Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Wed Oct 19, 2022 5:47 pm I didn't realise Shapps was Jewish.

Watch out for his sinister tentacles, Nige.

His more famous cousin Mick Jones* is Jewish so likely he is. Shapps can have some Brent banter with the youngsters at the home office with the irony of him being Home Secretary when his cousin played on I fought the law.

* From the Clash and not as you might guess the guy from Foreigner

Shapps is of Jewish heritage. Whether ior not he is observant I don't know.

It seems that he is.

https://www.thejc.com/news/politics/gra ... lgSczXhXxX

Shapps, a former BBYO president, told the JC in a 2010 interview, that he was "totally Jewish" saying: "I don't eat pork, we only buy kosher meat and we don't mix meat and milk. I like being Jewish and I married a Jewish girl. It's like a way of life and it's good to be able to instil some of that sense of being in your kids."

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Wed Oct 19, 2022 6:57 pm

davidjay wrote: ↑Wed Oct 19, 2022 6:48 pm All the shit this lot have done without embarrassment and she resigns because she pressed 'send all ' instead of 'send'?

Pull the other one; it plays Tomorrow Belongs to Me.

Leaking to a backbench loon mate of hers, highly dubious conduct.

Now, I was in work and kind of our of the loop and following Peston's tweets on the matter, but wasn't there also that she's sent it as a cc to another Tory who isn't even an MP, in a botched auto-complete thing (Who amongst us...).

My early working theory was that she'd sent it to Boris on purpose and Stanley by accident....

Whatever the case, it's shooting off your big toe to get a "blighty" wound.

Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Wed Oct 19, 2022 7:48 pm Shapps is of Jewish heritage. Whether ior not he is observant I don't know.

Observance is irrelevant when the GBNews fans come calling with their nose calipers.

Delving slightly deeper, the news last night referred to Cruella sending the documents from her phone.

Few have questioned what the secure documents were doing on her phone?
That (if true) is a major security breach, akin to the Donald transferring state secrets to his golf club.

Bones McCoy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 20, 2022 12:08 pm Delving slightly deeper, the news last night referred to Cruella sending the documents from her phone.

Few have questioned what the secure documents were doing on her phone?
That (if true) is a major security breach, akin to the Donald transferring state secrets to his golf club.

The docs may not have literally been on her phone - it could be an app accessing a secure server. Not that I’m giving her the benefit of the doubt - I just find it more likely she’s too stupid to save off and access documents!

Crabcakes wrote: ↑Thu Oct 20, 2022 2:50 pm

Bones McCoy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 20, 2022 12:08 pm Delving slightly deeper, the news last night referred to Cruella sending the documents from her phone.

Few have questioned what the secure documents were doing on her phone?
That (if true) is a major security breach, akin to the Donald transferring state secrets to his golf club.

The docs may not have literally been on her phone - it could be an app accessing a secure server. Not that I’m giving her the benefit of the doubt - I just find it more likely she’s too stupid to save off and access documents!

Even then, a personal phone should not be accessing a secure server.

The rules are pretty simple.
Secret stuff stays on secret infrastructure, which is air gapped from anything public.
Any transgressions receive the order of the boot, and have their clearance reviewed.

This may be a tad naive, but I assume all MP’s sign the Official Secrets Act

We need to be careful about document classifications.

Everything I have seen refers to official documents rather than secret. Official relates to relatively low level but potentially sensitive stuff. You can still get in big trouble for revealing personal or commercially sensitive information.

Here are some examples of OFFICIAL information:

■ The day-to-day business of the public sector, including information about public services and finances
■ Routine international relations and diplomatic activities
■ Public safety, criminal justice and law enforcement
■ Routine defence and security business
■ Commercial information, including contractual
information and intellectual property
■ Personal information that is required to be protected under Data Protection legislation.

(Source - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... FICIAL.PDF)

If it turns out that it was Secret or Top Secret that is a whole different ball game.

I really don't think the nature of the document matters much. Ministers have survived, even brushed off, far worse.

This was, as said above, shooting your toe off in order to get out of the big push. She can now claim to be honourable, owning up to her mistakes, setting an example. Bollocks. She saw it all coming down and decided it was time to get out under her volition rather than wait for the inevitable.

Watchman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 20, 2022 3:07 pm This may be a tad naive, but I assume all MP’s sign the Official Secrets Act

A pedantic answer would point out that signing isn't particularly inportant.

People with access to certain information are subject to the OSA.
People leaving that sort of employment often have to sign a statement to show that they understand its terms.
It isn't the signing that somehow opts you in.

I don't know about MPs.
There was certainly a lot of disquiet when "Moscow" Dom' Cummings visited senior commanders and implied that he would be laying down the law.
Much was of the "Who the fuck is this balloon headed twat".
More informed people were aware of his missing years in Moscow, and know he didn;t have a hope of getting even basic security clearance by normal means.

Watchman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 20, 2022 3:07 pm This may be a tad naive, but I assume all MP’s sign the Official Secrets Act

No-one signs it, it just IS.

Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Thu Oct 20, 2022 6:28 pm

Watchman wrote: ↑Thu Oct 20, 2022 3:07 pm This may be a tad naive, but I assume all MP’s sign the Official Secrets Act

No-one signs it, it just IS.

Of course. Bound by it, not sign it.

Easily misunderstood, it's another trope that the press echoes without understanding.

Reappointing Suella may not be a great move.

Oh well that's allright then.

I had hoped that Cruella could indeed be conigned to a shameful footnote in British political history, rendering this excellent article in the New European superfluous. .

Fuck you, Sunak.

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/what- ... braverman/

Would not surprise me if this becomes his fatal error.

She isn’t qualified to be AG let alone Home Secretary.

She’s at best a PPS, though I’m glad he did it, it signals very little has changed.