John52 Posted November 1, 2021 Share Posted November 1, 2021 Bulletguy - 2021-11-01 4:35 PM This is the letter in full (double click on it to magnify). As the poster says, Castex never wrote "Britain must be punished" as can clearly be seen. That was right wing trash media whipping up xenophobia to feed the not so bright. Unfortunately more people will read the right wing trash media version of the letter than the letter itself. And it suits them to blame Brexit problems on the French Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted November 1, 2021 Share Posted November 1, 2021 He's obviously turned into a cheese eating surrender monkey. From the Express! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted November 1, 2021 Share Posted November 1, 2021 John52 - 2021-11-01 4:52 PM Bulletguy - 2021-11-01 4:35 PM This is the letter in full (double click on it to magnify). As the poster says, Castex never wrote "Britain must be punished" as can clearly be seen. That was right wing trash media whipping up xenophobia to feed the not so bright. Unfortunately more people will read the right wing trash media version of the letter than the letter itself. And it suits them to blame Brexit problems on the French So what does demanding consequences mean if not punishment? *-) .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted November 1, 2021 Share Posted November 1, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-11-01 6:47 PM John52 - 2021-11-01 4:52 PM Bulletguy - 2021-11-01 4:35 PM This is the letter in full (double click on it to magnify). As the poster says, Castex never wrote "Britain must be punished" as can clearly be seen. That was right wing trash media whipping up xenophobia to feed the not so bright. Unfortunately more people will read the right wing trash media version of the letter than the letter itself. And it suits them to blame Brexit problems on the French So what does demanding consequences mean if not punishment? *-) .......... Except that is not what was said, even the BBC has corrected the mistranslation. “Jean Castex's missive did not, as has been suggested by the UK government and parts of the UK press, demand that Britain be punished for, or damaged by, leaving the EU” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59115496 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted November 1, 2021 Share Posted November 1, 2021 CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 6:57 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-01 6:47 PM John52 - 2021-11-01 4:52 PM Bulletguy - 2021-11-01 4:35 PM This is the letter in full (double click on it to magnify). As the poster says, Castex never wrote "Britain must be punished" as can clearly be seen. That was right wing trash media whipping up xenophobia to feed the not so bright. Unfortunately more people will read the right wing trash media version of the letter than the letter itself. And it suits them to blame Brexit problems on the French So what does demanding consequences mean if not punishment? *-) .......... Except that is not what was said, even the BBC has corrected the mistranslation. “Jean Castex's missive did not, as has been suggested by the UK government and parts of the UK press, demand that Britain be punished for, or damaged by, leaving the EU” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59115496 You obviously haven't read the first sentence of the 2nd page of Castex's letter that your fellow Chimp helpfully linked to :D ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted November 1, 2021 Share Posted November 1, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-11-01 6:47 PM John52 - 2021-11-01 4:52 PM Bulletguy - 2021-11-01 4:35 PM This is the letter in full (double click on it to magnify). As the poster says, Castex never wrote "Britain must be punished" as can clearly be seen. That was right wing trash media whipping up xenophobia to feed the not so bright. Unfortunately more people will read the right wing trash media version of the letter than the letter itself. And it suits them to blame Brexit problems on the French So what does demanding consequences mean if not punishment? *-) .......... I didn't expect you to understand the letter but at least try a little harder to comprehend English. *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdbrain Posted November 1, 2021 Share Posted November 1, 2021 CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 6:44 PM He's obviously turned into a cheese eating surrender monkey. From the Express! Isnt it the Government of Jersey thats given the permits??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted November 1, 2021 Share Posted November 1, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-11-01 7:04 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 6:57 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-01 6:47 PM John52 - 2021-11-01 4:52 PM Bulletguy - 2021-11-01 4:35 PM This is the letter in full (double click on it to magnify). As the poster says, Castex never wrote "Britain must be punished" as can clearly be seen. That was right wing trash media whipping up xenophobia to feed the not so bright. Unfortunately more people will read the right wing trash media version of the letter than the letter itself. And it suits them to blame Brexit problems on the French So what does demanding consequences mean if not punishment? *-) .......... Except that is not what was said, even the BBC has corrected the mistranslation. “Jean Castex's missive did not, as has been suggested by the UK government and parts of the UK press, demand that Britain be punished for, or damaged by, leaving the EU” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59115496 You obviously haven't read the first sentence of the 2nd page of Castex's letter that your fellow Chimp helpfully linked to :D ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ........... If you read the first page and continue on to the second page you will see that the first sentence of the second page is truncated in that link. Give us a translation of the full sentence if you think it proves your point, it doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted November 2, 2021 Share Posted November 2, 2021 CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 7:49 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-01 7:04 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 6:57 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-01 6:47 PM John52 - 2021-11-01 4:52 PM Bulletguy - 2021-11-01 4:35 PM This is the letter in full (double click on it to magnify). As the poster says, Castex never wrote "Britain must be punished" as can clearly be seen. That was right wing trash media whipping up xenophobia to feed the not so bright. Unfortunately more people will read the right wing trash media version of the letter than the letter itself. And it suits them to blame Brexit problems on the French So what does demanding consequences mean if not punishment? *-) .......... Except that is not what was said, even the BBC has corrected the mistranslation. “Jean Castex's missive did not, as has been suggested by the UK government and parts of the UK press, demand that Britain be punished for, or damaged by, leaving the EU” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59115496 You obviously haven't read the first sentence of the 2nd page of Castex's letter that your fellow Chimp helpfully linked to :D ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ........... If you read the first page and continue on to the second page you will see that the first sentence of the second page is truncated in that link. Give us a translation of the full sentence if you think it proves your point, it doesn't. Why did they truncate it......If they didn't want it to mean what it says? ;-).......... If you think grasping at straws saves your Nasty Froggy chums...it Doesn't >:-) ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted November 2, 2021 Share Posted November 2, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-11-02 8:10 AM If you think grasping at straws saves your Nasty Froggy chums...it Doesn't >:-) ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ......... All we are saying is read the letter instead of the Daily Mail version of it. And try and put your Britannia rules the waves nonsense aside for a moment. Anyone with a basic understanding of cross channel traffic will see that France, unlike Britain, is a Transit Country. So a blockade would hurt Britain far more than France. All Britain can do is plead with the EU - when France is a member and Britain is not. Britain left after years of insulting the EU remember. So who are the EU going to support ? I suspect that if you were in their position you would be spoiling for a fight you were bound to win. But they have held back and deserve respect for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted November 2, 2021 Share Posted November 2, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-11-02 8:10 AM CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 7:49 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-01 7:04 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 6:57 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-01 6:47 PM John52 - 2021-11-01 4:52 PM Bulletguy - 2021-11-01 4:35 PM This is the letter in full (double click on it to magnify). As the poster says, Castex never wrote "Britain must be punished" as can clearly be seen. That was right wing trash media whipping up xenophobia to feed the not so bright. Unfortunately more people will read the right wing trash media version of the letter than the letter itself. And it suits them to blame Brexit problems on the French So what does demanding consequences mean if not punishment? *-) .......... Except that is not what was said, even the BBC has corrected the mistranslation. “Jean Castex's missive did not, as has been suggested by the UK government and parts of the UK press, demand that Britain be punished for, or damaged by, leaving the EU” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59115496 You obviously haven't read the first sentence of the 2nd page of Castex's letter that your fellow Chimp helpfully linked to :D ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ........... If you read the first page and continue on to the second page you will see that the first sentence of the second page is truncated in that link. Give us a translation of the full sentence if you think it proves your point, it doesn't. Why did they truncate it......If they didn't want it to mean what it says? ;-).......... If you think grasping at straws saves your Nasty Froggy chums...it Doesn't >:-) ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ......... "They" didnt truncate it, the journalist and Mr Frost did. "Dr Edward Arnold, Professor in French and European Studies at Trinity College Dublin, translated the controversial paragraphs of the letter for The Journal: It would thus appear necessary that the EU shows its absolute determination to obtain the UK’s full compliance with the agreement and also asserts its rights through recourse to all means at its disposal in a firm, unified and proportional manner. It is indispensable to show clearly to European public opinion that the respect of commitments entered into is not negotiable and it is as damaging to leave the Union as it is to stay in it. This shows that Wickham’s translation (and Frost’s comments) left out a reference to “respecting commitments”. Dr Eamon Maher, Director of the National Centre for Franco Irish Studies and a member of the lecturing staff in the Department of Humanities on the Tallaght Campus of TU Dublin, also translated the paragraph, although he said it was not “a perfect translation”: “It therefore seems necessary for the EU to show its resolve in terms of obtaining full respect by the UK of the agreement and to foreground its rights by using all the levers it has available to it in a firm, united and proportionate manner. It is vital to demonstrate clearly to European public opinion that any commitments undertaken by either side are non-negotiable and that leaving the EU is more damaging than staying in it. The independent translations differ slightly – underlining how the argument erupted in the first place. However, they are both clear that commitments undertaken or entered into were mentioned, a piece of missing context from much of the reporting. There is also no mention of punishment, something that Downing Street had interpreted from the paragraphs." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted November 2, 2021 Share Posted November 2, 2021 CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-02 10:12 AM pelmetman - 2021-11-02 8:10 AM CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 7:49 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-01 7:04 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 6:57 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-01 6:47 PM John52 - 2021-11-01 4:52 PM Bulletguy - 2021-11-01 4:35 PM This is the letter in full (double click on it to magnify). As the poster says, Castex never wrote "Britain must be punished" as can clearly be seen. That was right wing trash media whipping up xenophobia to feed the not so bright. Unfortunately more people will read the right wing trash media version of the letter than the letter itself. And it suits them to blame Brexit problems on the French So what does demanding consequences mean if not punishment? *-) .......... Except that is not what was said, even the BBC has corrected the mistranslation. “Jean Castex's missive did not, as has been suggested by the UK government and parts of the UK press, demand that Britain be punished for, or damaged by, leaving the EU” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59115496 You obviously haven't read the first sentence of the 2nd page of Castex's letter that your fellow Chimp helpfully linked to :D ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ........... If you read the first page and continue on to the second page you will see that the first sentence of the second page is truncated in that link. Give us a translation of the full sentence if you think it proves your point, it doesn't. Why did they truncate it......If they didn't want it to mean what it says? ;-).......... If you think grasping at straws saves your Nasty Froggy chums...it Doesn't >:-) ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ......... "They" didnt truncate it, the journalist and Mr Frost did. "Dr Edward Arnold, Professor in French and European Studies at Trinity College Dublin, translated the controversial paragraphs of the letter for The Journal: It would thus appear necessary that the EU shows its absolute determination to obtain the UK’s full compliance with the agreement and also asserts its rights through recourse to all means at its disposal in a firm, unified and proportional manner. It is indispensable to show clearly to European public opinion that the respect of commitments entered into is not negotiable and it is as damaging to leave the Union as it is to stay in it. This shows that Wickham’s translation (and Frost’s comments) left out a reference to “respecting commitments”. Dr Eamon Maher, Director of the National Centre for Franco Irish Studies and a member of the lecturing staff in the Department of Humanities on the Tallaght Campus of TU Dublin, also translated the paragraph, although he said it was not “a perfect translation”: “It therefore seems necessary for the EU to show its resolve in terms of obtaining full respect by the UK of the agreement and to foreground its rights by using all the levers it has available to it in a firm, united and proportionate manner. It is vital to demonstrate clearly to European public opinion that any commitments undertaken by either side are non-negotiable and that leaving the EU is more damaging than staying in it. The independent translations differ slightly – underlining how the argument erupted in the first place. However, they are both clear that commitments undertaken or entered into were mentioned, a piece of missing context from much of the reporting. There is also no mention of punishment, something that Downing Street had interpreted from the paragraphs." I guess the Remoaner rag the Independent has got it wrong to? >:-) ........ "Brexit: EU must ‘show damage’ to UK as warning to other nations, says French PM in escalation of fishing row" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/fishing-castex-eu-france-uk-brexit-b1948202.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted November 2, 2021 Share Posted November 2, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-11-02 10:38 AM CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-02 10:12 AM pelmetman - 2021-11-02 8:10 AM CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 7:49 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-01 7:04 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 6:57 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-01 6:47 PM John52 - 2021-11-01 4:52 PM Bulletguy - 2021-11-01 4:35 PM This is the letter in full (double click on it to magnify). As the poster says, Castex never wrote "Britain must be punished" as can clearly be seen. That was right wing trash media whipping up xenophobia to feed the not so bright. Unfortunately more people will read the right wing trash media version of the letter than the letter itself. And it suits them to blame Brexit problems on the French So what does demanding consequences mean if not punishment? *-) .......... Except that is not what was said, even the BBC has corrected the mistranslation. “Jean Castex's missive did not, as has been suggested by the UK government and parts of the UK press, demand that Britain be punished for, or damaged by, leaving the EU” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59115496 You obviously haven't read the first sentence of the 2nd page of Castex's letter that your fellow Chimp helpfully linked to :D ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ........... If you read the first page and continue on to the second page you will see that the first sentence of the second page is truncated in that link. Give us a translation of the full sentence if you think it proves your point, it doesn't. Why did they truncate it......If they didn't want it to mean what it says? ;-).......... If you think grasping at straws saves your Nasty Froggy chums...it Doesn't >:-) ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ......... "They" didnt truncate it, the journalist and Mr Frost did. "Dr Edward Arnold, Professor in French and European Studies at Trinity College Dublin, translated the controversial paragraphs of the letter for The Journal: It would thus appear necessary that the EU shows its absolute determination to obtain the UK’s full compliance with the agreement and also asserts its rights through recourse to all means at its disposal in a firm, unified and proportional manner. It is indispensable to show clearly to European public opinion that the respect of commitments entered into is not negotiable and it is as damaging to leave the Union as it is to stay in it. This shows that Wickham’s translation (and Frost’s comments) left out a reference to “respecting commitments”. Dr Eamon Maher, Director of the National Centre for Franco Irish Studies and a member of the lecturing staff in the Department of Humanities on the Tallaght Campus of TU Dublin, also translated the paragraph, although he said it was not “a perfect translation”: “It therefore seems necessary for the EU to show its resolve in terms of obtaining full respect by the UK of the agreement and to foreground its rights by using all the levers it has available to it in a firm, united and proportionate manner. It is vital to demonstrate clearly to European public opinion that any commitments undertaken by either side are non-negotiable and that leaving the EU is more damaging than staying in it. The independent translations differ slightly – underlining how the argument erupted in the first place. However, they are both clear that commitments undertaken or entered into were mentioned, a piece of missing context from much of the reporting. There is also no mention of punishment, something that Downing Street had interpreted from the paragraphs." I guess the Remoaner rag the Independent has got it wrong to? >:-) ........ "Brexit: EU must ‘show damage’ to UK as warning to other nations, says French PM in escalation of fishing row" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/fishing-castex-eu-france-uk-brexit-b1948202.html Three days old and based on the lazy translation originally published by the right wing press trying to stir it up. Bottom line is the letter says what it says, Mr Frost omitted two key words and the MSM obliged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted November 2, 2021 Share Posted November 2, 2021 CurtainRaiser - 2021-10-30 5:27 PM The private letter from Castex - to quote the sentence correctly - ie ‘il est indispenable a montrer clairement aux opinions publiques europeenes que le respect des engagements souscrits n’est pas négociable et qu’il y a d’avantage de dommages à quitter l’union que à y demeur’. Which loosely translates as, ‘it is essential to clearly show to European public opinion that respecting the commitments made is not negotiable and that there is more detriment to leaving the union than to remaining there.’ It is a matter of record, that the EU feels that, 'pour décourager les autres', leaving the EU has to have a cost, so nothing new is being stated here. Sorry to be slow responding - been a bit busy!! Thanks, and a very fair liberal translation. They're worried that leaving may become a fashion, and want to emphasise the advantages of remaining in. So, why the insecurity? Poland? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted November 2, 2021 Share Posted November 2, 2021 Brian Kirby - 2021-11-02 3:47 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-10-30 5:27 PM The private letter from Castex - to quote the sentence correctly - ie ‘il est indispenable a montrer clairement aux opinions publiques europeenes que le respect des engagements souscrits n’est pas négociable et qu’il y a d’avantage de dommages à quitter l’union que à y demeur’. Which loosely translates as, ‘it is essential to clearly show to European public opinion that respecting the commitments made is not negotiable and that there is more detriment to leaving the union than to remaining there.’ It is a matter of record, that the EU feels that, 'pour décourager les autres', leaving the EU has to have a cost, so nothing new is being stated here. Sorry to be slow responding - been a bit busy!! Thanks, and a very fair liberal translation. They're worried that leaving may become a fashion, and want to emphasise the advantages of remaining in. So, why the insecurity? Poland? I think after Brexit the remaining members have always been keen to ensure that citizens in other countries recognise that only by being a member of the club can you have the benefits of membership. That membership is dependent on signing up to and maintaining certain conditions, Poland's move to the right with them ditching a Independent judiciary means that they are no longer complying with those fundamental principles, the EU is keen to ensure that people don't view membership as some sort of pick and mix. I don't think it's insecurity, they just don't want the upheaval that five years of Brexit caused. And a read of this would be enough to make most people want to stay firmly planted in the EU. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2021/11/01/the-iron-cage-revisited-how-brexit-constrains-the-uk/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted November 2, 2021 Share Posted November 2, 2021 Thanks for that, who'd have thought it? :-D BTW, on a different subject, but if you missed last night's Channel 4 "Dispatches" programme - "How Green is the Government?" - you may find it interesting, you can catch it on All 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted November 2, 2021 Share Posted November 2, 2021 CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-02 5:35 PM Brian Kirby - 2021-11-02 3:47 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-10-30 5:27 PM The private letter from Castex - to quote the sentence correctly - ie ‘il est indispenable a montrer clairement aux opinions publiques europeenes que le respect des engagements souscrits n’est pas négociable et qu’il y a d’avantage de dommages à quitter l’union que à y demeur’. Which loosely translates as, ‘it is essential to clearly show to European public opinion that respecting the commitments made is not negotiable and that there is more detriment to leaving the union than to remaining there.’ It is a matter of record, that the EU feels that, 'pour décourager les autres', leaving the EU has to have a cost, so nothing new is being stated here. Sorry to be slow responding - been a bit busy!! Thanks, and a very fair liberal translation. They're worried that leaving may become a fashion, and want to emphasise the advantages of remaining in. So, why the insecurity? Poland? I think after Brexit the remaining members have always been keen to ensure that citizens in other countries recognise that only by being a member of the club can you have the benefits of membership. That membership is dependent on signing up to and maintaining certain conditions, Poland's move to the right with them ditching a Independent judiciary means that they are no longer complying with those fundamental principles, the EU is keen to ensure that people don't view membership as some sort of pick and mix. I don't think it's insecurity, they just don't want the upheaval that five years of Brexit caused. And a read of this would be enough to make most people want to stay firmly planted in the EU. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2021/11/01/the-iron-cage-revisited-how-brexit-constrains-the-uk/ Bib is in a nutshell precisely what we had been doing for years and getting away with it. Amazingly despite no longer being a club member, we still think we have a right to bits of the EU we want. The Little Englander arrogance is simply staggering. Poland will remain in the EU but if it's PM intends on keeping his job, he'd best take notice of what 89% of his nation out on the streets are telling him. Good blog...makes you wonder what we left for? Oh yes of course, sovrunty, Ingerleesh passports, Ingerleesh fish, and errmm, errrm, err oh yeah, takin' back control innit. :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 Bulletguy - 2021-11-02 9:22 PM .makes you wonder what we left for? Oh yes of course, sovrunty, Ingerleesh passports, Ingerleesh fish, and errmm, errrm, err oh yeah, takin' back control innit. :-S .. and the British 3 pin 13amp plugs ;-) People were daft enough to fall for it - but why were they fed all that sh!te in the first place? I believe you can't underestimate the fear there was about those 'Socialists' in the EU wide tax treaty getting into Her Majesty's Tax Havens. No longer would the likes of the Duke of Westminster be able to inherit their £10 billion estates tax free. When we had a real Labour Government the Rentiers were having to leave their estates to the National Trust to avoid death duties and all the other taxes the rest of us have to pay. People were burying kruggerands in their gardens - they thought it was Armageddon 8-) They would rather ruin the rest of us than risk that happening again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-02 12:16 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-02 10:38 AM CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-02 10:12 AM pelmetman - 2021-11-02 8:10 AM CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 7:49 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-01 7:04 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-11-01 6:57 PM pelmetman - 2021-11-01 6:47 PM John52 - 2021-11-01 4:52 PM Bulletguy - 2021-11-01 4:35 PM This is the letter in full (double click on it to magnify). As the poster says, Castex never wrote "Britain must be punished" as can clearly be seen. That was right wing trash media whipping up xenophobia to feed the not so bright. Unfortunately more people will read the right wing trash media version of the letter than the letter itself. And it suits them to blame Brexit problems on the French So what does demanding consequences mean if not punishment? *-) .......... Except that is not what was said, even the BBC has corrected the mistranslation. “Jean Castex's missive did not, as has been suggested by the UK government and parts of the UK press, demand that Britain be punished for, or damaged by, leaving the EU” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59115496 You obviously haven't read the first sentence of the 2nd page of Castex's letter that your fellow Chimp helpfully linked to :D ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ........... If you read the first page and continue on to the second page you will see that the first sentence of the second page is truncated in that link. Give us a translation of the full sentence if you think it proves your point, it doesn't. Why did they truncate it......If they didn't want it to mean what it says? ;-).......... If you think grasping at straws saves your Nasty Froggy chums...it Doesn't >:-) ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ......... "They" didnt truncate it, the journalist and Mr Frost did. "Dr Edward Arnold, Professor in French and European Studies at Trinity College Dublin, translated the controversial paragraphs of the letter for The Journal: It would thus appear necessary that the EU shows its absolute determination to obtain the UK’s full compliance with the agreement and also asserts its rights through recourse to all means at its disposal in a firm, unified and proportional manner. It is indispensable to show clearly to European public opinion that the respect of commitments entered into is not negotiable and it is as damaging to leave the Union as it is to stay in it. This shows that Wickham’s translation (and Frost’s comments) left out a reference to “respecting commitments”. Dr Eamon Maher, Director of the National Centre for Franco Irish Studies and a member of the lecturing staff in the Department of Humanities on the Tallaght Campus of TU Dublin, also translated the paragraph, although he said it was not “a perfect translation”: “It therefore seems necessary for the EU to show its resolve in terms of obtaining full respect by the UK of the agreement and to foreground its rights by using all the levers it has available to it in a firm, united and proportionate manner. It is vital to demonstrate clearly to European public opinion that any commitments undertaken by either side are non-negotiable and that leaving the EU is more damaging than staying in it. The independent translations differ slightly – underlining how the argument erupted in the first place. However, they are both clear that commitments undertaken or entered into were mentioned, a piece of missing context from much of the reporting. There is also no mention of punishment, something that Downing Street had interpreted from the paragraphs." I guess the Remoaner rag the Independent has got it wrong to? >:-) ........ "Brexit: EU must ‘show damage’ to UK as warning to other nations, says French PM in escalation of fishing row" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/fishing-castex-eu-france-uk-brexit-b1948202.html Three days old and based on the lazy translation originally published by the right wing press trying to stir it up. Bottom line is the letter says what it says, Mr Frost omitted two key words and the MSM obliged. What?........The Remoaner biased Indendent being lazy 8-) ......... The truth is that the EU bottom lickers have realised that Castex's letter shows the EU's NASTY side, so are back pedaling for all their worth >:-) ......... (lol) (lol) (lol) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 Brian Kirby - 2021-11-02 3:47 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-10-30 5:27 PM The private letter from Castex - to quote the sentence correctly - ie ‘il est indispenable a montrer clairement aux opinions publiques europeenes que le respect des engagements souscrits n’est pas négociable et qu’il y a d’avantage de dommages à quitter l’union que à y demeur’. Which loosely translates as, ‘it is essential to clearly show to European public opinion that respecting the commitments made is not negotiable and that there is more detriment to leaving the union than to remaining there.’ It is a matter of record, that the EU feels that, 'pour décourager les autres', leaving the EU has to have a cost, so nothing new is being stated here. Sorry to be slow responding - been a bit busy!! Thanks, and a very fair liberal translation. They're worried that leaving may become a fashion, and want to emphasise the advantages of remaining in. So, why the insecurity? Poland? Sh1t scared would be more accurate >:-) ........... Brexit was supposed to cause Britain to implode :D ........... Unfortunately for the EU and our LOSER Brigade the total opposite is happening B-) ........ So now that other countries see that we are thriving without being a member of their club, there's going to be a few more countries heading for the Exit (lol) (lol) (lol) .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-11-03 10:13 AM Brexit was supposed to cause Britain to implode :D ........... It probably would if we had 'taken back control' of our borders like the Brexiteers said we would. But we are payoing the French to control our borders and imports (including illegal immigrants) are coming in with no checks. Its exporters who have been ruined, with even M&S giving up on trying to export to their own shops. So we now have a debt to GDP ratio not seen since WW2 and rising sharply. Imagine your Daily Mail if that happened with Jeremy Corbyn in power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-11-03 10:07 AM the EU's NASTY side.... Says the one hurling insults and shouty capitals *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-11-03 10:13 AM Brian Kirby - 2021-11-02 3:47 PM CurtainRaiser - 2021-10-30 5:27 PM The private letter from Castex - to quote the sentence correctly - ie ‘il est indispenable a montrer clairement aux opinions publiques europeenes que le respect des engagements souscrits n’est pas négociable et qu’il y a d’avantage de dommages à quitter l’union que à y demeur’. Which loosely translates as, ‘it is essential to clearly show to European public opinion that respecting the commitments made is not negotiable and that there is more detriment to leaving the union than to remaining there.’ It is a matter of record, that the EU feels that, 'pour décourager les autres', leaving the EU has to have a cost, so nothing new is being stated here. Sorry to be slow responding - been a bit busy!! Thanks, and a very fair liberal translation. They're worried that leaving may become a fashion, and want to emphasise the advantages of remaining in. So, why the insecurity? Poland? Sh1t scared would be more accurate >:-) ........... Brexit was supposed to cause Britain to implode :D ........... Unfortunately for the EU and our LOSER Brigade the total opposite is happening B-) ........ So now that other countries see that we are thriving without being a member of their club, there's going to be a few more countries heading for the Exit (lol) (lol) (lol) .......... PMSL at pretty much all of that. Do you live in the same country as the rest of us? Is Pelmet Land like a new Disney type secret country none of us know about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 pelmetman - 2021-11-03 10:07 AM............................. What?........The Remoaner biased Indendent being lazy 8-) ......... The truth is that the EU bottom lickers have realised that Castex's letter shows the EU's NASTY side, so are back pedaling for all their worth >:-) ................ Calm down, Dave! :-) How good is your French? Have you a good working command of any other foreign language? Do you realise that translation from one language to another involves not just translating each word at a time, literally, but translating the sense of what is said - so that it represents what a native speaker of the other language would normally say and understand? It is more art than science, and the result is almost always open to question. What Castex's letter actually says is that the UK should stick to the terms of the agreement it has negotiated (and that France would like the support of the EU to that end), and that this should be demonstrated to EU public opinion so that they can see the UK is not being allowed to get away with playing fast and loose with the rules. So no, not punished, but simply held to the terms of the agreement, which France claims we are not properly observing. OTOH, we say we think we are. So, someone (and possibly both), somewhere, is wrong. It currently seems possible that the French negotiators (and possibly those from the UK) hadn't realised that the smaller fishing boats aren't equipped with GPS (mainly because they didn't need to be) and so don't have records they can produce to prove where they have been, and when. Hence we are saying they haven't established their "grandfather" fishing rights, and they are saying they can't, but in fairness alternative means should be accepted within the spirit of the agreement. Its pointless going all paranoid about it. The actual stakes are minuscule - except for the owners of the boats - who number only a few dozen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 Brian Kirby - 2021-11-03 11:07 AM pelmetman - 2021-11-03 10:07 AM............................. What?........The Remoaner biased Indendent being lazy 8-) ......... The truth is that the EU bottom lickers have realised that Castex's letter shows the EU's NASTY side, so are back pedaling for all their worth >:-) ................ Calm down, Dave! :-) How good is your French? Have you a good working command of any other foreign language? Do you realise that translation from one language to another involves not just translating each word at a time, literally, but translating the sense of what is said - so that it represents what a native speaker of the other language would normally say and understand? It is more art than science, and the result is almost always open to question. What Castex's letter actually says is that the UK should stick to the terms of the agreement it has negotiated (and that France would like the support of the EU to that end), and that this should be demonstrated to EU public opinion so that they can see the UK is not being allowed to get away with playing fast and loose with the rules. So no, not punished, but simply held to the terms of the agreement, which France claims we are not properly observing. OTOH, we say we think we are. So, someone (and possibly both), somewhere, is wrong. It currently seems possible that the French negotiators (and possibly those from the UK) hadn't realised that the smaller fishing boats aren't equipped with GPS (mainly because they didn't need to be) and so don't have records they can produce to prove where they have been, and when. Hence we are saying they haven't established their "grandfather" fishing rights, and they are saying they can't, but in fairness alternative means should be accepted within the spirit of the agreement. Its pointless going all paranoid about it. The actual stakes are minuscule - except for the owners of the boats - who number only a few dozen. I'd say its your Frog chums who need to calm down ;-) .......... They're the ones issuing NASTY threats to turn the Leccy off to the Channel Islands, and disrupt trade along with preventing British fishing boats from landing their catch..... over just a few fishing licences *-) ........... You 5th columnists can defend your EU bully's as much as you like........Joe public can see who are the real NASTY BULLY's >:-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.