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 October 6 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 October 6 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 October 6 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 October 6 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 October 6 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 October 6 by bradiston

[DonniePeverley]

9 hours ago, RayC said:

 

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.

 

 

The EU did not help. It's the problem the system of the EU has, is that you can get some foolish people in charge at the wrong moment. All it had to do was make some concessions to the UK on immigration (which could have been dealt with in the longer term, in a time when there was less volatility in the politics and an economy on the rise again). They've already given concessions to the UK on not being part of Shengen, when the reality was it made no difference other than optics. Anyone who got a shengen visa also qualified quite easily for a British visa. 

 

The EU has been hurt by this too. You say the US and Beijing simply bypass the UK, and go straight to Europe. They don't. They bypass Europe now too. Without the UK, they have lost one of the few major defense partners in the world, and one of a few nuclear powers. 

 

Look at how the Polish leadership were annoyed with the EU leaders posturing over northern ireland, when if Russia made any advances to Poland it was only really the UK (along with France) that could come to help. 

 

The structural leadership of the EU is a problem. You have different countries, leaders with egos exerting influencing for short term gain, rather than looking at the bigger picture. 

 

They will never get a better opportunity to intergrate the UK into the EU than they do now. Labour will lose seats at the next election and be weaker. 

 

Make a deal with friction free trade. Make a deal on immigration (because that's what it's about with ignorant racist fools). And then slowly intergrate. Cast bind it, so no future conservative government can undue it without massive economic pain. 

 

But will they do anything? Nope. More posture, dealing etc 

 

The EU has stagnated, whilst China, the USA, and now even India are burgeoning. All we are now is a museum for tourists. 

Edited October 6 by DonniePeverley

[RayC]

4 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

 

The EU did not help. It's the problem the system of the EU has, is that you can get some foolish people in charge at the wrong moment.

 

Somehow foolish and/or weak people become influential within nations. One need look any further than the UK in the last decade to confirm that fact. 

 

4 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

All it had to do was make some concessions to the UK on immigration (which could have been dealt with in the longer term, in a time when there was less volatility in the politics and an economy on the rise again).

 

The UK had the opportunity to restrict the number of immigrants from the countries which joined the EU in 2004 but chose not to. This restriction was lifted in 2011.

 

Why should the EU have offered further concessions to the UK? 

 

4 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

They've already given concessions to the UK on not being part of Shengen, when the reality was it made no difference other than optics. Anyone who got a shengen visa also qualified quite easily for a British visa. 

 

I don't understand the point that you are trying to make about the Schengen Agreement. The opt-outs to the UK (and Ireland) were given in the 1990s!

 

4 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

The EU has been hurt by this too.

 

I already agreed that Brexit has affected the EU, but it has hurt the UK more. Very much a case of cutting off your nose to smike your face.

 

4 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

You say the US and Beijing simply bypass the UK, and go straight to Europe. They don't. They bypass Europe now too. Without the UK, they have lost one of the few major defense partners in the world, and one of a few nuclear powers. 

 

Europe as a whole is a fading power. The US's focus is on the Asia-Pacific region. Nevertheless, Europe remains a significant player. Within that context, the EU far outweighs the UK in terms of importance. A fact recognised by the US, China, India and the rest of the world.

 

The UK is currently, along with France, the most influencial defence player in Europe. However, things are changing rapidly. The EU and Germany in particular are now becoming more active in the defence sphere.

 

4 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

Look at how the Polish leadership were annoyed with the EU leaders posturing over northern ireland, when if Russia made any advances to Poland it was only really the UK (along with France) that could come to help. 

 

I assume that you mean Ukraine? The UK deserves credit for its position regarding Ukraine but the fact remains that the amount of aid given by the EU is 3 times greater than that given by the UK.

 

4 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

The structural leadership of the EU is a problem. You have different countries, leaders with egos exerting influencing for short term gain, rather than looking at the bigger picture. 

 

Tell me which UK leader - with the possible exception of John Major wrt  Ireland -  has put national interest before short term political gain over the past 50 years? 

 

Why do you hold the EU or other European countries to a higher standard than the UK?

 

4 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

They will never get a better opportunity to intergrate the UK into the EU than they do now. Labour will lose seats at the next election and be weaker. 

 

The UK left the EU. Fact. Why should the EU bend over backwards to accompany a nation which voluntarily decided to leave and where a significant proportion of its' politicians are still hostile to it? Moreover, if it were to give special treatment to the UK, other third countries would ask for similar concessions. Why should the EU cause problems for itself?

 

4 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

Make a deal with friction free trade. Make a deal on immigration (because that's what it's about with ignorant racist fools). And then slowly intergrate. Cast bind it, so no future conservative government can undue it without massive economic pain. 

 

As I implied in the last paragraph, doing so opens a Pandora's box for the EU. Why would they want to do so?

 

4 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

 

4 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

The EU has stagnated, whilst China, the USA, and now even India are burgeoning. All we are now is a museum for tourists. 

 

The EU and the UK are in decline but the UK will decline quicker and further outside the EU than within.