1. It surprises me that on the whole pro Europeans on Twitter view themselves as pragmatists, who rely on evidence to form their opinion.
In fact a long running joke in our 'group' is that Brexit will be a roaring success, if we all just believe hard it will be a roaring success.

2. The last couple of weeks have made it clearer than ever that blind belief that is impervious to evidence and facts is not a leave/remain thing. It's a human thing
3. I was accused of lying and hounding a 'vulnerable' person off Twitter. When the victims of that 'vulnerable' got the same treatment, it became necessary to take action.
4. So I gathered evidence (not all, but enough) and wrote a blog with contributions from several others. Then the blog was checked by experts to ensure that it was neither libellous (to protect authors) or a risk to any possible legal action (to protect victims).
5. I naively thought that would put an end to the false accusations and trolling.
Since publishing I've been accused of having called the "vulnerable' person and threatened members of their family, forcing them to confess to the police
6. Of course I haven't done that. Nor have I ever hacked anything, sent sent sexually explicit images to vulnerable people, taken money fraudulently or groomed anyone*.

*I have cut my own hair during lockdown though.
7. What is fascinating is that the trolls scream for evidence, but when they are given some, scream for more, different, every single detail. They cling to their false belief. At the same time they never give anything to prove their wild false accusations.
8. The people doing this all claim to be pro EU and pride themselves on being evidence led. But they are merely willing to really look at the evidence if it confirms their preexisting belief. The #hypocrisy is off the scale and the behaviour is decidedly 'brexity'.
9. For anyone interested this is the (not) libellous blog.
https://t.co/9EvP668iXm

End

More from Brexit

It is time to talk Brexit and standards again. (thread)


Let's start off with: I don't think any trade experts are surprised by this. It is why the TCA did not do much on SPS. It is why the EU did not offer much on SPS. It is why the UK did not ask much on SPS.

But it also shows that the popular slogan "after Brexit we'll have the same standards as before, so why would anything change in trade" was wrong - and worse, it was purposefully trying to stifle a necessary debate.

And this leads me to the next point: I have no issue with changing the rules, I have a massive issue with how it is done. Here's what we should discuss:

The decisive question: What are the standards the UK as a country wants. To inform this debate, we need the following information:

You May Also Like