Chapelhall chap Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 1 hour ago, welshbairn said: Was thinking that, had to check what his promise was. Less drugs and violence, was thinking more ambitious, like recidivism. But fair play to him if he made any progress without hiring a shedload more PO's. I certainly give him credit for what he was seeking to achieve and am just inclined to believe his promise. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 1 minute ago, Chapelhall chap said: I certainly give him credit for what he was seeking to achieve and am just inclined to believe his promise. I think he's one of the few decent and thinking politicians, even if he appears a bit strange. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chapelhall chap Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 Just now, welshbairn said: I think he's one of the few decent and thinking politicians, even if he appears a bit strange. I do find it hard to give him much time as he opposes Scottish independence ( the famous Cairn) but as a Borderland advocate I understand that he makes a good case for the Unionist arguments, although I don't agree with him . ( I am sure he is really worried about my opinion) But he does argue quite well and is not a raving Mark Francois, He does look strange but he can't be faulted for that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
O'Kelly Isley III Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 If age has provided me with anything it may be the faculty to seldom accept anything at face value, especially where politics is concerned. Consider this. Last week the US security apparatus condemned the UK Government's decision to involve Huawei in any shape or form in future telecoms projects; the news had originally been leaked to The Telegraph, by persons or persons unknown, but that's not how the Yanks got to hear about it. Had the US not issued its threat on future cooperation then the leak enquiry would have gently drifted into the ether, with the usual lessons learned, etc., The fact that they did however has forced May's Government to seek to hastily ditch the Huawei deal, shit scared as they are of the Americans, especially with Brexit looming (indeed it is surprising it ever materialised in the first place). What better then than to sacrifice the most hapless member of a hapless Cabinet, namely Private Pike, and to kill two birds with one stone ? The leaker is hung out to dry, job done, but more importantly, under cover of Williamson's sacking and the horror of leaked highly sensitive info expect May's Government to now revisit and reassess the entire Huawei project, with a wholly predicatable outcome. Better to offend Beijing than Washington after all, and normal service will quickly be resumed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, O'Kelly Isley III said: If age has provided me with anything it may be the faculty to seldom accept anything at face value, especially where politics is concerned. Consider this. Last week the US security apparatus condemned the UK Government's decision to involve Huawei in any shape or form in future telecoms projects; the news had originally been leaked to The Telegraph, by persons or persons unknown, but that's not how the Yanks got to hear about it. Had the US not issued its threat on future cooperation then the leak enquiry would have gently drifted into the ether, with the usual lessons learned, etc., The fact that they did however has forced May's Government to seek to hastily ditch the Huawei deal, shit scared as they are of the Americans, especially with Brexit looming (indeed it is surprising it ever materialised in the first place). What better then than to sacrifice the most hapless member of a hapless Cabinet, namely Private Pike, and to kill two birds with one stone ? The leaker is hung out to dry, job done, but more importantly, under cover of Williamson's sacking and the horror of leaked highly sensitive info expect May's Government to now revisit and reassess the entire Huawei project, with a wholly predicatable outcome. Better to offend Beijing than Washington after all, and normal service will quickly be resumed. The leak seriously fucked up the Chancellor's trip to China, when a neutral position on Huawei would have been very helpful. He had already bragged about sending our aircraft carrier out to China which fucked up an earlier visit. The Huawei thing is daft, Trump's crazy trade wars. Apple phones and most of Western technology is already made in China, and the bits of Huawei's stuff that is dangerous can easily be avoided. The basic infrastructure of 5g technology that the UK were talking about introducing isn't much more advanced than satellite discs. Edited May 2, 2019 by welshbairn 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 Penny Morduant is the new defence secretary another proven liar [emoji23] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 So long as Williamson keeps denying the leak he probably can't get done under the Official Secrets Act. The journalist is unlikely to grass, and if they did secretly record the phone call, they probably couldn't use it as evidence. If he admitted it, it sounds cut and dried. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btb Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 15 hours ago, ICTJohnboy said: Born-again Brexiters This group all have their eyes on the biggest prize of all – being on the right side of the Brexit debate when May does eventually step down. The foreign secretary, Jeremy Hunt, was a leading remainer who now says he has changed his mind and would vote leave if he had his time again, blaming the European commission’s “arrogant” behaviour for changing his mind. The home secretary, Sajid Javid, was a natural Eurosceptic who backed remain at the behest of David Cameron but after the vote appeared to regret his decision, which lost him the trust of many Tory Brexiters. He has been treading a careful line between scepticism and loyalty ever since. The defence secretary, Gavin Williamson, previously a low-key remainer, has grown keener on Brexit as the months have gone on, although he has recently kept his counsel. The Treasury chief secretary, Liz Truss, awkwardly for her boss, the chancellor, has had a damascene conversion and is now a fully signed-up leaver. It will not have passed any of them by that the next leader of the Tory party will have to unify MPs as well as win the support of the predominantly Brexiter membership. Why not - Theresa May was regarded as a Eurosceptic prior to the referendum and at one point touted to lead the LEAVE campaign by Nigel Farage! https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/theresa-may-leadership-eu-out-campaign 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beefybake Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 13 hours ago, Chapelhall chap said: I do find it hard to give him much time as he opposes Scottish independence ( the famous Cairn) but as a Borderland advocate I understand that he makes a good case for the Unionist arguments, although I don't agree with him . ( I am sure he is really worried about my opinion) But he does argue quite well and is not a raving Mark Francois, He does look strange but he can't be faulted for that. I just think he's someone who makes the right noises, sweet and reasonable..........., but when all is said and done, and this government is dead and gone, I'm absolutely certain that he will have had just about no discernible positive effect on prisons. At root, Conservatives are hangers, floggers and punishers. Not that Labour are better. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tibbermoresaint Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 13 minutes ago, welshbairn said: So long as Williamson keeps denying the leak he probably can't get done under the Official Secrets Act. The journalist is unlikely to grass, and if they did secretly record the phone call, they probably couldn't use it as evidence. If he admitted it, it sounds cut and dried. Yes, no-one has ever been convicted after denying committing a crime. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 6 minutes ago, Tibbermoresaint said: Yes, no-one has ever been convicted after denying committing a crime. Your point caller? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 1 hour ago, welshbairn said: So long as Williamson keeps denying the leak he probably can't get done under the Official Secrets Act. The journalist is unlikely to grass, and if they did secretly record the phone call, they probably couldn't use it as evidence. If he admitted it, it sounds cut and dried. This thread gives another reason why there might not be enough evidence to prosecute, even if they've got a recording of the phone call. https://twitter.com/gabyhinsliff/status/1123901819644719104 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 2 hours ago, welshbairn said: So long as Williamson keeps denying the leak he probably can't get done under the Official Secrets Act. The journalist is unlikely to grass, and if they did secretly record the phone call, they probably couldn't use it as evidence. If he admitted it, it sounds cut and dried. If the journalist reveals his source, he's dead in the water. I'm not sure why anyone expects to hear from him. It absolutely can't be used as evidence one way or the other. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 1 minute ago, Savage Henry said: If the journalist reveals his source, he's dead in the water. I'm not sure why anyone expects to hear from him. It absolutely can't be used as evidence one way or the other. Yeah, I wasn't clear. I meant if the security services had recorded the phone call and as you say it's more than unlikely the journalist would grass. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 19 hours ago, welshbairn said: Still an MP till the election, and could stand for Brexit. Wouldn't put it past her. The 10% requirement seems a bit low though, how many MPs could pass that threshold? Ian Paisley Junior... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 5 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said: Ian Paisley Junior... Aye. I didn't know that he only survived by 0.6% of the electorate. He got 9.4%, 10% and it's P45 time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 2 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Aye. I didn't know that he only survived by 0.6% of the electorate. He got 9.4%, 10% and it's P45 time. He'd have got back in. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 1 minute ago, Jacksgranda said: He'd have got back in. No doubt. I don't understand why he's not in jail, twice getting caught taking bribes from foreign powers to lobby Government without declaring an interest. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 5 minutes ago, welshbairn said: No doubt. I don't understand why he's not in jail, twice getting caught taking bribes from foreign powers to lobby Government without declaring an interest. Me neither. Sinn Fein f***** up the recall process, crying after the result there weren't enough signing stations. It's North Antrim, ffs, not an area the size of Wales... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTJohnboy Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 (edited) This is interesting. Quote Why aren't the police investigating? Following Mr Williamson's sacking, the Liberal Democrat deputy leader, Jo Swinson, wrote to the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Cressida Dick, calling for a criminal investigation. Ms Dick says the Met will "look at any complaint", but adds the force has not received any referral from the Cabinet Office. The force says it needs a referral and to see material before it can decide whether to carry out an investigation. Whether or not a disclosure is deemed "damaging" is a decision for the attorney general. Any prosecution, under the 1989 Act, has to be done with their consent. If the police do decide to investigate, they would aim to determine the nature of the leaked information and who did it. But No 10 appears to want to draw a line under it. A spokesman said it "considers the matter closed". Surely if complaints have been received the police are duty bound to make enquiries - especially in a matter as serious as this. Presumably Theresa May doesn't want the police involved - probably fearful of whatever else might be uncovered or revealed. It's not up to her or her office to consider the matter closed. Edited May 2, 2019 by ICTJohnboy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.