Deleted member 68110
Deleted member 68110
OP
I guess that means you're not in favour of Boris taking the reins...
Here he is calling Trump stupendously ignorant and unfit for office! Ouch.
Here he is calling Trump stupendously ignorant and unfit for office! Ouch.
Most people (lefties/remainers) say the same of Boris so they should get on like a house on fire, plus they both support Brexit unlike Hunt who isn't saying anything we haven't heard from Theresa May over the last 3 years.
Lets face it during 2 years of Russian collusion propaganda anyone among the establishment who said they liked Trump would have committed career suicide.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 4,988
- Location
- South Wirral
Sir Kim has resigned: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48937120
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,663
- Location
- La France
I thought as much. I certainly remember getting read the riot act by the local security bloke for leaving a restricted document unsecured, despite it being inside a controlled area where only people with secret clearance were allowed.
I genuinely have to question what Tweets like this hope to achieve. It's like these hand wringing social media obsessed users would rather see the country fail just to get likes and say "hahaha look we were right".
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
He's not a politician, he's a civil servant and should remain neutral in matters of politics.
He did remain neutral as it was a secret cable on advice to the government and whitehall, and now he's lost his job because some **** has abused his position to illegally leak it, hopefully the person is found and prosecuted for the traitor he is.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,174
Is this how things might go in your fantasy World?
Theresa May - "Hey Ambassador, what is your informed opinion of the US Administration, having worked with them and lived out there?"
Sir Kim - "I have no opinion on that matter"
Theresa May - "Ummm, well that's actually a big part of your job"
Sir Kim - "I have no opinion on that matter"
Do and say anything to protect King Drumpf from the truth, doesnt even matter if the victim is actually British.
Deleted member 68110
Deleted member 68110
OP
Hmmm. So it's all OK, because Boris is stupendously stupid like trump, whereas the ambassador isn't? I'm not sure if I concur with that logic.
And similarly, I don't agree with the sentiment that "the fox wants to get into the chicken coup, so, as long as us chickens pick the cockeral who's willing to let him in, we'll all be fine."
Huh? Should they leak it instead?
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
What an asinine response.
Obviously they are there to do a job and may express their opinions to the appropriate people, although whether these comments were vaguely professional is another matter altogether. But Raymond Lin seemed to be implying that that the diplomats opinions becoming public were acceptable because that is what people seemed to want - brutal honesty.
I pointed out he's a civil servant and should be remaining politically neutral - this leak compromises the idea that he's simply a civil servant there to do a job without making it personal.
An official opinion that's meant for the British government only is not "personal", you're making it personal because you hate anyone who would dare to tell the truth about Trump's ****** government that's had about a million resignations/and people in prison...
The real evil is someone leaking British secrets.
The real evil is someone leaking British secrets.
@Schlong&Stable Is saying that the administration is inept in that manner really a ‘political’ statement? Saying the policies etc are rubbish / ineffective would be political. But I’m sure about the below...
"We don't really believe this administration is going to become substantially more normal; less dysfunctional; less unpredictable; less faction-riven; less diplomatically clumsy and inept."
It could still have all the same policies yet be functional / not clumsy. Maybe I’m splitting atoms but I don’t think the above is particularly ‘political’. It’s more just saying ‘this machine is ineffective’.
That’s my view anyway.
"We don't really believe this administration is going to become substantially more normal; less dysfunctional; less unpredictable; less faction-riven; less diplomatically clumsy and inept."
It could still have all the same policies yet be functional / not clumsy. Maybe I’m splitting atoms but I don’t think the above is particularly ‘political’. It’s more just saying ‘this machine is ineffective’.
That’s my view anyway.
Of course it's an ambassador's job to report back things like that.
Working out who the influential people are, how to approach an administration, what tactics to use, what is likely to float their boat, etc is surely as much as part of the job as the visible greasing of palms and schmoozing.
Working out who the influential people are, how to approach an administration, what tactics to use, what is likely to float their boat, etc is surely as much as part of the job as the visible greasing of palms and schmoozing.
Another unfortunate leak 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-48933881
Both caused by the same person, presumably? *tin foil hat*
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-48933881
Both caused by the same person, presumably? *tin foil hat*
Deleted member 68110
Deleted member 68110
OP
Which of the ambassador's comments were not "vaguely professional"?
Or, to set the bar at a different level, which of those private comments were less professional than the Twitter comments of the 45th POTUS in response?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,174
Yep, we know
but I knew it first, even before he knew himself