Even the BBC think it's bollocks
I know exactly what it means, it still isn't anti brexit though. It's just not rabid and spittle flecked any longer. As I've said and @Archimedes has explained, he's doing what he was asked to do. Which is to soften the tone,Never thought you were that obtuse. You do understand the phrase "editorial stance changed overnight" don't you ?
May and Robbins?I'm now reading the 177 pages of the Withdrawal Agreement in full for the first time.
Unlike the GFA, which seems relatively balanced in the greater scheme of things, the WA is extraordinarily lop-sided.
I've done, and supervised, a lot of serious and detailed commercial negotiation over the years. Without fail, the first thing a negotiator should do when presented with a contentious clause or amendment is to make its obligations or rights mutual, so as to test how the opposition respond to being bound by the same requirement. It's negotiation 101.
I'm genuinely surprised by the sheer number of one-way clauses in the WA, where a mutually binding clause would be an obvious requirement given the content. The more I read, the clearer it becomes that the negotiators had something other in mind than negotiating the best outcome for the UK.
For those interested, read the recitals at the start of the Agreement (which set out the intentions of the Parties). Note which recitals are mutual, and which are one way. You'll be quite surprised.
May and Robbins have a good deal to answer for, whether you believe in Brexit or not.
How about trips to Durham?Your second para. Already robustly stated yesterday by Hancock, virtually ignored by the entire MSM.
Boris much the same this weekend. But the current crew are fully aware that telling the general public in general and ethnic groups in particular that they are a bunch of selfish w*nkers is not likely to win friends and influence anything other than a backlash.
A recent conversation with a resident of Italy reveals what lockdown meant to her and her family. 4 months confined to the apartment. Allowed out for 45 mins daily, time specified, in which to do all that needed to be done, such as shopping.
That set of bullet points.Even the BBC think it's bollocks
Beware of 'Tanks on the Streets' rumours
Disinformation and social media reporter
At the start of the pandemic, false claims about tanks on the streets of the UK to enforce lockdown went viral online.
Following the prime minister's announcement that he might use the Army to enforce new measures, similar claims have spread on social media about the military and martial law.
A spokesperson for the prime minister has since clarified what he meant, explaining the system has been used in the past and would involve the military back-filling certain duties.
That includes guarding protected sites, so police officers can be out enforcing the virus response.
But with many of us worried, frustrated and consumed about new changes, it’s a fertile time for misinformation to spread in WhatsApp and Facebook groups.
Here’s a reminder of how you can stop bad information going viral:
- Interrogate the source - and pause before you share. Where has the information come from? A copied and pasted message that’s attributed to a friend of a friend is much less reliable than trusted sources for updates
- Ask yourself how a post makes you feel. Often misleading information and conspiracy theories play on the feelings of worry and frustration that come with news about possible restrictions
- Think about bias. Lots of people share false claims about lockdown or coronavirus that confirm their political opinions. Criticism of the government’s handling of the pandemic, general confusion and opposition to measures are all very legitimate. Unhelpful panicky messages and claims coronavirus is a "hoax" are less useful