Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Loud Whispers]

The full extent of how hackers managed to hijack the petition demanding a second EU referendum can be revealed by MailOnline. 

Hackers boasted about their exploits in online forums and openly mocked how easy it was to infiltrate the UK Parliament petition website.

The petition has attracted more than 3.7million signatures and has led high profile figures to use the petition as proof of the public appetite for a re-run of last week's referendum, which was won by the Brexit campaign by more than 1.2million votes.

Computer bots were able to use scripts that automatically signed up hundreds of thousands of fake signatures by using the same UK postcode - many of which were the Palace of Westminster's SW1A 0AA address.

They deliberately directed their names to appear as residents of a range of different countries, including tiny states such as Vatican City to 'show your democracies are a joke'.

It meant more than 42,000 signatures were registered in the Vatican City, despite the tiny papal state having a population of just 840. 

There were more signatures registered from the least populous country of Pitcairn Island than the 56 residents living there.

There were even 24,867 signatures registered in North Korea, where the internet is highly censored and accessed by a tiny minority of the population.

Thousands were signed up from other tiny states, including Palau, the British Virgin Islands, Liechtenstein, British Virgin Islands, Liechenstein and St Kitts and Nevis - as well as the disputed Occupied Palestinian Territories.

Writing in a mix of Arabic and English, a hacker claiming to be in Syria said 'God willing' the number of signatures from the Vatican City would 'soon exceed actual Vatican population and from then on it's pure bants'.

Spoiler: lmao (click to show/hide)

Everyone = British

[Radio Controlled]

I imagine the old thread was locked by the OP because people were getting too mad and needed time to cool off, making another to circumvent it is probably bad form.

Perhaps, but he didn't actually tell us why he closed it or when he'd be reopening it (and the fact that it didn't seem to be getting uncomfortably heated, at least from how I saw it). He could leave it closed for a day, meaning brexit news might start derailing other threads. Either way, we can permanently close one of the two later anyway.
Ninja'd


Seems like Sturgeon is already facing some roadblocks in her efforts to try and keep Scotland in the EU somehow.

Nicola Sturgeon suffers major setback as Donald Tusk rejects invitation for Brexit talks on Scotland's future
Nicola Sturgeon’s plan to bypass the UK Government and lobby the EU directly to let Scotland stay has suffered a major setback after the president of the powerful European Council rejected her invitation for talks.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The First Minister will travel to Brussels tomorrow for a meeting with Martin Shulz, the president of the European Parliament, at which she will argue that special arrangements should be put in place to protect Scotland’s EU status.

It marks the start of a public relations blitz on the European stage in which Ms Sturgeon will attempt to carve out her own foreign policy based on Scotland having made a “different choice” from the UK in last week’s referendum.
But Donald Tusk, the council president, declined her overtures by arguing that a meeting would be “not appropriate” given the “situation in the UK.”

His refusal is significant as the European Council comprises the heads of all the member states, who would have to unanimously agree to any special deal for Scotland, whether it was independent or not.
Several central and eastern European states are reported to be concerned that meeting Ms Sturgeon would encourage other separatist movements.

Also, sorry to bang this drum again, but it seems this (possibly) Brexit-related incident is a step up in magnitude from the previously reported ones:

Halal butcher in the Midlands is firebombed as tensions run high after Brexit vote
A HALAL butchers was destroyed in a sick petrol bomb attack just days after Britain voted to leave the EU.

The vile destruction at Kasmir Meat & Poultry in Pleck, Walsall, is the latest in a string of sick hate crimes in the wake of Brexit.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Police say a 6ft-tall white man, who was wearing a blue jacket, walked into the halal butchers and threw a lit bottle of accelerant at 5.25pm on Monday.
Thankfully a shop-worker managed to escape with just minor bruising after the sickening fire bomb attack.
Dramatic photos have shown the extent of damage at the Muslim store, with the front windows blown out and the walls covered in black soot.

West Midlands Police say they are keeping an open mind over the motive, but locals insist the attack was Brexit-related.
One said tensions have been “running high in the community” in the aftermath of the shock decision to leave the European Union.

Other source: http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/28/butcher-hit-by-petrol-bomb-in-latest-racist-incident-5971947/

I've heard people claim that these might not point toward the UK having an unusual amount of racists compared to other countries, but more that they feel emboldened now that the vote result could be somewhat interpreted as the majority of voters backing this kind of sentiment (not the case probably, but with the way the immigration horn was blown by the leave campaign, I could see why some would interpret it like that :/ ).

[Loud Whispers]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I revise my thoughts on Corbyn, and my confidence in his ability to survive has faltered considerably

[Frumple]

Also wat
"gli inglesi hanno violato le regole. Non è la filosofia UE che la folla possa decidere del suo destino"
"the British have violated the rules . It is not the EU 's philosophy that the crowd will decide his fate "
TOO SMUG

Hey, that again. Anyone know if folks ever found out when schulz was supposed to have said that? Closest someone seemed to come to a source was this, which apparently translates (at least partially) out to something more along the lines of "the fate of the EU should not be decided by decisions of the mob", but still wasn't attributed to a specific date or somethin'. _{google translate spits out madness that disagrees with both the reported translation and that second one from a native german speaker :V}

Maybe helg could get in on this? Pretty sure it's either him or sheb (or both) that speak german, so they could at least confirm the meaning if not identify the actual source.

[Loud Whispers]

If you can't trust Giovanni, mankind is not worth trusting

[Radio Controlled]

On the possible revote, I do understand the arguments against. Just revoting until you get the 'right' result isn't fair at all, and a mockery of democracy. However, in this particular case, with all the blatant lies during the campaign and the fact that the full consequences are just now sinking in, the implosion of the political top of some of the major parties and the fact that nobody there has a goddamn idea on what to do, it becomes more complicated.

Not only that, but the referendum was explicitly not legally binding, and while not following through would be political suicide, it wouldn't be breaking law (it would be a massive breach of trust of course, and could lead to rioting in the streets according to some).

Now, from the way I've been reading things, it kinda seems like a lot of leave supporters almost fear a revote (as if they're assuming, again, that remain would win). But if leaving is truly the will of the people, won't they simply vote it again? Thereby erasing any doubts or regrexits or whatever.

To be very honest, right now it kinda seems like a situation where a person has been conned, and then the conman quickly going 'no backsies!' as the duped person realizes what happened. Even though the con was obvious and the victim really should've known better, it's still something I wouldn't want to see for the British people. I don't want to see them suffer, even though I do love the idea of a strong, integrated EU myself (provided it's implemented well of course) and I realize the fact that (from the perspective of the current EU) a member leaving kinda has to hurt to make it clear why staying is better.

I am NOT saying that leave is the empirically wrong camp here (even though I personally am a remain backer, which was probably clear by now), or that they don't have legit grievances (lord knows the current EU isn't perfect), nor that they're just a bunch of racists. The fact that so many of the remain camp just dismiss them like that is atrocious. I do think however that the leave camp is run by incompetents and liars. I think there's quite some evidence that whoever ends up executing the will of the people (whatever that may be), these clowns aren't the ones to do it.

Thing is, if brexit happens now, the way things were run, I really don't think it'll be pretty, not in slightest way, for the people of the UK. It could cause a deep rift in society, and would hurt more (eg economically) than an exit from the EU would have anyways (for example, due to the continued uncertainty we are seeing right now even, which is really bad for investments and business and all that jazz).

In case of a revote however, very clear rules should be set up from the start, and a clear plan of what will happen for every possible result. Eg in case leave wins again, immediate invocation of article 50 and a clear idea on who will run negotations. And that after this referendum, no more new ones will be held (in case of leave victory), or a period in which no new ones will be held unless 2/3 majority approves it in parliament (in case of remain victory, to try and prevent the 'neverendum' situation). Also clear rules on what majority needs to be gotten and what voter turnout is needed. It might very well still be simple majority (though I personally don't think leaving such an enormous decision to 50%+1 is a good idea), but whatever it is, make it clear and argued.

In order to make it so the results of the previous aren't ignored, a certain arrangement could be made. For example, saying that remain must win by a certain margin (eg more than 53%) and that if not, leave is said to have won. Averaging the two results is also an option. Just letting a second referendum stand on its own would be easiest of course, and give the least headaches, but might not be the fairest. I dunno honestly.


Anyways, sorry for wallness of that post.
/rant

[Flying Dice]

Yeah, sorry, democratic politics isn't a game where you get to quickload over and over until the RNG gives you the outcome you want. It's an MMO full of P2W microtransactions that cost $1m per and the only other option is grinding for realtime years for a single dollar of equivalent gain.

RE: the Polish source. If it's verified, I'm curious to see if Brexit will actually kick the EU's ass into gear. Regardless of how it turns out for Britain an Europe that's actually trying to fix its problems and settle its differences would be astonishing.

[Sonlirain]

We got any Poles who can verify this crap

Well TVP.info reposted this document.
http://www.tvp.info/25939371/nasz-news-superpanstwo-zamiast-unii-europejskiej--ultimatum-francji-i-niemiec
http://wiadomosci.wp.pl/kat,1356,title,Superpanstwo-zamiast-Unii-Europejskiej-Wyciekl-tekst-ultimatum-Francji-i-Niemiec,wid,18397368,wiadomosc.html?ticaid=117464

Aaaand it's kinda legit i guess? TVP is the polish public TV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telewizja_Polska which includes info channels.
and WP.pl is your Polish MSN.com equivalent.

I fucking swear it looks like a hoax but it does seem legit as far as the sites go.

[Loud Whispers]

On the possible revote, I do understand the arguments against. Just revoting until you get the 'right' result isn't fair at all, and a mockery of democracy. However, in this particular case, with all the blatant lies during the campaign and the fact that the full consequences are just now sinking in, the implosion of the political top of some of the major parties and the fact that nobody there has a goddamn idea on what to do, it becomes more complicated.

Quite so, it is now impossible

Not only that, but the referendum was explicitly not legally binding, and while not following through would be political suicide, it wouldn't be breaking law (it would be a massive breach of trust of course, and could lead to rioting in the streets according to some).

Quite so

Now, from the way I've been reading things, it kinda seems like a lot of leave supporters almost fear a revote (as if they're assuming, again, that remain would win). But if leaving is truly the will of the people, won't they simply vote it again? Thereby erasing any doubts or regrexits or whatever.

There are no credible doubts except where Remain sees them; just keep making referendums until your opponents are not able to keep up with your funding is a surefire way to keep a healthy democracy and erase "doubts" right? No, it is quite a mockery. Remain had state support, state funds, EU funds, most all celebrity endorsements, charity endorsements, Uni endorsements, all the high office posts, near all the economists, and a good portion of the City of London - still lost. Osborne went on TV saying if OAPs voted Brexit he'd cut pensions, Cameron started a media campaign that outspent the entire Leave campaign using state funds in one day - still lost. Cameron had an advantage in that Tory MPs could not even begin campaigning for Brexit until he concluded negotiations, still lost. Our Remain MPs unilaterally changed the voting registration deadline to coincide with a 2 day media blitz to get the most Remain voters registered, having decided such an illegal action was legal because - still lost.

To be very honest, right now it kinda seems like a situation where a person has been conned, and then the conman quickly going 'no backsies!' as the duped person realizes what happened.

To me, it seems the conmen have reared their ugly heads and shown their colours. When Remain broke the law to mobilize Remain voters, that was democratic, and to oppose it was counter-democratic. Yet to say that the referendum should be overturned because old people voted for it, that is not counter-democratic, that is pro-democratic.
Hell, do you know what response I got when I criticized the Remain campaign's inequity?
"Misleading voters is a tradition and an expectation."
If 2 million more of your voters still doesn't win after you control the legal playing field and you control the state media and you still lose? Why is it so hard to accept the result?
I recall how the Remain spokesperson for the BBC talked of reconciliation when they were counting the results. This was when it was predicted that Remain would win. The spokesperson talked of reconciliation, of respecting the people's will, of reaching out to the other half - and then it turns out they lost and it takes less than a day for utter demonization of Leave as some of the vilest things I've had the displeasure of having to endure. Living in London, I will endure much, much more, from people who genuinely believe more money and more education makes them superior to the less fortunate.

Even though the con was obvious and the victim really should've known better, it's still something I wouldn't want to see for the British people.

Good thing this vote was had, so what other people see as best for the British does not override what the British want.

I don't want to see them suffer, even though I do love the idea of a strong, integrated EU myself (provided it's implemented well of course) and I realize the fact that (from the perspective of the current EU) a member leaving kinda has to hurt to make it clear why staying is better.

In the course of a day I have gone from being eurosceptic to wanting the utter destruction of the European Union, its total disintegration as a matter of guarantee. Ordinary Europeans have looked upon this situation and not seen an opportunity to prove the European Union's worth by showing why it is valuable, but rather by showing how if you attempt to leave you will be destroyed, made to suffer. I do not think ordinary Europeans harbour hatred for the UK, some harbour suspicion, but few hatred. Yet even so, ordinary Europeans who cheer the EU feel compelled to destroy the UK out of fear that its success would inspire too many, out of a desire to protect an Empire that has not brought its people prosperity. All the whilst Eurosceptics cheer the UK, and wave our flag in support. Thus the European Union must die, before it continues to make others suffer in order to preserve its own ambitions.

I do think however that the leave camp is run by incompetents and liars. I think there's quite some evidence that whoever ends up executing the will of the people (whatever that may be), these clowns aren't the ones to do it.

I do not place my faith in men, these are all I have. When I have trusted in Oxbridge MPs, they have used their intelligence to advance their own careers and ignore their constituents. If I placed my faith in them, they would obligate us to further integration and find a way to disguise it, with their skills, they could even succeed. Thus the departure of the likes of Cameron is welcome, and the arrival of Boris, welcome.

The last part of your post, I find agreeable, bar the notion of more referendums of course.

We got any Poles who can verify this crap

Well TVP.info reposted this document.
http://www.tvp.info/25939371/nasz-news-superpanstwo-zamiast-unii-europejskiej--ultimatum-francji-i-niemiec
http://wiadomosci.wp.pl/kat,1356,title,Superpanstwo-zamiast-Unii-Europejskiej-Wyciekl-tekst-ultimatum-Francji-i-Niemiec,wid,18397368,wiadomosc.html?ticaid=117464

Aaaand it's kinda legit i guess? TVP is the polish public TV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telewizja_Polska which includes info channels.
and WP.pl is your Polish MSN.com equivalent.

I fucking swear it looks like a hoax but it does seem legit as far as the sites go.

Ah... I wonder why British news does not relate this, but Polish does. I suppose British news is busy with useless crap, but that this is legit... Well, reality is not without more than a few good surprises these days. I suppose it's not too surprising, yesterday's satire is today's reality, bring on the united state

[Neonivek]

The reason a second referendum would be impossible in my mind is because well

Any Leaver worth their salt would say the obvious: "Many people voting stay would only do so because they are afraid of the current economic turmoil then because it is genuinely something they believe they should do"

The equivalent of starting a war, letting people see how expensive it is to field the troops, and THEN making another vote as to whether they should go through with the war.

---

A second referendum with Remain won is a BIT more legit since the votes will generally stay the same.

[Loud Whispers]

The reason a second referendum would be impossible in my mind is because well
Any Leaver worth their salt would say the obvious: "Many people voting stay would only do so because they are afraid of the current economic turmoil then because it is genuinely something they believe they should do"

To quote some anonymous grafitti:

The media didn't want it
The politicians didn't want it
The corporations didn't want it
The bankers didn't want it
The bureaucrats didn't want it

The people wanted it
The people won

Who wants to be the man who tells all of those people their opinion doesn't matter, and that they need to think again and vote for the right option - the one they selected? Assuming of course, our country can survive another referendum, or that the established parties do not get kicked out - the majority of our Parliament has now just realized they as pro-EU MPs, are ruling off of mandates in constituencies that voted to leave the EU. I don't need to trust in their good faith, or dutiful service to the UK, to know they are smart enough to act in self-interest, in preserving their careers.

Remain promised economic destruction for the UK, the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, the cessation and collapse of British trade with the world, the destruction of the NHS and the elimination of all pensions and they still lost, with more media coverage and literally having been able to send multiple leaflets to every household in the UK without factoring in all of the established parties were using their funds to support the EU. And the fact I keep stressing, is that they lost.

Simple matter is, why does Remain on the one hand say the Scottish referendum result must be upheld, yet push for more and more referendums on the EU because they lost? If the Scottish Nationalists won, would they have told the Scottish Nationalists to have a second referendum result in lieu of the panic its uncertainty caused?
What Britons now must face is the notion of the SNP and Westminster both having two simultaneous drives to veto the result from within, whilst the EU tries destroying us from without. What a harmonious project of democracy and peace, that must inflict suffering upon all those who oppose it with democracy.

[Sonlirain]

What a harmonious project of democracy and peace, that must inflict suffering upon all those who oppose it with democracy.

Unless we lose that is.
The we will renegotiate as many times as needed till we win.

[Frumple]

Yeah, sorry, democratic politics isn't a game where you get to quickload over and over until the RNG gives you the outcome you want.

Hey man, trying again was exactly what the leave campaign intended to do if they lost. Goose and gander et al. Kinda' hard to say it's fair to cry foul when you're on record saying you'd do the same thing.

... also democratic politics is totally a game where you quickload over and over until the RNG gives you what you want. Continuing to push an agenda over a long period is... really basic stuff? Normal and necessary to a functioning democracy? So on and so forth. You don't poll once and then call it forever binding, heh. Plus revotes are a normal thing, yeah. Usually over more mechanical issues, but still. A second referendum, even in fairly short order, wouldn't exactly be some kind of trampling of democracy people seem to be trying to frame it as.

Longer wait would be a better thing, make no doubt about that, but there's a lot of signs a longer wait would get nothing for anyone involved with this (and the EU itself has serious and entirely reasonable reasons a long wait is not something they want to see; it's got 27 other countries to worry about while the UK unfucks itself in one direction or the other). It's already looking a fair amount like article 50 just won't get invoked, and I could see the UK not really getting a second chance any time soon if they don't kick their politicians in the ass even harder. A second go, a more clear mandate that the public wants it, and some kind of legal guarantee that a leave win would mean an immediate A50 invocation instead of this dithering around bullshit, sounds like it'd be kinda' nice. Do it again and make that shit binding this time, with a clear period of time (or major event of some sort) before the next one's allowed. Don't give the folks they've managed to elect any room to wiggle out of it, because we're already seeing they're trying to on both sides of the proverbial aisle.

But yeeeaaah, as an american I'd definitely be supporting a supermajority for a decision like the UK's looking at. Simple majority's fine for electing people, 'cause they're only going to be there for a few years, but stuff that'll be on the books or have seriously long term and far reaching effects, you go for more consensus, both for the initial institution (and the UK did vote ~67% in favor to stay in what would become the EU the first time around, for what it's worth) and for any major changes (such as dissolution of the whatever). You want to be fucking over as small amount of your population as you can, not, y'know, around half of it. Something more along the lines of the original referendum to stay would be nice, yeah?

S'like... c'mon, folks. Even florida needs 60% support for a constitutional amendment these days, and the scale of that is way smaller. Know this thing wasn't binding and it's basically a glorified poll, but people're calling something a political mandate that heat addled druggies would balk at, which is a little weird t'me living among heat addled druggies.

Who wants to be the man who tells all of those people their opinion doesn't matter, and that they need to think again and vote for the right option - the one they selected?

Well, many (most?) of the major leave politicians did until a few days ago 

Now they want to tell all those other people that their opinion doesn't matter, and they don't get the second (third, Nth) chance leave was intending to go for, of course.

[Loud Whispers]

Hey man, trying again was exactly what the leave campaign intended to do if they lost. Goose and gander et al. Kinda' hard to say it's fair to cry foul when you're on record saying you'd do the same thing.

Oh what, Nigel Farage, head of the United Kingdom Independence Party, head of the Leave group which was not selected by the Electoral Commission to represent the Leave Campaign, whose sole career has been spent fighting to secure the United Kingdom's independence - promising to continue irregardless of result? Who'd have thought it?
Now would Nigel Farage have gotten that second referendum if he lost?
With one MP in Parliament, not representing the Leave Campaign, all high office in Parliament held by pro-EU MPs, Conservative leadership despising him - no. He'd have a chance on a 50/50 split, but a 50/50 split would be anyone's job.

Now a devolved Parliament and Westminster outright ignoring a decisive result in order to pursue their personal agenda? Look at this, Nigel Farage is not an MP, he holds no power - yet Remain has made such a big deal about his hypothetical pledge whilst trying to veto the referendum in actuality. And for the time being they have the power to do so, Scottish Nationalist Party maybe less so, but they're damn well going to try.

... also democratic politics is totally a game where you quickload over and over until the RNG gives you what you want. Continuing to push an agenda over a long period is... really basic stuff? Normal and necessary to a functioning democracy? So on and so forth. You don't poll once and then call it forever binding, heh. Plus revotes are a normal thing, yeah. Usually over more mechanical issues, but still. A second referendum, even in fairly short order, wouldn't exactly be some kind of trampling of democracy people seem to be trying to frame it as.

It's hard not to frame trampling on democracy as anything but. You don't get to excuse ignoring the people just because it's your agenda you want to preserve, that democracy is a game of destroying your opponents until you get what you want.

Longer wait would be a better thing, make no doubt about that, but there's a lot of signs a longer wait would get nothing for anyone involved with this (and the EU itself has serious and entirely reasonable reasons a long wait is not something they want to see; it's got 27 other countries to worry about while the UK unfucks itself in one direction or the other). It's already looking a fair amount like article 50 just won't get invoked, and I could see the UK not really getting a second chance any time soon if they don't kick their politicians in the ass even harder. A second go, a more clear mandate that the public wants it, and some kind of legal guarantee that a leave win would mean an immediate A50 invocation instead of this dithering around bullshit, sounds like it'd be kinda' nice. Do it again and make that shit binding this time, with a clear period of time (or major event of some sort) before the next one's allowed.

Why?

But yeeeaaah, as an american I'd definitely be supporting a supermajority for a decision like the UK's looking at. Simple majority's fine for electing people, 'cause they're only going to be there for a few years, but stuff that'll be on the books or have seriously long term and far reaching effects, you go for more consensus, both for the initial institution (and the UK did vote ~67% in favor to stay in what would become the EU the first time around, for what it's worth) and for any major changes (such as dissolution of the whatever). You want to be fucking over as small amount of your population as you can, not, y'know, around half of it. Something more along the lines of the original referendum to stay would be nice, yeah?

We voted to stay in a free trade union, then it became a political union. Upon becoming a political union, we voted to leave it - that's what it's worth.

S'like... c'mon, folks. Even florida needs 60% support for a constitutional amendment these days, and the scale of that is way smaller. Know this thing wasn't binding and it's basically a glorified poll, but people're calling something a political mandate that heat addled druggies would balk at, which is a little weird t'me living among heat addled druggies.

Already more excuses.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Dealing with an entity that accepts referendums when they agree with them, and denies them when they don't, it is sickening.

Well, many (most?) of the major leave politicians did until a few days ago 

Citation please Frump, when did Boris Johnson go on the record to say young people are naive and stupid, so we must have another referendum to get out of the EU if we lose? You're trying to make me forget that every poll was saying Remain would win, Remain was counting on a safe win, and it was only at 3AM on counting day did Remain realize they lost. All their talks were of making peace with Leave, not of more referendums - in their eyes, they had already won.
That is, until they lost. Then they began incessantly attacking Leave and demanding more referendums, or vetos, or votes in Parliament - anything which would guarantee the highest chance of success with the least amount of interference from normal people, to ensure the UK stays in the EU, and does not threaten their six figure career prospects.

[Neonivek]

Ok lets just pretend this wasn't Brexit. Lets just pretend it was something mildly evil.

Say... Deporting all Refuges and Immigrants (first and second generation) from undesirable countries. (and pretend it was legal, since I don't think the UK could do that if they tried, but I don't know)

If they had a referendum and got a 52% majority... They should still enact it. However vicious it would be.

---

The only reason a political power should not enact a democratically reached referendum that was fair and legal... is if something OUTSIDE the original situation demands it.

So if... the UK is falling into a outright depression for example...

But the UK is holding in there, there is no need to declare it a sinking ship just yet. The market hasn't even stabilized.

---

Democracy isn't about never making mistakes.

It is about having a system of government that is better then all others in spite of all the mistakes you will make along the way.

---

Now... How far I can stretch this belief... if say the UK wanted to enact a second holocaust or I dunno bomb all their banks... >_>

Luckily Brexit is FAR away from any of those things.