[flagged]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Analytica
And probably Russia who has an obvious interest in a weaker EU and UK.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20...
Russian sock-puppet social media accounts were commonplace. Especially check the "twitter bots" section of that wiki page. Some choice quotes
> In November 2017, The Times reported that researchers from Swansea University and UC Berkeley had identified around 150,000 accounts with links to Russia that tweeted about Brexit in the run-up to the referendum.
> A working paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research claims the influence of Twitter bots may have been significant enough to impact the result, roughly calculating that automated accounts may have ultimately been responsible for around 1.76 percentage points of the 'Leave' vote share.
If it was any less than 1B GBP, you cannot be in a good faith suggest that it played more than a token role in either Brexit or Trump.
Have you even read their report?
Apologies, but I've stopped reading after this.
As a Russian classic said, "Homer, Milton and Panikovsky".
But wait, there is more:
> In supporting Syria, Russia has used disinformation to cover the brutality of its attacks on civilian populations
In supporting Israel, the Unitet States has...
Can you please finish this one for me?
Doesn't have anything to do with the point at hand though, which you have continued to not answer because you have no good answers.
I certainly don't. The vast majority of Russian citizens are victims of their shitty government, just like the rest of us who have been impacted by it.
In any case, let's get back to the point we were talking about: Russian influence on the brexit referendum, you still haven't offered any counterpoints relevant to anything I've said.
On the other hand, US&UK NGOs meddling just about anywhere is not extraordinary and there is plenty of evidence, including recently discovered navalnist, anti-war, pro-western troll farm.
Let's try to be as objective as we can here. I think the fact that Russia and Cambridge analytica tried to influence the referendum is fairly incontrovertible. There is plenty of evidence for that.
Now the question is whether or not they failed. For some reason you have decided the report I mentioned is biased. Why do you think that, other than it disagrees with what you believe?
I just don't see how Russian influence could have moved the needle in any measurable fashion without a large number of boots on the ground. The report can be factually correct and the whole thing still pathetic.
By the same folks who periodically murder their dissidents who’ve fled to the UK with polonium tea or ricin umbrellas.
Yeah, I'm aware what pops out when you type "Timeline" in Wikipedia's search.
Otherwise, everybody meddles in everybody else's politics all the time, chiefly US and the UK, so when they complain about it is like when a pro poker player complains that he was stripped pantsless by a newbie. It can only be a smoke cover. First of all, pro players never complain in good faith.
The result of the Miller case placed the decision back in the hands of parliament.
They then overwhelming chose to grant the Government a carte blanc to trigger Article 50. They could have chosen to impose conditions, or even refused to pass the Article 50 notification Bill.
If the actual final plan had been put up for a vote - is this the Brexit you wanted for - it may well have failed democratically.