UK Intelligence report in to Russian interference in UK Elections/Scottish Referendum

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Report here. https://docs.google.com/a/independen...EyN2Y3NjM0OWFl

---------- Post added at 10:43 ---------- Previous post was at 10:41 ----------


I'm afraid that I think you're rather too forgiving of foreign powers.

I'm afraid that I think you're rather too forgiving of Labour

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

I'm afraid that I think you're rather too forgiving of Labour

Unlike many I've not been afraid to take a non-partisan line and
- criticise parties Left, Right and Centre. Generally, it's more constructive to critique the Government as they're actually the ones who are making the decisions.
- condemn foreign powers placing bounties on the heads of our soldiers
- condemn decisions placed on British business which result in lots of bureaucracy and red tape when dealing with their largest market

At the ballot box, I've similarly voted for all three main parties. I don't believe you should follow a party in the same way you follow a football team.

Originally Posted by papa smurf

I'm afraid that I think you're rather too forgiving of Labour

As you are of the Conservatives.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by nomadking

What is this "interference" ever have amounted to? Just people expressing an opinion? Do no other countries ever "interfere" in the same way? Then there is the rather insidious way the media "interferes". Even the inclusion of an extra word in a sentence can change the tone and impression of a story. Journalists can be rather selective on who and what they challenge about a story.

Whether you plan to vote Tories or not, whether you voted Brexit or not, the outcomes of those decisions have a direct impact on the world. Some countries will benefit from those outcomes, some will lose out.

If you're one of those countries that will benefit greatly from a specific outcome, it's in your interests to try and make that outcome happen. I mean this isn't just world politics, it's like anything - if you stand to gain from something happening, you probably want that something to happen.

But if you speak out too loudly about it, it might make things worse. Just because it benefits you doesn't necessarily mean that those voting for it want it for your interests, they might even vote against it to spite you because what's good for you isn't necessarily what's good for them. Politics, eh?

So in that case, how do you make this outcome happen, without tipping anyone off that actually you really want this outcome? Find someone else to do it. Find someone that people aren't immediately opposed to and give them the help to do it. Maybe it's a research firm, or a think tank, or a politician with aspirations of becoming PM - you get them to do the dirty work so you get what you want without anyone knowing you wanted it. British people wanting what's best for Britain. Sounds great, right?

And the best bit is that those who voted for all of this will fight anyone who dares suggest they've been influenced, because it's not like Vladmir was down the pub mouthing off to them about how great Brexit would be for mother russia. Nah, it was their mate Nige that said it, he's definitely not russian so russia has nothing to do with it. Simples.

But in all of this, whether you believe there was "influence" or not, whether you believe you were influenced or not, that's almost not even the point. Whether Russia had any involvement or success isn't the main issue - the main issue is that they wanted that outcome.

Debate the ifs and buts all you want, but make sure you ask why.

Why would Russia go to such lengths? What have they got to gain from a stronger, more independent Britain, eh? What's useful for them if the Tories are in power, if the Tories don't have links to Russia?

Surely Russia would much prefer communist Corbyn, right? Right?! Surely he'd be destroying the UK from within, while setting up shop for his commie mates to swoop in and take over. Maybe the commie thing is too much on the nose, but seriously - why would Russia have the UK's best interests to heart?

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Kushan

<snip>

Surely Russia would much prefer communist Corbyn, right? Right?! Surely he'd be destroying the UK from within, while setting up shop for his commie mates to swoop in and take over. Maybe the commie thing is too much on the nose, but seriously - why would Russia have the UK's best interests to heart?

Russia would surely prefer a useful idiot Corbyn so that chaos could prevail. No chance of a commie takeover - police & army would have to be overcome first.

[Kushan]

And yet, they seemed to favour the Tories. Weird.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Russia would surely prefer a useful idiot Corbyn so that chaos could prevail. No chance of a commie takeover - police & army would have to be overcome first.

Putin has two useful idiots in power in the USA and UK. Whether or not he helped them ascend the greasy pole can be debated until the cows come home. The fact is, since these two populist leaders came to power, the West has been divided to the benefit of Russia.

---------- Post added at 13:38 ---------- Previous post was at 13:36 ----------

Originally Posted by Kushan

And yet, they seemed to favour the Tories. Weird.

I think they favour disunity and dislike the harmony that the centre ground more often delivers, so would favour Johnson and Corbyn over May and Starmer.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Putin has two useful idiots in power in the USA and UK. Whether or not he helped them ascend the greasy pole can be debated until the cows come home. The fact is, since these two populist leaders came to power, the West has been divided to the benefit of Russia.

<SNIP>

I'm not going to entirely disagree with you - though in respect of the UK, it pains me. But Corbyn would have been magnitudes larger idiot.

[nomadking]

Link

The ISC's inquiry covers a number of topics, including disinformation campaigns, cyber tactics and Russian expatriates in the UK - saying the UK was a "top target" for the state.
But much of the "highly sensitive" detail will not be published due to fears Russia could use the evidence to threaten the UK.

So no "disinformation campaigns" originated elsewhere? No expatriates, Scottish or otherwise, did anything? So who influenced the polls in the years before, that have tended to be close either way? Eg Support for Brexit existed long before even the possibility of a referendum.

The report also said there had been "credible open source commentary" suggesting Russian tried to influence the Scottish independence referendum in 2014.

So where exactly is the evidence that anything happened? No signs of what those events and actions are meant to have been.

Difficult to retrospectively gather examples.
Link

Catalonia is probably the place outside of the UK where Scotland's referendum had, and still has, most resonance.

So no interference from Spain?

The victory for the "No" vote will please many of Canada's editorial writers, most of whom came down firmly on the side of Scotland staying with the union.

So no interference from Canada?

But in the run-up to the vote, Premier Li Keqiang stressed that he wanted to see a "united" United Kingdom.
Privately at least, China's leaders will welcome the "No" vote.

Or China?

"I'm hugely relieved," said one politician. "It prevents further fragmentation of Europe."
The government agrees - though the official line is less exuberant.
"We have always respected the fact that this referendum was called and that the central government in London agreed to this. And now we respect the outcome of it as well," said Angela Merkel.
Is she pleased with the result? The German chancellor was coy. "I will not comment on this but just smile."

Or Germany?

Former Prime Minister Enrico Letta tweeted (in Italian): "Scotland has decided. Good for us and for Europe. Now let's not ignore the intolerance and fears which encourage separatists."

Italy?

The news that Scotland is not going to leave the UK will mean many governments are heaving a sigh of relief.
Some feared that Scottish independence might encourage other separatist movements. Others worried that it would turn the rest of the UK into a weaker and distracted partner.

Sounds like not many governments around the world, were for one reason or another, in favour of Scottish independence.

Link

So far, the signs are not encouraging. The Spanish government reacted to the Scottish government's December Brexit plan by saying: "If the UK leaves the single market, the whole UK will leave the single market." The main question for the SNP may thus be whether Spain wields the influence it claims it does.
The second is Ireland. The UK government is desperate to find a way to keep the border between the Republic and Northern Ireland open, and no one is more supportive than the SNP. If it works in Ireland, it can work in Gretna Green. (Irish political leaders gave Sturgeon a warm welcome when she visited in November).
Finally, there is Germany. SNP insiders believe it is crucial to Scotland's chances of staying in the EU (David Cameron, who wooed the Chancellor Angela Merkel during his EU negotiations, might disagree). They claim that Europe’s giant is sympathetic to their predicament. Indeed, Manfred Weber, a Bavarian ally of Merkel, said after the Brexit vote: “Those who want to stay are welcome in the European Union.” Merkel’s attack dog Gunther Krichbaum made similar noises.

No "interference" from Spain, Ireland, and Germany?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I'm not going to entirely disagree with you - though in respect of the UK, it pains me. But Corbyn would have been magnitudes larger idiot.

Agreed.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Link
So no "disinformation campaigns" originated elsewhere? No expatriates, Scottish or otherwise, did anything? So who influenced the polls in the years before, that have tended to be close either way? Eg Support for Brexit existed long before even the possibility of a referendum.

So where exactly is the evidence that anything happened? No signs of what those events and actions are meant to have been.

Difficult to retrospectively gather examples.
Link
So no interference from Spain?
So no interference from Canada?
Or China?
Or Germany?
Italy?
Sounds like not many governments around the world, were for one reason or another, in favour of Scottish independence.

Link
No "interference" from Spain, Ireland, and Germany?

Careful, if you stick your fingers in your ears any harder, you're going to give yourself further brain damage.

[1andrew1]

Damning analysis from Sky News.

Sky News analysis

This is staggering – the UK doesn't know if Russia interfered in the Brexit vote because it never sought to ask!

For years ministers have consistently batted off questions about whether Vladimir Putin's regime attempted to meddle in the EU referendum, saying that there was no evidence of "successful interference".

We now know why.
They had never specifically instructed MI5, MI6 and GCHQ - the intelligence and security agencies tasked with protecting the UK - with looking at precisely this issue.

It is a damning finding from a report by the powerful Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) that Boris Johnson ensured did not see the light of day until long after the last election in December.

It is hard not to disagree, especially as it is not as though there were no warning bells for the previous Theresa May and David Cameron governments.

https://news.sky.com/story/staggerin...laims-12033171

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Damning analysis from Sky News.

https://news.sky.com/story/staggerin...laims-12033171

No evidence eh,well that's that then.

---------- Post added at 15:13 ---------- Previous post was at 15:10 ----------

Nigel Farage demands serious apologies from arch Remainers as he waves Russia report

The Brexiteer hit out after a long-awaited probe into alleged Russian interference in British democracy said it would be "difficult - if not impossible" to assess whether any such attempts had been successful. Mr Farage tweeted: “So, no evidence of Russian interference in the referendum. Some serious apologies are due.https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/13...ferendum-putin

[Carth]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

No evidence eh,well that's that then.

haha, don't be daft, it'll be alive on here for years

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Carth

haha, don't be daft, it'll be alive on here for years

Your not suggesting some will try and fabricate evidence are you

Any hoo we now have the clear evidence that the brexit vote was as i expected totally legitimate.