Ambassador Farage

[Greenmile]

If you were capable of reading between the lines you migh realise that I *have* demonstrated very, very clearly how easy it is to eviscerate without spilling over into undiplomatic language.

You really haven’t, so I’ll ask you again in clearer terms.

Put yourself in Darroch’s shoes. Imagine you share his opinion on the Trump administration. What exact words would you use to communicate this to your employers?

No reading between the lines - just tell me the words you would use

Also, you have misunderstood entirely if you thought I was drawing any kind of equivalence between expressing ineptitude and insecurity and referring to your boss by a profanity.

That’s exactly the equivalence you’re drawing.

I shall leave it to you to try and work out the metaphor I was drawing upon; although it might be exasperating for you that I leave it unexplained, it only strengthens my case to leave it that way.

If your case can only be strengthened by being maddeningly vague and oblique (or by “leaving it unexplained”) then that suggests you don’t have much of a case to begin with.

As the ambassador didn't say, 'Work it out for yourself.'

If he’s asking his employers to work it out for themselves, he’s not doing his job, is he? Do you ask your boss to pull pints for his clientele himself?

[Rowls]

I composed quite a lengthy post about that very fact before sacking it off after remembering that it's Rowls and that he's not the least bit interested in debating in good faith. Framing the debate (or in this case, banging the loudest drum you have) around the content rather than the machinations behind the leak (for entirely obvious reasons, considering the politics of the person attempting to chokehold the thread) is a ploy professional propagandists would be proud of; and here he is, shilling for free while the reputation of the country rots and its next PM kowtows to a foreigner.

Hi spiral

I don't recall engaging you in this debate but I don't recognise anything which you say above and, I'll be honest, I'm struggling to understand your post.

Could you clarify what you mean by, "Framing the debate ... around the content rather than the machinations behind the leak ... is a ploy professional propagandists would be proud of"? I don't understand what point you're making here.

And could you also clarify what "and here he is, shilling for free while the reputation of the country rots and its next PM kowtows to a foreigner." means too?

I'd love to give you a considered response but it would be best to do so with a clear understanding of what you meant.

If you can clarify, I'll endeavour to respond later on.

Thanks, and goodnight!

Rowls

[Spiral]

Hi spiral

I don't recall engaging you in this debate but I don't recognise anything which you say above and, I'll be honest, I'm struggling to understand your post.

Could you clarify what you mean by, "Framing the debate ... around the content rather than the machinations behind the leak ... is a ploy professional propagandists would be proud of"? I don't understand what point you're making here.

And could you also clarify what "and here he is, shilling for free while the reputation of the country rots and its next PM kowtows to a foreigner." means too?

I'd love to give you a considered response but it would be best to do so with a clear understanding of what you meant.

If you can clarify, I'll endeavour to respond later on.

Thanks, and goodnight!

Rowls

I shall leave it to you to try and work out the metaphor I was drawing upon; although it might be exasperating for you that I leave it unexplained, it only strengthens my case to leave it that way.

[Imploding Turtle]

The winners right now are the leakers as we all debate what was said by a man doing his job instead of asking who leaked it and who it benefits.

I'm pretty sure that if Boris becomes PM then the leaker will never be identified.

[Burnley Ace]

Who's this aimed at?

You

[Burnley Ace]

On that, I bid you goodnight and God bless.

Thanks for playing along fellows. I hope you have better arguments next time.

Exits stage left tail between legs.

[Healeywoodclaret]

You really need to get a hobby....

He's got a hobby - posting on this board - it's a bloody job he needs!

[martin_p]

I see Rowls continued to wriggle well after I’d gone to bed. I’ve never seen someone use so many words without being able to express himself clearly. If he’d been an ambassador using such ambiguity and obfuscation with his employer he’d soon be out of a job!

[Imploding Turtle]

I swear he's about one Big Mac away from bringing up the size of his penis. Again.

Darroch was right.

[AndrewJB]

Farage, Banks, and Tice have all been attacking Darroch. I don’t see the point unless their allegiance is to Trump.

[Imploding Turtle]

Heh.

https://newsthump.com/2019/07/11/boris- ... s-allowed/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Imploding Turtle]

Apparently i'm not allowed to post a new thread about this, so lets add it to this one and wait

The fascist Farage wants every civil servant with an ideology that's different to his fired from their jobs
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-st ... -1-6154703" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[LoveCurryPies]

Apparently i'm not allowed to post a new thread about this, so lets add it to this one and wait

The fascist Farage wants every civil servant with an ideology that's different to his fired from their jobs
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-st ... -1-6154703" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It’s the same for all of us when creating multiple threads on one subject. Think of it as democracy in action.

[Imploding Turtle]

It’s the same for all of us when creating multiple threads on one subject. Think of it as democracy in action.

It was a different topic. Converting from a dubious democracy to overt McCarthyism

[elwaclaret]

Don't see it like this at all.
Labour have consistently been opposed to a Tory brexit, (or no deal), but (IMO) would secretly like them to deliver it, since then the Tories will get all the blame for it, and at the subsequent election Labour can say - "we never supported this and voted against it".
Whereas if Labour were in power they'd have exactly the same issue as the Conservatives - trying to deliver something that was promised but is largely undeliverable, (partly because people who voted leave were looking for many different things, and were promised it would be very easy).

I’d be very surprised if BJ didn’t come back with something Parliament allowed through, I’m not saying Labour shouldn’t have declared for remain.... just that they should have done it long ago if that was the intention. Obviously traditional Labour cannot nationalise within the EU so fully understand the position up to now, but the Liberals have already nabbed the voters that Labour are trying now to appeal to.... they’ve already gone. And the Labour fragmentation just continues... it’s bad for Britain, whatever your politics for the opposition to be in just a big a mess as those in power. They risk alienating the traditional socialist vote in for the momentum eu radicals.... two distinct parties will emerge from this if they are not really careful.

[aggi]

Clearly, writing about the US does not equate to a security risk between the US and ourselves. But it is clearly a diplomatic risk as it evidenced by this case.

I shall quote myself to address this point and I shall give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it was posted before you responded.

The point wasn't that it was a security risk, the point was that you seemed to know more about the how foreign attaches should communicate and the possibilities of correspondence being intercepted and read by foreign intelligence than the ex-National Security Adviser.

I did post before you responded but I see you just left the point as unclear rather than explaining it.

[AndrewJB]

I’d be very surprised if BJ didn’t come back with something Parliament allowed through, I’m not saying Labour shouldn’t have declared for remain.... just that they should have done it long ago if that was the intention. Obviously traditional Labour cannot nationalise within the EU so fully understand the position up to now, but the Liberals have already nabbed the voters that Labour are trying now to appeal to.... they’ve already gone. And the Labour fragmentation just continues... it’s bad for Britain, whatever your politics for the opposition to be in just a big a mess as those in power. They risk alienating the traditional socialist vote in for the momentum eu radicals.... two distinct parties will emerge from this if they are not really careful.

If Labour offer a remain platform I highly doubt progressive voters will go with an austerity party (LibDems).

[elwaclaret]

If Labour offer a remain platform I highly doubt progressive voters will go with an austerity party (LibDems).

That as they say is a matter of opinion. Time will tell. The Liberal party stand four square on New Labour ground. When was the last time old Labour won an election?

[AndrewJB]

That as they say is a matter of opinion. Time will tell. The Liberal party stand four square on New Labour ground. When was the last time old Labour won an election?

New Labour lost in 2010 and 2015. Had Miliband opposes austerity, and stood on renationalising the railways and utilities in 2015, instead of being Tory lite and driving the Scots and many others away from Labour I think he could have beaten Cameron. If the LibDems want to take that ground they’re welcome to it. All of those standing for leader voted for austerity, selling off public assets (like Royal Mail, for a song), Lansleys disterous NHS reforms, student fee hikes, and armed intervention in Libya - to name a few things. I don’t think any of them will do better than Cable until they renounce these things.

[elwaclaret]

New Labour lost in 2010 and 2015. Had Miliband opposes austerity, and stood on renationalising the railways and utilities in 2015, instead of being Tory lite and driving the Scots and many others away from Labour I think he could have beaten Cameron. If the LibDems want to take that ground they’re welcome to it. All of those standing for leader voted for austerity, selling off public assets (like Royal Mail, for a song), Lansleys disterous NHS reforms, student fee hikes, and armed intervention in Libya - to name a few things. I don’t think any of them will do better than Cable until they renounce these things.

But Nationalisation is the very reason old Labourites (Corbyn) want out of Europe... Europe don’t allow nationalisation.

[AndrewJB]

But Nationalisation is the very reason old Labourites (Corbyn) want out of Europe... Europe don’t allow nationalisation.

Nationalisation is allowed under EU rules.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.indepe ... html%3famp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[elwaclaret]

Nationalisation is allowed under EU rules.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.indepe ... html%3famp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

With respect Andrew, the article deals specifically with Rail. It is the exception to the rule... literally.

[AndrewJB]

With respect Andrew, the article deals specifically with Rail. It is the exception to the rule... literally.

It’s not. There might be some hurdles, but it’s possible across all areas of the economy: https://www.anothereurope.org/lets-be-c ... st-eu-law/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[levraiclaret]

Hi levrai, too be honest, I've not been following this a great deal. I've not read what the leaked docs said. I've taken a look this evening on one of the reports - and the comments accompanying the reports, but not read enought to have much of a view.

That being said:
1) I'd hope that correspondence between our embassies and "head office" were carried out securely. If, as I've seen reported, these docs cover a period since Trump was elected.inaugurated - more than 30 months - then that's a very long time to be hacked. If it was "a foreign power" then they are unlikely to have chosen to disclose that they've hacked the FCO or Washington embassy at this time. So, based on this it's more likely it's a leak from the inside.

Agreed probably someone with access in the FO. But what is your view on the leaking?

2) Just because the leak covers 30 months (from above) doesn't mean that the docs have all been collected together and leaked at one time. It's not impossible that the collection of docs have been built up over a period, and not impossible that there is more than one person doing the leaking.

But what is your view on the leaking?

3) Who gains from the leaking? Timing - suggests it's intended to embarrass the elections for leader of Tory party - and hence PM - but, is BJ embarrassable? And, what would it change?

Really, it is not impossible that it is a precursor to a purge of the Civil Service as proposed by Farage.

4) Friend of the Ambassador or a foe? What's the point? He's retiring in a few months anyway.

The Ambassador is just a means to an end

5) I've seen a suggestion that the ambassador wants the publicity so that he can publish his book. Well, I guess he's got some stories to tell now, but aren't the civil servants limited in what they can publish for some time?

The suggestion is probably just the dead cat on the table.

You ask do I consider it a treasonable offense. As I've said, I've not read the leaks. Don't we expect that Ambassadors provide views on the countries they are resident in? Are there any secrets in the leaks? Is there anything on a par with wikileaks? I've not heard that there is. If US secrets were leaked, I'd expect the ambassador to have packed and left immediately. Is there anything in the leaks beyond the ambassador's assessments of Trump's admin?

The Ambassador didn't do the leaks, his secure reports were leaked. The leaks have damaged the "special relationship" and put our Government in a difficult position.

I always think we can learn something by making comparisons. What would we expect are the views of our ambassador in Moscow? or Berlin? or Paris? or Hong Kong? of Beijing? and so on?

I would expect them to be candid reports on the situation in the host country.

I doubt it is treason. I doubt we will be bothered, either way, in a few days time.

I will be bothered if a foreign government had an influence on the appointment of our Ambassadors. I thought we were taking back control.

[elwaclaret]

It’s not. There might be some hurdles, but it’s possible across all areas of the economy: https://www.anothereurope.org/lets-be-c ... st-eu-law/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It may have changed but I would never trust them. The EU provided Thatchers leverage to destroy British heavy industry. We didn’t have a united opposition to her because The necessary subsidies needed to get them back in proper shape meant that all kinds of industries could be binned of as uneconomic, and then low and behold money pits in private hands.

When people spit on the word Thatcher, they should equally spit for what the EU insisted and as far as I know still insist on... NO STATE SUBSIDY of industry. We had been paying debts for saving the world from the Nazi’s of course our heavy industry had been neglected, and of course it would need subsidising for the catchup years of proper management.

Like I say it may be different now....

[Paul Waine]

“Look! A squirrel!”

???? No, you've got me there, Gm. What's all that about?

[Paul Waine]

Agreed probably someone with access in the FO. But what is your view on the leaking?
But what is your view on the leaking?
Really, it is not impossible that it is a precursor to a purge of the Civil Service as proposed by Farage.
The Ambassador is just a means to an end
The suggestion is probably just the dead cat on the table.

The Ambassador didn't do the leaks, his secure reports were leaked. The leaks have damaged the "special relationship" and put our Government in a difficult position.

I would expect them to be candid reports on the situation in the host country.

I will be bothered if a foreign government had an influence on the appointment of our Ambassadors. I thought we were taking back control.

Hi again, levrai, so, tonight I've read Oakshott's (sp?) article in MoS. A few quotes from the "leaked cables" - but nothing I find to get very excited about. Do you know where I can see the documents themselves, read the source, so to speak? Have these been published anywhere? (I can't find anything via google).

So, what is my view on the leaking? Based on MoS I'm puzzled why all the fuss. Was it a quiet day when this was all published? Or, have I been asleep for some time - and I've missed all the excitement?

I don't expect Farage to have any influence over the civil service - or anything else for that matter. It would be "absurd" to think of Nigel Farage becoming UK's "man in Washington."

For many reasons, I think it's more than a little hyperbolic (is that a word?) to think the "leaks" will make much difference to the UK's relationship with the US - beyond a few days. I can't see anything wrong with Darroch's cables - from the little bits quoted in MoS. Yes, I'm really puzzled why everyone has got so excited.

[AndrewJB]

It may have changed but I would never trust them. The EU provided Thatchers leverage to destroy British heavy industry. We didn’t have a united opposition to her because The necessary subsidies needed to get them back in proper shape meant that all kinds of industries could be binned of as uneconomic, and then low and behold money pits in private hands.

When people spit on the word Thatcher, they should equally spit for what the EU insisted and as far as I know still insist on... NO STATE SUBSIDY of industry. We had been paying debts for saving the world from the Nazi’s of course our heavy industry had been neglected, and of course it would need subsidising for the catchup years of proper management.

Like I say it may be different now....

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... r-eu-rules" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

France and Germany invest a lot more than we do in state aid, and probably have for a long time. Thatcher's selling off of state industry (including the later selling of the railways) was all part of her ideological mission to shrink the state and apply market forces wider across the economy. That the EU didn't stand in the way of this underlines the independence of UK governments in domestic economic policy within the EU.

[Imploding Turtle]

"What Kim Darroch said was undiplomatic and outrageous", say the idiots referring to Darroch's secret communications with his own government

Here's what Trump's own party thinks of him. Out loud. In public.


My point? I don't have one really, i just wanted to remind you what morons Trump and everyone who supports him is. Please, be offended.

[Greenmile]

???? No, you've got me there, Gm. What's all that about?

Hi Paul

The post I replied to was a complete non-sequitur and had nothing to do with the thread topic.

I was therefore (gently) mocking you by suggesting that your post was the equivalent of shouting “look, a squirrel” in a desperate attempt to change the subject, because you were being made to look a bit silly.

Hope this clarifies my earlier post for you.

[Paul Waine]

Hi Paul

The post I replied to was a complete non-sequitur and had nothing to do with the thread topic.

I was therefore (gently) mocking you by suggesting that your post was the equivalent of shouting “look, a squirrel” in a desperate attempt to change the subject, because you were being made to look a bit silly.

Hope this clarifies my earlier post for you.

Thanks, Greenmile. No worries, I wasn't trying to distract, just posting "live" that I was watching that BBC documentary - RBS and World Financial Crisis being the subject of a thread a week or so back. Worth a watch on catch up.

Was I being made to "look a bit silly?" I don't mind. I'd said I'd not read the leaked docs. From best I can find, the "leaked docs" haven't been disclosed in full - though I'm interest if this are available somewhere and I've missed it. (Not in the MoS, which I have now read).

A little odd, perhaps, that no one said "hey, you can read the leaked docs here." or even "we've not read them, either...."

I'm open to anyone providing me with the information I'm missing.

BTW, we have a lot of squirrels around where I live. "Look a squirrel" may get the response - "what, only one?" However, if you'd said "look a red squirrel" I'm going to be excited and look straight away!

Have a great day. Neil Young and Bob Dylan later for me.

[Rowls]

We're still waiting for Boris to appoint Ambassador Farage.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51413307

[Rowls]

It all looked so nailed on when this thread happened, didn't it?

[Rowls]

My theory is that Boris read this thread, realized that ImplodingTurtleHeads was onto him and therefore had to backtrack on all the many plans to appoint Ambassador Farage.

It won't be a surprise when a massive mainstream media cover up is exposed in the coming years.

There's probably a giant bonfire in Boris Johnson's country residence right now trying to get rid of the paperwork that pertained to the secret plan to appoint Ambassador Farage.

[KateR]

how disappointing, there I was checking this expecting to welcome IT back and see what pearls of wisdom he was casting upon the masses

Rowls, are you taking up the mantle of IT regarding conspiracy theories?

Seems like the Gov did what they were supposed to do or is my thinking wrong here?

[Rowls]

how disappointing, there I was checking this expecting to welcome IT back and see what pearls of wisdom he was casting upon the masses

Rowls, are you taking up the mantle of IT regarding conspiracy theories?

Seems like the Gov did what they were supposed to do or is my thinking wrong here?

I don't know what happened KateR.

Turtle had predicted with great certainty that we'd have our Ambassador Farage.

But we still don't.

And there's no sign of Turtle either!

I just don't know what to say or do any more. I don't know what to think.

I'm going for a lie down.

[Buxtonclaret]

My theory is that Boris read this thread, realized that ImplodingTurtleHeads was onto him and therefore had to backtrack on all the many plans to appoint Ambassador Farage.

It won't be a surprise when a massive mainstream media cover up is exposed in the coming years.

There's probably a giant bonfire in Boris Johnson's country residence right now trying to get rid of the paperwork that pertained to the secret plan to appoint Ambassador Farage.

Smokescreen, Rowls.
Your just trying to coax out his new site name.

[KateR]

I actually do miss IT and also Lancaster, I sincerely hope nothing bad/ill has happened to them to prevent posting

[Buxtonclaret]

I do too, Kate.
I'm probably one of the few who actually quite liked Turtle.
Though he was his own worst enemy.
Without wanting to sound too patronising, reckon a few years on his/her shoulders, and there wouldn't have to be a overwhelming need to justify so many split hairs.
Which was, of course, a big ingredient in his posting.


Not sure where Lancaster has gone though.
A decent poster.

[FCBurnley]

Were IT and Lancaster one and the same person ? They certainly used to sing off the same lefty page

[Loyalclaret]

Pretty certain they weren't the same person. Sure Lancaster walked to the ground and was presented on the pitch before the game. IT seemed to be Burnley based

[Bin Ont Turf]

It certainly feels a more calm less trolling forum at the minute.

No doubt that the 'remain children' who went on and on and on every day for what seemed like years, have taken to twitter full time now where they will be saying that this board is full of racists (like Enola Gay did on the PNE forum).

Give them a wave.

[yTib]

in ten years time when it starts to dawn on folk they've been sold a pup farages life won't be worth ten bob on these isles.

[dougcollins]

Probably about a year from now, to be honest.

[Jakubclaret]

I do too, Kate.
I'm probably one of the few who actually quite liked Turtle.
Though he was his own worst enemy.
Without wanting to sound too patronising, reckon a few years on his/her shoulders, and there wouldn't have to be a overwhelming need to justify so many split hairs.
Which was, of course, a big ingredient in his posting.


Not sure where Lancaster has gone though.
A decent poster.

He was & the same applied to greenmile who doesn't seem to post that often, at the end of day you can disagree but when all said done it's a football MB, it's not life threatening, I just assumed a few had changed the usernames & carried on with new usernames.

[timshorts]

IT had a posting style all of his own. Unless he went deep deep under cover, we'd soon spot him.
Look at the saga with the ringo and Elizabeth posters.
Perhaps IT got a job which meant he had to stop using social media. I'm sure we could all think of other interesting reasons for his disappearance.