The point about the influence of the print media in putting anti-EU sentiment in people's minds, as well as suggesting it would be simple to untangle all the complex arrangements is important. They are likely to have had much more impact than anyone like Soros possibly could, and Murdoch particularly is a far more tangible 'foreign' influence on democracy through his widespread reach.
Their desire to escape from soon to be in action EU anti-tax avoidance regulations make their input much dodgier and again with a much bigger impact on the UK than the interventions of those who they can play their audience off as 'enemies of the people'. No other country has such a rabid tabloid press as the UK's and this, combined with their obvious vested interest in not being in the EU, is one of the major factors in the UK voting (marginally) to leave but it would be very unlikely to happen in any other EU country.
If brexit voters knew what they were voting for, I think it is the case that Theresa May has negotiated precisely what brexit voters wanted and expected. During the process the EU has been steadfastly itself which has helped brexiters to be able to rely on their consistency whilst the UK sorts itself out. If any brexit supporters feel they have been betrayed, perhaps they could explain in precise detail how, and explain in precise detail what they would do, so their ideas can be held up to scrutiny. The UK is past the point where anybody can say 'I know what I don't want, but don't know what I do want, and I don't know how to get it'. The politicians have done your bidding. As a remainer personally I think any deal is terrible, but I didn't vote for it.
Ah so @southbank has finally blown the Soros dogwhistle.
Right then mate, I'll let you in on something. I'm a beneficiary of George Soros. To the tune of €1500.
What did I do with this money? Did I use this wall of money to set about subverting Czech or UK democracy to help him make more billions (as the alt.right would suppose and suggest).?
Well. I used it to set up the Czech version of the WhatDoTheyKnow website. The website used to force for example the full disclosure of the West Ham Olympic Stadium contract. The website that could assist you in getting information that would help you uncover whether George Soros had clandestinely contributed funds to some public body.
As a result of this I joined a community comprising some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. For example in Hungary the people who run the same FOI site have for their troubles been raided, physically threatened by police and shadowy private persons, had their computers taken, been subjected to spurious intimidating tax audits..for running a website which helps people use an active law to seek information about their own public bodies.
This is the sort of thing Soros' Open Society Fund does. You can easily go to their website and see what they do. I somehow doubt you will like it. But you will struggle to demonstrate that it is anti-democratic. It gives voice to the weak, the under-represented, the discriminated against. I think that is something a mature, self-confident democracy welcomes.
So I'd think twice before blowing that particular dogwhistle here, if I were you...
Fucking thank you. I was getting increasingly concerned this dog whistle anti semitism was going unopposed.
Anyone spouting the Soros line, especially designating him as an “other” (elite in this case) is anti Semitic. Which is the main problem I have with calling some one the “elite”. It’s empty, and relies on conspiracy theories.
Soros, Banks, Murdoch, all take a shit and fart and are human beings, they may be unpleasant and sociopathic but they’re not worldwide puppet masters.
Ah so @southbank has finally blown the Soros dogwhistle.
Right then mate, I'll let you in on something. I'm a beneficiary of George Soros. To the tune of €1500.
What did I do with this money? Did I use this wall of money to set about subverting Czech or UK democracy to help him make more billions (as the alt.right would suppose and suggest).?
Well. I used it to set up the Czech version of the WhatDoTheyKnow website. The website used to force for example the full disclosure of the West Ham Olympic Stadium contract. The website that could assist you in getting information that would help you uncover whether George Soros had clandestinely contributed funds to some public body.
As a result of this I joined a community comprising some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. For example in Hungary the people who run the same FOI site have for their troubles been raided, physically threatened by police and shadowy private persons, had their computers taken, been subjected to spurious intimidating tax audits..for running a website which helps people use an active law to seek information about their own public bodies.
This is the sort of thing Soros' Open Society Fund does. You can easily go to their website and see what they do. I somehow doubt you will like it. But you will struggle to demonstrate that it is anti-democratic. It gives voice to the weak, the under-represented, the discriminated against. I think that is something a mature, self-confident democracy welcomes.
So I'd think twice before blowing that particular dogwhistle here, if I were you...
Fucking thank you. I was getting increasingly concerned this dog whistle anti semitism was going unopposed.
Anyone spouting the Soros line, especially designating him as an “other” (elite in this case) is anti Semitic. Which is the main problem I have with calling some one the “elite”. It’s empty, and relies on conspiracy theories.
Soros, Banks, Murdoch, all take a shit and fart and are human beings, they may be unpleasant and sociopathic but they’re not worldwide puppet masters.
Ah so @southbank has finally blown the Soros dogwhistle.
Right then mate, I'll let you in on something. I'm a beneficiary of George Soros. To the tune of €1500.
What did I do with this money? Did I use this wall of money to set about subverting Czech or UK democracy to help him make more billions (as the alt.right would suppose and suggest).?
Well. I used it to set up the Czech version of the WhatDoTheyKnow website. The website used to force for example the full disclosure of the West Ham Olympic Stadium contract. The website that could assist you in getting information that would help you uncover whether George Soros had clandestinely contributed funds to some public body.
As a result of this I joined a community comprising some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. For example in Hungary the people who run the same FOI site have for their troubles been raided, physically threatened by police and shadowy private persons, had their computers taken, been subjected to spurious intimidating tax audits..for running a website which helps people use an active law to seek information about their own public bodies.
This is the sort of thing Soros' Open Society Fund does. You can easily go to their website and see what they do. I somehow doubt you will like it. But you will struggle to demonstrate that it is anti-democratic. It gives voice to the weak, the under-represented, the discriminated against. I think that is something a mature, self-confident democracy welcomes.
So I'd think twice before blowing that particular dogwhistle here, if I were you...
Fucking thank you. I was getting increasingly concerned this dog whistle anti semitism was going unopposed.
Anyone spouting the Soros line, especially designating him as an “other” (elite in this case) is anti Semitic. Which is the main problem I have with calling some one the “elite”. It’s empty, and relies on conspiracy theories.
Soros, Banks, Murdoch, all take a shit and fart and are human beings, they may be unpleasant and sociopathic but they’re not worldwide puppet masters.
What on earth are you talking about?
Maybe read about the history of anti semitism. You might learn about something called the holocaust, Shylock in the merchant of Venice. The idea that there is a bunch of rich Jews controlling everything. You know, that kind of thing.
Ah so @southbank has finally blown the Soros dogwhistle.
Right then mate, I'll let you in on something. I'm a beneficiary of George Soros. To the tune of €1500.
What did I do with this money? Did I use this wall of money to set about subverting Czech or UK democracy to help him make more billions (as the alt.right would suppose and suggest).?
Well. I used it to set up the Czech version of the WhatDoTheyKnow website. The website used to force for example the full disclosure of the West Ham Olympic Stadium contract. The website that could assist you in getting information that would help you uncover whether George Soros had clandestinely contributed funds to some public body.
As a result of this I joined a community comprising some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. For example in Hungary the people who run the same FOI site have for their troubles been raided, physically threatened by police and shadowy private persons, had their computers taken, been subjected to spurious intimidating tax audits..for running a website which helps people use an active law to seek information about their own public bodies.
This is the sort of thing Soros' Open Society Fund does. You can easily go to their website and see what they do. I somehow doubt you will like it. But you will struggle to demonstrate that it is anti-democratic. It gives voice to the weak, the under-represented, the discriminated against. I think that is something a mature, self-confident democracy welcomes.
So I'd think twice before blowing that particular dogwhistle here, if I were you...
Fucking thank you. I was getting increasingly concerned this dog whistle anti semitism was going unopposed.
Anyone spouting the Soros line, especially designating him as an “other” (elite in this case) is anti Semitic. Which is the main problem I have with calling some one the “elite”. It’s empty, and relies on conspiracy theories.
Soros, Banks, Murdoch, all take a shit and fart and are human beings, they may be unpleasant and sociopathic but they’re not worldwide puppet masters.
What on earth are you talking about?
Maybe read about the history of anti semitism. You might learn about something called the holocaust, Shylock in the merchant of Venice. The idea that there is a bunch of rich Jews controlling everything. You know, that kind of thing.
I know the history of antisemitism, thanks. The guy is using his financial clout in a political setting. I dont, have a problem with that, but to call someone an anti-semite purely for pointing out that he is doing so, is laughable.
Ah so @southbank has finally blown the Soros dogwhistle.
Right then mate, I'll let you in on something. I'm a beneficiary of George Soros. To the tune of €1500.
What did I do with this money? Did I use this wall of money to set about subverting Czech or UK democracy to help him make more billions (as the alt.right would suppose and suggest).?
Well. I used it to set up the Czech version of the WhatDoTheyKnow website. The website used to force for example the full disclosure of the West Ham Olympic Stadium contract. The website that could assist you in getting information that would help you uncover whether George Soros had clandestinely contributed funds to some public body.
As a result of this I joined a community comprising some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. For example in Hungary the people who run the same FOI site have for their troubles been raided, physically threatened by police and shadowy private persons, had their computers taken, been subjected to spurious intimidating tax audits..for running a website which helps people use an active law to seek information about their own public bodies.
This is the sort of thing Soros' Open Society Fund does. You can easily go to their website and see what they do. I somehow doubt you will like it. But you will struggle to demonstrate that it is anti-democratic. It gives voice to the weak, the under-represented, the discriminated against. I think that is something a mature, self-confident democracy welcomes.
So I'd think twice before blowing that particular dogwhistle here, if I were you...
Fucking thank you. I was getting increasingly concerned this dog whistle anti semitism was going unopposed.
Anyone spouting the Soros line, especially designating him as an “other” (elite in this case) is anti Semitic. Which is the main problem I have with calling some one the “elite”. It’s empty, and relies on conspiracy theories.
Soros, Banks, Murdoch, all take a shit and fart and are human beings, they may be unpleasant and sociopathic but they’re not worldwide puppet masters.
What on earth are you talking about?
Maybe read about the history of anti semitism. You might learn about something called the holocaust, Shylock in the merchant of Venice. The idea that there is a bunch of rich Jews controlling everything. You know, that kind of thing.
So it's impossible to criticize him without being an anti semite? Beyond ridiculous.
Ah so @southbank has finally blown the Soros dogwhistle.
Right then mate, I'll let you in on something. I'm a beneficiary of George Soros. To the tune of €1500.
What did I do with this money? Did I use this wall of money to set about subverting Czech or UK democracy to help him make more billions (as the alt.right would suppose and suggest).?
Well. I used it to set up the Czech version of the WhatDoTheyKnow website. The website used to force for example the full disclosure of the West Ham Olympic Stadium contract. The website that could assist you in getting information that would help you uncover whether George Soros had clandestinely contributed funds to some public body.
As a result of this I joined a community comprising some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. For example in Hungary the people who run the same FOI site have for their troubles been raided, physically threatened by police and shadowy private persons, had their computers taken, been subjected to spurious intimidating tax audits..for running a website which helps people use an active law to seek information about their own public bodies.
This is the sort of thing Soros' Open Society Fund does. You can easily go to their website and see what they do. I somehow doubt you will like it. But you will struggle to demonstrate that it is anti-democratic. It gives voice to the weak, the under-represented, the discriminated against. I think that is something a mature, self-confident democracy welcomes.
So I'd think twice before blowing that particular dogwhistle here, if I were you...
Fucking thank you. I was getting increasingly concerned this dog whistle anti semitism was going unopposed.
Anyone spouting the Soros line, especially designating him as an “other” (elite in this case) is anti Semitic. Which is the main problem I have with calling some one the “elite”. It’s empty, and relies on conspiracy theories.
Soros, Banks, Murdoch, all take a shit and fart and are human beings, they may be unpleasant and sociopathic but they’re not worldwide puppet masters.
What on earth are you talking about?
Maybe read about the history of anti semitism. You might learn about something called the holocaust, Shylock in the merchant of Venice. The idea that there is a bunch of rich Jews controlling everything. You know, that kind of thing.
So it's impossible to criticize him without being an anti semite? Beyond ridiculous.
Sure, but criticise him but not banks, murdoch etc? Sounds a bit fishy
Ah so @southbank has finally blown the Soros dogwhistle.
Right then mate, I'll let you in on something. I'm a beneficiary of George Soros. To the tune of €1500.
What did I do with this money? Did I use this wall of money to set about subverting Czech or UK democracy to help him make more billions (as the alt.right would suppose and suggest).?
Well. I used it to set up the Czech version of the WhatDoTheyKnow website. The website used to force for example the full disclosure of the West Ham Olympic Stadium contract. The website that could assist you in getting information that would help you uncover whether George Soros had clandestinely contributed funds to some public body.
As a result of this I joined a community comprising some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. For example in Hungary the people who run the same FOI site have for their troubles been raided, physically threatened by police and shadowy private persons, had their computers taken, been subjected to spurious intimidating tax audits..for running a website which helps people use an active law to seek information about their own public bodies.
This is the sort of thing Soros' Open Society Fund does. You can easily go to their website and see what they do. I somehow doubt you will like it. But you will struggle to demonstrate that it is anti-democratic. It gives voice to the weak, the under-represented, the discriminated against. I think that is something a mature, self-confident democracy welcomes.
So I'd think twice before blowing that particular dogwhistle here, if I were you...
Fucking thank you. I was getting increasingly concerned this dog whistle anti semitism was going unopposed.
Anyone spouting the Soros line, especially designating him as an “other” (elite in this case) is anti Semitic. Which is the main problem I have with calling some one the “elite”. It’s empty, and relies on conspiracy theories.
Soros, Banks, Murdoch, all take a shit and fart and are human beings, they may be unpleasant and sociopathic but they’re not worldwide puppet masters.
What on earth are you talking about?
Maybe read about the history of anti semitism. You might learn about something called the holocaust, Shylock in the merchant of Venice. The idea that there is a bunch of rich Jews controlling everything. You know, that kind of thing.
So it's impossible to criticize him without being an anti semite? Beyond ridiculous.
Sure, but criticise him but not banks, murdoch etc? Sounds a bit fishy
The difference is that Banks and Murdoch are not, currently, financing an attempt to reverse Brexit (although they may both be coming round to it). Don't worry, I have plenty of criticisms of both.
As for the Soros anti-Semitism slur, do you hold back from criticising Philip Green because he is Jewish?
Ah so @southbank has finally blown the Soros dogwhistle.
Right then mate, I'll let you in on something. I'm a beneficiary of George Soros. To the tune of €1500.
What did I do with this money? Did I use this wall of money to set about subverting Czech or UK democracy to help him make more billions (as the alt.right would suppose and suggest).?
Well. I used it to set up the Czech version of the WhatDoTheyKnow website. The website used to force for example the full disclosure of the West Ham Olympic Stadium contract. The website that could assist you in getting information that would help you uncover whether George Soros had clandestinely contributed funds to some public body.
As a result of this I joined a community comprising some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. For example in Hungary the people who run the same FOI site have for their troubles been raided, physically threatened by police and shadowy private persons, had their computers taken, been subjected to spurious intimidating tax audits..for running a website which helps people use an active law to seek information about their own public bodies.
This is the sort of thing Soros' Open Society Fund does. You can easily go to their website and see what they do. I somehow doubt you will like it. But you will struggle to demonstrate that it is anti-democratic. It gives voice to the weak, the under-represented, the discriminated against. I think that is something a mature, self-confident democracy welcomes.
So I'd think twice before blowing that particular dogwhistle here, if I were you...
Fucking thank you. I was getting increasingly concerned this dog whistle anti semitism was going unopposed.
Anyone spouting the Soros line, especially designating him as an “other” (elite in this case) is anti Semitic. Which is the main problem I have with calling some one the “elite”. It’s empty, and relies on conspiracy theories.
Soros, Banks, Murdoch, all take a shit and fart and are human beings, they may be unpleasant and sociopathic but they’re not worldwide puppet masters.
What on earth are you talking about?
Maybe read about the history of anti semitism. You might learn about something called the holocaust, Shylock in the merchant of Venice. The idea that there is a bunch of rich Jews controlling everything. You know, that kind of thing.
I know the history of antisemitism, thanks. The guy is using his financial clout in a political setting. I dont, have a problem with that, but to call someone an anti-semite purely for pointing out that he is doing so, is laughable.
You should take a look at the exact way he is being attacked in Hungary, his home country, and in the US. And by the way do you think that helping people set up websites which assist people in making a Freedom of Information request, is "political"? Or a grant for NGOs that help ethnic minorities who struggle in a given country? Or a grant that helps support investigative journalism?
And what about Soros supposed bad crime against Britain ? You know, "breaking the pound" as the average person reads and parrots back. I think you of all people will struggle to assert that this was so bad. But then for 25 years nobody had much to say about Soros either way, despite him setting up OSF and similar foundations gradullay over that period. Despite Central European Uni functioning just fine in Budapest until Orban came along. Funny, that, huh?
Ah so @southbank has finally blown the Soros dogwhistle.
Right then mate, I'll let you in on something. I'm a beneficiary of George Soros. To the tune of €1500.
What did I do with this money? Did I use this wall of money to set about subverting Czech or UK democracy to help him make more billions (as the alt.right would suppose and suggest).?
Well. I used it to set up the Czech version of the WhatDoTheyKnow website. The website used to force for example the full disclosure of the West Ham Olympic Stadium contract. The website that could assist you in getting information that would help you uncover whether George Soros had clandestinely contributed funds to some public body.
As a result of this I joined a community comprising some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. For example in Hungary the people who run the same FOI site have for their troubles been raided, physically threatened by police and shadowy private persons, had their computers taken, been subjected to spurious intimidating tax audits..for running a website which helps people use an active law to seek information about their own public bodies.
This is the sort of thing Soros' Open Society Fund does. You can easily go to their website and see what they do. I somehow doubt you will like it. But you will struggle to demonstrate that it is anti-democratic. It gives voice to the weak, the under-represented, the discriminated against. I think that is something a mature, self-confident democracy welcomes.
So I'd think twice before blowing that particular dogwhistle here, if I were you...
Fucking thank you. I was getting increasingly concerned this dog whistle anti semitism was going unopposed.
Anyone spouting the Soros line, especially designating him as an “other” (elite in this case) is anti Semitic. Which is the main problem I have with calling some one the “elite”. It’s empty, and relies on conspiracy theories.
Soros, Banks, Murdoch, all take a shit and fart and are human beings, they may be unpleasant and sociopathic but they’re not worldwide puppet masters.
Is this a joke?
Wasn’t aware Soros was Jewish and not should I have. Doesn’t make any difference at all to the fact that he is an individual prepared to bring down or develop entire countries using his money as long as it fulfils the main requirement which is to increase the amount of money/power he has. Same goes for loads of people in that boat, Murdocch, Barclay brothers, Jamie dimon, lord ashcroft etc
Can’t see it is anti-Semitic at all unless soros is particularly being targeted for being Jewish which wasn’t obvious to me.
Ah so @southbank has finally blown the Soros dogwhistle.
Right then mate, I'll let you in on something. I'm a beneficiary of George Soros. To the tune of €1500.
What did I do with this money? Did I use this wall of money to set about subverting Czech or UK democracy to help him make more billions (as the alt.right would suppose and suggest).?
Well. I used it to set up the Czech version of the WhatDoTheyKnow website. The website used to force for example the full disclosure of the West Ham Olympic Stadium contract. The website that could assist you in getting information that would help you uncover whether George Soros had clandestinely contributed funds to some public body.
As a result of this I joined a community comprising some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. For example in Hungary the people who run the same FOI site have for their troubles been raided, physically threatened by police and shadowy private persons, had their computers taken, been subjected to spurious intimidating tax audits..for running a website which helps people use an active law to seek information about their own public bodies.
This is the sort of thing Soros' Open Society Fund does. You can easily go to their website and see what they do. I somehow doubt you will like it. But you will struggle to demonstrate that it is anti-democratic. It gives voice to the weak, the under-represented, the discriminated against. I think that is something a mature, self-confident democracy welcomes.
So I'd think twice before blowing that particular dogwhistle here, if I were you...
Fucking thank you. I was getting increasingly concerned this dog whistle anti semitism was going unopposed.
Anyone spouting the Soros line, especially designating him as an “other” (elite in this case) is anti Semitic. Which is the main problem I have with calling some one the “elite”. It’s empty, and relies on conspiracy theories.
Soros, Banks, Murdoch, all take a shit and fart and are human beings, they may be unpleasant and sociopathic but they’re not worldwide puppet masters.
Is this a joke?
Wasn’t aware Soros was Jewish and not should I have. Doesn’t make any difference at all to the fact that he is an individual prepared to bring down or develop entire countries using his money as long as it fulfils the main requirement which is to increase the amount of money/power he has. Same goes for loads of people in that boat, Murdocch, Barclay brothers, Jamie dimon, lord ashcroft etc
Can’t see it is anti-Semitic at all unless soros is particularly being targeted for being Jewish which wasn’t obvious to me.
Surprised that you are the author of that post. Might I ask you to consider my posts above on Soros, and then tell me why he is so bad, and specifically where's the evidence that he has done the things you claim, and in the name of the objective you assign to him. Bear in mind that he is 87. Eighty-fucking-seven...
Ah so @southbank has finally blown the Soros dogwhistle.
Right then mate, I'll let you in on something. I'm a beneficiary of George Soros. To the tune of €1500.
What did I do with this money? Did I use this wall of money to set about subverting Czech or UK democracy to help him make more billions (as the alt.right would suppose and suggest).?
Well. I used it to set up the Czech version of the WhatDoTheyKnow website. The website used to force for example the full disclosure of the West Ham Olympic Stadium contract. The website that could assist you in getting information that would help you uncover whether George Soros had clandestinely contributed funds to some public body.
As a result of this I joined a community comprising some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. For example in Hungary the people who run the same FOI site have for their troubles been raided, physically threatened by police and shadowy private persons, had their computers taken, been subjected to spurious intimidating tax audits..for running a website which helps people use an active law to seek information about their own public bodies.
This is the sort of thing Soros' Open Society Fund does. You can easily go to their website and see what they do. I somehow doubt you will like it. But you will struggle to demonstrate that it is anti-democratic. It gives voice to the weak, the under-represented, the discriminated against. I think that is something a mature, self-confident democracy welcomes.
So I'd think twice before blowing that particular dogwhistle here, if I were you...
Fucking thank you. I was getting increasingly concerned this dog whistle anti semitism was going unopposed.
Anyone spouting the Soros line, especially designating him as an “other” (elite in this case) is anti Semitic. Which is the main problem I have with calling some one the “elite”. It’s empty, and relies on conspiracy theories.
Soros, Banks, Murdoch, all take a shit and fart and are human beings, they may be unpleasant and sociopathic but they’re not worldwide puppet masters.
Is this a joke?
Wasn’t aware Soros was Jewish and not should I have. Doesn’t make any difference at all to the fact that he is an individual prepared to bring down or develop entire countries using his money as long as it fulfils the main requirement which is to increase the amount of money/power he has. Same goes for loads of people in that boat, Murdocch, Barclay brothers, Jamie dimon, lord ashcroft etc
Can’t see it is anti-Semitic at all unless soros is particularly being targeted for being Jewish which wasn’t obvious to me.
Surprised that you are the author of that post. Might I ask you to consider my posts above on Soros, and then tell me why he is so bad, and specifically where's the evidence that he has done the thing's you claim, and in the name of the objective you assign to him. Bear in mind that he is 87. Eighty-fucking-seven...
But I read some tweets from NotARussianBot784872728 saying that he was howwible.
Ah so @southbank has finally blown the Soros dogwhistle.
Right then mate, I'll let you in on something. I'm a beneficiary of George Soros. To the tune of €1500.
What did I do with this money? Did I use this wall of money to set about subverting Czech or UK democracy to help him make more billions (as the alt.right would suppose and suggest).?
Well. I used it to set up the Czech version of the WhatDoTheyKnow website. The website used to force for example the full disclosure of the West Ham Olympic Stadium contract. The website that could assist you in getting information that would help you uncover whether George Soros had clandestinely contributed funds to some public body.
As a result of this I joined a community comprising some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. For example in Hungary the people who run the same FOI site have for their troubles been raided, physically threatened by police and shadowy private persons, had their computers taken, been subjected to spurious intimidating tax audits..for running a website which helps people use an active law to seek information about their own public bodies.
This is the sort of thing Soros' Open Society Fund does. You can easily go to their website and see what they do. I somehow doubt you will like it. But you will struggle to demonstrate that it is anti-democratic. It gives voice to the weak, the under-represented, the discriminated against. I think that is something a mature, self-confident democracy welcomes.
So I'd think twice before blowing that particular dogwhistle here, if I were you...
He is openly campaigning to reverse Brexit and funding that campaign, whatever else good he does I do not appreciate him interfering in our elections, along with Obama etc when they did the same thing. Foreign interference is not welcome, whether from Russia or Hungary.
I completely agree, first step, ban the foreign owned right wing press that has been poisoning the electorate for 30+ year. So that's an end to: The Daily Mail The Express The Sun The Times The Evening Standard
I'm sure there's more I've missed.
The extent to which the UK press has poisoned minds against the EU is nothing short of a national disgrace. We could never have had a democratic referendum on the subject of Europe because the public had been fed lies and propaganda for decades on end. Below are some specific examples dating back over 30 years, but there are literally hundreds of others. The trouble is, that even when they print retractions (rare and always in the small print) the damage is already done: The message that the EU is made of 'potty', over-controlling, self-interested bureaucrats is implanted and nourished in the collective consciousness of the British public. And now we have people moaning about George Soros being involved in British politics. Jeez just look at this litany of filth. The British public has had its thinking on Europe carefully controlled by the malign forces of the gutter press for years. You cannot even begin to complain about outside influence unless you concede that we are all victims of Fleet Street's hogwash.
November 1990: Sun Headline screams "Up Yours Delors" the accompanying picture of a Union Jack and a two-fingered salute clearly spelling out the us against them position that the The Sun wanted its readers to take up. For some reason they held back with their alternative racist headline "Frog Off", though the text still called him a “French fool” and “the Froggie Common Market chief”.
September 1993: The Observer (yes even The Observer can fall into the anti-EU trap) claimed that “The EC is to ban the serving of rare meat in restaurants”. The story was wholly untrue.
September 1994: Four papers (the usual suspects, plus The Mirror) reported that curved bananas have been banned by the EU. They haven’t, they just have a different classification.
March 2002: The press misrepresent proposed noise at work regulations. What the proposals actually stated was that anyone working with noise levels above 87 decibels for 8 hours or more should have access to ear protection. This was reported as: “Potty EU bureaucrats want to ban music and loud chatter from pubs and clubs”, The Sun. “Pubs showing England’s World Cup games this summer could forced to keep the noise down under crazy new European rules”, Sunday People. “Musicians are fighting to be exempted from a European Union directive to reduce workplace noise levels which will require hundreds of pieces of classical music to be played more quietly or not at all”, The Times. “Barmy Eurocrats are bringing in new laws which mean night-clubbers will have to wear earplugs”, News of the World. “Football players could soon be ordered to wear ear plugs to protect them from the roar of the crowd”, Daily Express.
April 2002: Under the headline “Don’t let the EU take away Rumpole’s wig” The Mail on Sunday reported that Lord Chief Justice Wolf had submitted proposals for judges to wear more modern dress. The fools didn’t even seem to realise that Woolf was nothing to do with the EU.
May 2003: The Daily Mail described a draft EU constitution as a “blueprint for tyranny”. Even the right wing Times slammed this unfounded insult as “a figment of febrile minds”.
January 2005: The BBC reported that the EU had banned the recycling of tea bags. The truth was rather different: Cardiff council had used their entitlement (not obligation) under UK and EU law to ban the composting of vegetable matter as a temporary measure in the fight against foot and mouth disease.
June 2010: The front page of the Daily Mail falsely reported that the EU planned to ban the sale of eggs by the dozen. After MEP Renate Sommer explained that this was not the case, the Mail changed their tune to "Eggs by the dozen will NOT be banned… after backlash by Britain", as if British complaints had stopped this. It was never going to happen anyway.
August 2011: In a fit of unashamed Europhobia the Daily Mail claimed Germany was turning Europe into a “Fourth Reich”.
September 2013: The Express, The Mail, and the Telegraph all report the EU plan to ban the use of the Union Jack and other national flags on packets of meat. There is no substance to the story at all.
October 2011: The Daily Mail claimed that the EU had banned children from blowing up balloons. Instead the EU had recommended that children under eight be accompanied by an adult to avoid any potential choking problems.
February 2012: The Mail report a controversy over the amounts of sugar allowed in products that are allowed to be called in jam. Over the following months the story spread through most of the press; always in the same sensationalist manner. The Express even went so far as declaring the end of the British Breakfast. Even the Secretary of State for Business and some time Europhile, Vince Cable, couldn't resist making a bit of political capital out of this non-story, "This is exactly the sort of ridiculous red tape that we want to do away with". So, what was all the fuss about? There was an anomaly in the classification system. Whilst the stated sugar limits work well for most fruits, apples contain more acid and so require less sugar to achieve the same jam effect. When the case was brought before Eurostat, all member states agreed and the classification was altered. To be fair, it did take a few months to go through the process but the story was a perfect storm in a breakfast teacup.
November 2013: The Daily Telegraph claimed that "Brussels wants to harmonise the volume of lavatory flushes around the European Union". In fact, all that had happened was that the EU had introduced criteria under which Member States can award Ecolabel status to such products. They were simply trying to encourage manufacturers to be more environmentally friendly, not imposing any regulations.
June 2015: The Mail and Express claim that a new law will ban the photography of tourist landmarks. There never was such a law or a plan for one.
August 2015: The Sunday Express claimed, “EU bureaucrats to brand popular British beaches 'UNFIT for swimming' in latest barmy move”. In fact this wasn’t a new regulation as claimed, but an updating of standards to account for changes made by the World Health Organisation. Who wants to visit a clean beach anyway? Surely not Sunday Express readers.
January 2016: Under the headline “Europe’s leaders have no plan to cut immigration”, The Daily Express claimed that an “annual tidal wave of 228,000 non-EU migrants who use European passports to gain access to Britain”. They were forced to correct this by IPSO* as the figure relates to the total number not an annual figure.
January 2016: The Daily Express reported that “Now European Union bureaucrats could make Britons put out SEVEN bins every week”. What they were reporting on was in fact an academic study, but the headline and report twisted this leading readers to believe is was EU policy.
February 2016: Writing in the Sunday Times, Dominic Raab (I wonder what became of him) was allowed to claim that “ditching the common agricultural policy would cut food bills by up to 17 per cent.” Whilst no-one would claim that CAP is cost free, the actual costs are closer to 1% of average food bills.
March 2016: The Sun’s front page claims that the "Queen Backs Brexit". IPSO ruled that this was 'significantly misleading'.
May 2016: The Express calmed that, “BRUSSELS plans to ban British kettles, toasters and hairdryers after the European Union referendum”. There is no such plan for this to happen and there never was. What there was is an ecodesign policy to ensure that electrical equipment is energy efficient. And very sensible it is too.
May 2016: Daily Express leads with the claim that the cost of teaching migrant children is £3bn a year. This was inaccurate figure which included many British citizens, including Nigel Farage’s children born to a German mother.
May 2016: In a gross misinterpretation of official figures, The Sun claimed that 80% of new jobs go to foreign workers. In fact the true figure is about 17.5%
May 2016: The Daily Mail claimed that the EU had "told" Britain to build more homes. However they were reporting on a recommendation rather than an order.
June 2016: Immediately prior to the Brexit referendum the Daily Mail reported a "lorry load" of "stowaways from Europe" had been intercepted in east London. However, police footage clearly showed the migrants saying they were from Iraq and Kuwait. The Telegraph and Express printed similar misleading stories.
November 2016: The Daily Mail called judges "The Enemies of The People" after the High Court stated that Parliament rather than May should trigger Article 50. So much for sovereignty eh? For the Daily Mail, it didn’t matter though, it’s all about leaving.
March 2018: The Sun published a table of predicted post-Brexit price drops in consumer goods. The trouble is, that they got their maths wrong and their claims were untrue. They have since deleted the table form their website. If they’ve published a correction though, I haven’t been able to find it.
For some reason I think you work in finance (a very generic description of course).
Would you like to explain how his actions in 1992 were uniquely evil, and have never been carried out by any other lovely hedge fund managers )other than the reason that they didn't have his financial clout)?
And would you like to explain why all the stuff he does now - the object of so much vitriolic criticism - is so bad? Should I pay back my €1500 in shame?
Anyone? What is so uniquely bad about George Soros? Let's be avin yer...
For some reason I think you work in finance (a very generic description of course).
Would you like to explain how his actions in 1992 were uniquely evil, and have never been carried out by any other lovely hedge fund managers )other than the reason that they didn't have his financial clout)?
And would you like to explain why all the stuff he does now - the object of so much vitriolic criticism - is so bad? Should I pay back my €1500 in shame?
Anyone? What is so uniquely bad about George Soros? Let's be avin yer...
Funny when people whinge about Soros hedging against the UK in the 1990s but don't mind that half the Tories in the ERG are openly doing the same thing.
For some reason I think you work in finance (a very generic description of course).
Would you like to explain how his actions in 1992 were uniquely evil, and have never been carried out by any other lovely hedge fund managers )other than the reason that they didn't have his financial clout)?
And would you like to explain why all the stuff he does now - the object of so much vitriolic criticism - is so bad? Should I pay back my €1500 in shame?
Anyone? What is so uniquely bad about George Soros? Let's be avin yer...
What are you on about?
He isn’t uniquely bad, or uniquely good. He is someone who is prepared to bankrupt entire countries if that serves his personal interest. That was my point and I am really not sure why you are getting so wound up about that comment. Read it again. Not unique to him, as I think I said.
Now he has made more money than he and his descendants can spend maybe he is trying to do some good, I have not been exposed to it but recognise you may have been an I have no issues with that at all.
Comments
Their desire to escape from soon to be in action EU anti-tax avoidance regulations make their input much dodgier and again with a much bigger impact on the UK than the interventions of those who they can play their audience off as 'enemies of the people'. No other country has such a rabid tabloid press as the UK's and this, combined with their obvious vested interest in not being in the EU, is one of the major factors in the UK voting (marginally) to leave but it would be very unlikely to happen in any other EU country.
During the process the EU has been steadfastly itself which has helped brexiters to be able to rely on their consistency whilst the UK sorts itself out.
If any brexit supporters feel they have been betrayed, perhaps they could explain in precise detail how, and explain in precise detail what they would do, so their ideas can be held up to scrutiny.
The UK is past the point where anybody can say 'I know what I don't want, but don't know what I do want, and I don't know how to get it'. The politicians have done your bidding.
As a remainer personally I think any deal is terrible, but I didn't vote for it.
Anyone spouting the Soros line, especially designating him as an “other” (elite in this case) is anti Semitic. Which is the main problem I have with calling some one the “elite”. It’s empty, and relies on conspiracy theories.
Soros, Banks, Murdoch, all take a shit and fart and are human beings, they may be unpleasant and sociopathic but they’re not worldwide puppet masters.
As for the Soros anti-Semitism slur, do you hold back from criticising Philip Green because he is Jewish?
And what about Soros supposed bad crime against Britain ? You know, "breaking the pound" as the average person reads and parrots back. I think you of all people will struggle to assert that this was so bad. But then for 25 years nobody had much to say about Soros either way, despite him setting up OSF and similar foundations gradullay over that period. Despite Central European Uni functioning just fine in Budapest until Orban came along. Funny, that, huh?
Wasn’t aware Soros was Jewish and not should I have. Doesn’t make any difference at all to the fact that he is an individual prepared to bring down or develop entire countries using his money as long as it fulfils the main requirement which is to increase the amount of money/power he has. Same goes for loads of people in that boat, Murdocch, Barclay brothers, Jamie dimon, lord ashcroft etc
Can’t see it is anti-Semitic at all unless soros is particularly being targeted for being Jewish which wasn’t obvious to me.
Never really liked him after that (if I have indeed got the same bloke)
This was what I was thinking of when I wrote the post.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/george-soros-bank-of-england.asp
November 1990: Sun Headline screams "Up Yours Delors" the accompanying picture of a Union Jack and a two-fingered salute clearly spelling out the us against them position that the The Sun wanted its readers to take up. For some reason they held back with their alternative racist headline "Frog Off", though the text still called him a “French fool” and “the Froggie Common Market chief”.
September 1993: The Observer (yes even The Observer can fall into the anti-EU trap) claimed that “The EC is to ban the serving of rare meat in restaurants”. The story was wholly untrue.
September 1994: Four papers (the usual suspects, plus The Mirror) reported that curved bananas have been banned by the EU. They haven’t, they just have a different classification.
March 2002: The press misrepresent proposed noise at work regulations. What the proposals actually stated was that anyone working with noise levels above 87 decibels for 8 hours or more should have access to ear protection. This was reported as: “Potty EU bureaucrats want to ban music and loud chatter from pubs and clubs”, The Sun. “Pubs showing England’s World Cup games this summer could forced to keep the noise down under crazy new European rules”, Sunday People. “Musicians are fighting to be exempted from a European Union directive to reduce workplace noise levels which will require hundreds of pieces of classical music to be played more quietly or not at all”, The Times. “Barmy Eurocrats are bringing in new laws which mean night-clubbers will have to wear earplugs”, News of the World. “Football players could soon be ordered to wear ear plugs to protect them from the roar of the crowd”, Daily Express.
April 2002: Under the headline “Don’t let the EU take away Rumpole’s wig” The Mail on Sunday reported that Lord Chief Justice Wolf had submitted proposals for judges to wear more modern dress. The fools didn’t even seem to realise that Woolf was nothing to do with the EU.
May 2003: The Daily Mail described a draft EU constitution as a “blueprint for tyranny”. Even the right wing Times slammed this unfounded insult as “a figment of febrile minds”.
January 2005: The BBC reported that the EU had banned the recycling of tea bags. The truth was rather different: Cardiff council had used their entitlement (not obligation) under UK and EU law to ban the composting of vegetable matter as a temporary measure in the fight against foot and mouth disease.
June 2010: The front page of the Daily Mail falsely reported that the EU planned to ban the sale of eggs by the dozen. After MEP Renate Sommer explained that this was not the case, the Mail changed their tune to "Eggs by the dozen will NOT be banned… after backlash by Britain", as if British complaints had stopped this. It was never going to happen anyway.
August 2011: In a fit of unashamed Europhobia the Daily Mail claimed Germany was turning Europe into a “Fourth Reich”.
September 2013: The Express, The Mail, and the Telegraph all report the EU plan to ban the use of the Union Jack and other national flags on packets of meat. There is no substance to the story at all.
Continued
October 2011: The Daily Mail claimed that the EU had banned children from blowing up balloons. Instead the EU had recommended that children under eight be accompanied by an adult to avoid any potential choking problems.
February 2012: The Mail report a controversy over the amounts of sugar allowed in products that are allowed to be called in jam. Over the following months the story spread through most of the press; always in the same sensationalist manner. The Express even went so far as declaring the end of the British Breakfast. Even the Secretary of State for Business and some time Europhile, Vince Cable, couldn't resist making a bit of political capital out of this non-story, "This is exactly the sort of ridiculous red tape that we want to do away with". So, what was all the fuss about? There was an anomaly in the classification system. Whilst the stated sugar limits work well for most fruits, apples contain more acid and so require less sugar to achieve the same jam effect. When the case was brought before Eurostat, all member states agreed and the classification was altered. To be fair, it did take a few months to go through the process but the story was a perfect storm in a breakfast teacup.
November 2013: The Daily Telegraph claimed that "Brussels wants to harmonise the volume of lavatory flushes around the European Union". In fact, all that had happened was that the EU had introduced criteria under which Member States can award Ecolabel status to such products. They were simply trying to encourage manufacturers to be more environmentally friendly, not imposing any regulations.
June 2015: The Mail and Express claim that a new law will ban the photography of tourist landmarks. There never was such a law or a plan for one.
August 2015: The Sunday Express claimed, “EU bureaucrats to brand popular British beaches 'UNFIT for swimming' in latest barmy move”. In fact this wasn’t a new regulation as claimed, but an updating of standards to account for changes made by the World Health Organisation. Who wants to visit a clean beach anyway? Surely not Sunday Express readers.
January 2016: Under the headline “Europe’s leaders have no plan to cut immigration”, The Daily Express claimed that an “annual tidal wave of 228,000 non-EU migrants who use European passports to gain access to Britain”. They were forced to correct this by IPSO* as the figure relates to the total number not an annual figure.
January 2016: The Daily Express reported that “Now European Union bureaucrats could make Britons put out SEVEN bins every week”. What they were reporting on was in fact an academic study, but the headline and report twisted this leading readers to believe is was EU policy.
February 2016: Writing in the Sunday Times, Dominic Raab (I wonder what became of him) was allowed to claim that “ditching the common agricultural policy would cut food bills by up to 17 per cent.” Whilst no-one would claim that CAP is cost free, the actual costs are closer to 1% of average food bills.
March 2016: The Sun’s front page claims that the "Queen Backs Brexit". IPSO ruled that this was 'significantly misleading'.
May 2016: The Express calmed that, “BRUSSELS plans to ban British kettles, toasters and hairdryers after the European Union referendum”. There is no such plan for this to happen and there never was. What there was is an ecodesign policy to ensure that electrical equipment is energy efficient. And very sensible it is too.
May 2016: Daily Express leads with the claim that the cost of teaching migrant children is £3bn a year. This was inaccurate figure which included many British citizens, including Nigel Farage’s children born to a German mother.
May 2016: In a gross misinterpretation of official figures, The Sun claimed that 80% of new jobs go to foreign workers. In fact the true figure is about 17.5%
May 2016: The Daily Mail claimed that the EU had "told" Britain to build more homes. However they were reporting on a recommendation rather than an order.
June 2016: Immediately prior to the Brexit referendum the Daily Mail reported a "lorry load" of "stowaways from Europe" had been intercepted in east London. However, police footage clearly showed the migrants saying they were from Iraq and Kuwait. The Telegraph and Express printed similar misleading stories.
November 2016: The Daily Mail called judges "The Enemies of The People" after the High Court stated that Parliament rather than May should trigger Article 50. So much for sovereignty eh? For the Daily Mail, it didn’t matter though, it’s all about leaving.
March 2018: The Sun published a table of predicted post-Brexit price drops in consumer goods. The trouble is, that they got their maths wrong and their claims were untrue. They have since deleted the table form their website. If they’ve published a correction though, I haven’t been able to find it.
*Independent Press Standards Organisation
Would you like to explain how his actions in 1992 were uniquely evil, and have never been carried out by any other lovely hedge fund managers )other than the reason that they didn't have his financial clout)?
And would you like to explain why all the stuff he does now - the object of so much vitriolic criticism - is so bad? Should I pay back my €1500 in shame?
Anyone? What is so uniquely bad about George Soros? Let's be avin yer...
He isn’t uniquely bad, or uniquely good. He is someone who is prepared to bankrupt entire countries if that serves his personal interest. That was my point and I am really not sure why you are getting so wound up about that comment. Read it again. Not unique to him, as I think I said.
Now he has made more money than he and his descendants can spend maybe he is trying to do some good, I have not been exposed to it but recognise you may have been an I have no issues with that at all.
High Court ruling could declare Brexit ‘void’ as early as Christmas https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-void-high-court-ruling-arron-banks-investigation-when-december-christmas-a8649001.html