you really are.

[bradiston]

3 hours ago, mokwit said:

Always an insult or smear with the Left. Read what I wrote in the post that you quoted. I stated that they had banned a number of people from commenting, which makes you comment plain stupid.. I really hope for your sake that you are a cynical propagandist, because the alternative is that you are "useful".

Oh, calling me stupid is ok then? Yeah, banned a number of people from commenting. That's what I took you to mean. But I asked you what you said to offend? And please don't "hope for my sake". I can take care of myself. What makes you think I'm on the left? Because I call out your stuff about the FT and the Guardian? What's your experience of  "left wing" politics?  I'm not a socialist. You label anyone challenging your view as Left, or Leftie. You dismiss the FT and the guardian as what, Leftie? Childish.

Edited 3 hours ago by bradiston

[Chomper Higgot]

The fragility of Brexiteers on full display here.

 

Starmer talks to the EU and the histrionic kick off. 

[JonnyF]

21 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The fragility of Brexiteers on full display here.

 

Starmer talks to the EU and the histrionic kick off. 

 

It's no surprise that Brit haters love Starmer.

 

Must be like Christmas every day watching him ruin the country, give away territory, freeze pensioners, import criminals etc.

 

None of which was in the manifesto.

 

No wonder his approval ratings are in the toilet.

 

[BangkokReady]

12 hours ago, BKKBike09 said:

"the UK's predominantly rightwing press" - are you still living in the 1980s?

 

He's a left-wing nutcase.  They live in a world of lies.

[bradiston]

8 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

It's no surprise that Brit haters love Starmer.

 

Must be like Christmas every day watching him ruin the country, give away territory, freeze pensioners, import criminals etc.

 

None of which was in the manifesto.

 

No wonder his approval ratings are in the toilet.

 

I'm not a Starmer supporter, but do you have a reverse AI filter? All artificial, but no intelligence?

[Chomper Higgot]

15 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Brit haters

 

 

The fragility of which I spoke.

[JonnyF]

2 minutes ago, bradiston said:

I'm not a Starmer supporter, but do you have a reverse AI filter? All artificial, but no intelligence?

 

Feel free to point out which part of my post was untrue.

 

Or just continue copy/pasting something you read on Twitter and thought was witty.

[bradiston]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

Feel free to point out which part of my post was untrue.

 

Or just continue copy/pasting something you read on Twitter and thought was witty.

"Ruin the country" covers just about anything. You really think the country's ruined? If so, don't you think the Cameron/Johnson/Sunak administrations might have had something to do with it? After all, Rome didn't fall in a day.

 

Import criminals? What happened to the Tory promise to take back control of our borders after Brexit? They couldn't even force through the Rwandan scheme to EXport criminals, as you call them.

 

Give away territory? Oh, you mean Diego Garcia? We had no claim on it. The local inhabitants were displaced and banned from returning because of the US base there. Even reporters couldn't get in until the BBC were allowed a brief visit.

 

The winter fuel payment is still available to those claiming pension credit. 800,000 people who are entitled to pension credit don't bother. I'm a UK pensioner. It took 3 minutes to Google the facts, not your scandalously misleading précis. And you suggest I'm the propagandist.

 

Why are you so bitter? Chip on the shoulder? What did Labour, presumably, do to you? What's with the "Leftie" nonsense? This is how the Rugby Club at university c. 1969 referred to long haireds and stoners. A little passé don't you think? Might need an upgrade into the 21st century.

 

London lost preeminence as a financial centre. So what, you say? A small price to pay for securing our borders, right? 555. What a load of you know what.

 

And I don't copy and paste from X. I'm not even on it. Never have been. Never will be. I'm not a fan of Musk nor AI.

 

So any more baseless allegations? Or even claims?

Edited 23 minutes ago by bradiston