Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Oh dear... Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson sacked over Huawei leak.

Wot! FFS! :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:
Indeed he should come back swinging

dreams_58723-520x390.jpg
 
Reading between the lines, it appears that there may (so far) only be circumstantial evidence that he is the leaker
Mr Williamson, who has been defence secretary since 2017, "strenuously" denies leaking the information. In a meeting with Mr Williamson on Wednesday evening, Theresa May told him she had information that provided "compelling evidence" that he was responsible for the unauthorised disclosure.
In a letter confirming his dismissal, she said: "No other, credible version of events to explain this leak has been identified." Responding in a letter to the PM, Mr Williamson said he was "confident" that a "thorough and formal inquiry" would have "vindicated" his position.
 
But it's good that this info was leaked.
That depends on who you believe. The anti-Huawei campaign is seriously political and accelerated by the US, with the Trump administration putting a lot of pressure on governments, especially Australia and NZ, to exclude their network hardware. Hauwei are largely considered ok in Europe and Ireland, with oversight and certain restrictions, and by the sound of it Her Majesty's Government were just about to stick two fingers up at the yanks. The other side of that is that Huawei is a god awful company that has been stealing western IP for years and couldn't give a fuck about employment rights, so swings and roundabouts really.
 
That depends on who you believe. The anti-Huawei campaign is very political and accelerated by the US, with the Trump administration putting a lot of pressure on governments, especiallyb Australia and NZ, to exclude their network hardware. Hauwei are largely considered ok in Europe and Ireland, with oversight and certain restrictions, and by the sound of it Her Majesty's Government were just about to stick two fingers up at the yanks. The other side of that is that Huawei is a god awful company that has been stealing western IP for years and couldn't give a fuck about employment rights, so swings and roundabouts really.
Fine, but why shouldn't we know the thoughts of those (supposedly) responsible on UK security on this matter? Fuck that secrecy and fuck the NCS, GCHQ, MI5, MI6 and the rest - these people have been shown time and time again to throw UK citizens to the dogs when "needed".
 
bloke was out of depth in a puddle but when the spooks argue the Huwaei really is not a good idea to be given access to 5g infrastructure and the pm ignores the advice maybe he did the right thing?.
he wanted to arm tractors and car ferriesand pick a fight with russia and china so not terribly bright
 
On which matter? There's an obvious need for secrecy in lots of security matters.
Is there? Like whether MI5 interfered in the Miners Strike? Or how the security services conspired with Loyalist paramilitaries to kill people?
Fine but I wouldn’t trust GW’s thoughts if he said “hello”. There is nothing honourable in his reasons for doing this.
Sure, as I said he can go fuck himself. But let's not pretend the rest of the wankers that make up the NSC are any more honourable. Filth one and all.
 
Is there? Like whether MI5 interfered in the Miners Strike? Or how the security services conspired with Loyalist paramilitaries to kill people?
Well that's one end of the spectrum. The other would be the operational security of counter-terrorism endeavours, cyber-crime, organised crime, industrial espionage, people trafficking ... etc, etc, etc
 
Last edited:
And often does. Allegedly.

When corporal punishment was finally abolished in public schools, I recall a letter to the Telegraph, where the writer said:

'Those youngsters, they don't know how privileged they were, what they were getting for free, well, he had to pay a nice young lady in Soho Square quite handsomely to receive'. :D
 
When corporal punishment was finally abolished in public schools, I recall a letter to the Telegraph, where the writer said:

'Those youngsters, they don't know how privileged they were, what they were getting for free, well, he had to pay a nice young lady in Soho Square quite handsomely to receive'. :D
Wanting a spanking from a nice young lady & getting one from a brutish teacher maybe quite different experiences. I know you are getting on in years but laughing about child abuse? WTF
 
I think the squaddies liked him, kebabking?

He made a change from the standard Defence Secretary in that he was capable of understanding finely balanced arguments, didn't read the Telegraph, and wasn't interested in being the Treasury's man at Defence.

He occasionally, or perhaps more accurately, is reported to have done some very 'blue sky thinking', but he steered some significant procurement programmes through cabinet and faced some opposition in doing so.

There have certainly been lazier, less rigourous, less interested, less intellectually gifted and more kow-towing defence secretaries in the 5, 10, 15, 20 etc... years.
 
Well that's one end of the spectrum. The other would be operational security of counter-terrorism endeavours, cyber-crime, organised crime, industrial espionage ... etc, etc, etc
How many of these counter-terrorism endeavours actually benefit us, rather than serve to maintain the power of capital and the state.

These are the people who argued that because their illegal assistance in torture was found out they need to have extra secrecy protections so that in future such shit should not come to light.
 
Back
Top Bottom