back to article Buyout of British defence supplier Ultra Electronics paused by UK.gov over competition concerns

The British government has intervened in the US buyout of defence supplier Ultra Electronics, temporarily halting the acquisition and prohibiting any tech transfer overseas. An order in Parliament was laid yesterday [PDF] that prohibits Ultra's buyer, Advent International, from receiving any of its intellectual property until …

  1. macjules Silver badge

    Pardon me for asking

    What the hell have Department for Culture, Media and Sport got to do with the US buyout of a UK defence supplier?

    1. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: Pardon me for asking

      As British sports men and women keep winning in the world stage, and, er, the defence crowd not so much, Boris will reshuffle things so that defence comes under DCMS.

      Not so far fetched to combine the two - a few years ago definitely there was a combined federal ministry for the two in Austria. Looks like they are now separate again

  2. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

    Sovereignty

    > on a UK company that makes very sensitive stuff for ... nuclear missiles."

    The Made In America nuclear missiles that the UK leases from the USA ?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Sovereignty

      Some very confused downvoters who don't really understand the reality of the UK's "independent" nuclear deterrent.

      1. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
        Mushroom

        Re: Sovereignty

        British PM on the hotline to the US President:

        B PM: Can I launch the nukes?

        US P: Woah there buddy. No

        B PM: Ah go on, go on, go on...

        1. SundogUK Silver badge

          Re: Sovereignty

          The idea that we can't launch our nuclear missiles without the US's permission hasn't been true since the 1960's.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Sovereignty

            Aww. That's adorable you think that. Not only are the missiles the property of the US of A, but all maintenance etc is carried out in the US. Which is why UK submariners spend so much time over there.

            Also, the targeting/comms system is fully reliant on US software and satellites.

            1. Old Tom

              Re: Sovereignty

              Trident missiles use astro-inertial guidance - they look at stars, they don't piss about with GPS.

              Maintenance in US because it's cheaper than having our own facilities, this does not give the US any control over missiles not undergoing maintenance.

      2. gandalfcn Silver badge

        Re: Sovereignty

        To Brexiteers being controlled by the USA is being independent.

        "Paul Myners, the former City minister, has cast doubt on the value of promises made by companies seeking to secure takeovers. “These things are not enforceable, they mean nothing and they’re normally time-limited,” he said."

      3. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

        Re: Sovereignty

        Some very confused downvoters who don't really understand the reality of the UK's "independent" nuclear deterrent. ..... Anonymous Coward

        That's very bold, AC, to let out of the bag that Uncle Sam is Blighty's bitch although sadly nowadays nowhere near as Almighty as was and is necessary to lead anyone/everyone with a phantom fear.

        Ah, the good ole days eh ...... it was great while it lasted. Heaven only knows what the price to be paid for the grand deception is going to be.

        1. gandalfcn Silver badge

          Re: Sovereignty

          The UK is on its own. The USA doesn't give a gnat's and the Brexiteers cut us off from the EU.

  3. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Ideal for Troubled Spots Requiring SMARTR AIdDevelopment/NEUKlearer HyperRadioProACTive Assistance.

    MaybeFinally, whoever/whatever UKGBNI is, has realised Uncle Sam is not fit to lead with pioneering technology and secrets purchased with nothing more nor greater than reams of pretty practically bankrupting paper/virtually worthless fiat.

    Whereas in the past, to inordinately get on in life the obverse/reverse may have been true, in the future and presently, is it what you know and not who you know which commands and controls prime attention for delivery of premium rates of interests.

    And knowing exactly how things are no longer gonna work because of what is released and running riot and rampant freely out into the wild, are the secret sources which past forces have failed to contain and retain to maintain the continuity of their corrupt and perverse bidding in support and defence of ancient and modern status quo hierarchies battling emerging oligarchies ...... and Newly Blooded AI and IT Product ...... Proprietary Foreign Intellectually Advanced Property.

    And such is quite perfect for any new state in need of a novel program for rapid progress to an unlikely state of calm and order/peace and renewal.

    1. Archivist

      Re: Ideal for Troubled Spots Requiring SMARTR AIdDevelopment/NEUKlearer HyperRadioProACTive Assistan

      Oh, ok then.

  4. Outski Silver badge

    Cobham

    Perhaps they might have thought of this earlier, namely when the sale of Cobham was going through

  5. HildyJ Silver badge
    WTF?

    Danger of private equity takeovers

    Of all the billions of dollars of Advent International's investments just one is defense related, Cobham. They don't have shareholders to report to and government oversight is minimal. They make their money by striping companies to the bare bones and selling them off in whole or in part. Cobham has already experienced this with their communications division being sold off to another US company.

    Unfortunately, the Competition and Marketing Authority (CMA) is a paper tiger which may delay but never stops the ongoing fire sale.

    1. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge

      Re: Danger of private equity takeovers

      In the old days, this may have been referred to the "Department for Trade and Industry" - or as Private Eye used to refer to them "Department of Timidity and Inaction". Nothing really changes

    2. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
      Unhappy

      Re: Danger of private equity takeovers

      Not defence, but still (US) Private Equity over here shopping...

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58273916

      I expect they will sell off Morrisons' freeholds and lease them back and do all sorts of financial wizardry until the pips squeak - and I don't mean the oranges in the fruit & veg section.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Danger of private equity takeovers

        It'll probably end up like Maplin.

    3. gandalfcn Silver badge

      Re: Danger of private equity takeovers

      "Paul Myners, the former City minister, has cast doubt on the value of promises made by companies seeking to secure takeovers. “These things are not enforceable, they mean nothing and they’re normally time-limited,” he said."

  6. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Purchasing the Future is Never a Made Tool for Indolent Use, which is Abusive Misuse

    How much is Ultra Electronics worth to Advent International, or anybody else, if its key staff/prime novel premium intellectual property providers decide/realise their future industry and inventions be akin to collaboration and trading with a bankrupt enemy and they withhold all future imagination for product manufacture/viable program realisation????

    Would Advent International/Uncle Sam think to sue and do a HPE/Autonomy and propose/contemplate it worthy of a good old fashioned, jolly roger type lynching ...... and in so doing prove the case to be perfectly true and the charge entirely valid ‽ .

    And such considerations are always to be expected in any business which deals in transfers and exchanges and development of extremely attractive and sensitive and subversive and coercive intellectual property. 'Tis only natural.

  7. Big_Boomer Silver badge

    Greasy Money

    Sounds to me more like the greasing of certain palms was not forthcoming, so the punishment is a delay that will continue until an enhanced stack of spondulix finds it's way to the appropriate hands. Yes, I'm a cynic. I trust this lot about as far as I can spit a Rhino.

  8. Chris Coles

    Too Late . . . Tony Blair Gave Away All Our Technology Via The Defence Trade Co-operation Treaty

    This statement troubles me as it would seem no one has told him about The Defence Trade Co-operation Treaty: "This afternoon, I instructed the @CMAgovUK to investigate the proposed acquisition of Ultra Electronics by Cobham to assess any national security concerns

    The UK is open for business, however foreign investment must not threaten our national security

    (1/3)

    — Kwasi Kwarteng (@KwasiKwarteng) August 18, 2021"

    The very last day of Tony Blair's premiership, we signed over to the United States the right to list ANY technology that might be being developed in ANY UK government facility; at which point, we have to hand it over, for free; not even a paper trail. At that precise moment, we were, very effectively; colonised by the United States Central Intelligence Agency. We no longer own ANY technology; as all new developments, if so listed; have to be given to the United States.

    Given being the operative word.

    This debate is a classic example of smoke and mirrors to cover up reality; we are no longer a nation; we are, very simply; in exactly the same place as Hawaii was before being subsumed as a new State into the United States. Since, just about every important industrial group has now been bought by US corporate interests . . . so everyone, get real and live with it.

    1. hammarbtyp Silver badge

      Re: Too Late . . . Tony Blair Gave Away All Our Technology Via The Defence Trade Co-operation Treaty

      The Defence Trade Co-operation Treaty only removes trade barriers when selling defence equipment between the US and UK. It does not say the technology has to be given to the US just that it does not require an export licence. All ownership and IP remains with the company and country of origin.

      It could be argued however that this makes UK firms more attractive to US buyers, since products can be sold directly into the US market without government export restrictions

      1. Chris Coles

        Re: Too Late . . . Tony Blair Gave Away All Our Technology Via The Defence Trade Co-operation Treaty

        You need to read it again.

  9. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Garbage In Garbage Out/What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander

    Such an abject abdication and quasi surrender of future third party leading rights as may be any abomination of a Defence Trade Co-operation Treaty has at least two abiding fundamental flaws.

    1) If secret and sensitive future products and projects are not shared with HMG, and such are always just great initial ideas floated out to perceived allies and/or interested parties, there is nothing to steal and remotely benefit greatly from.

    2) And, as is accurately recognised in this National Defense article .... https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2021/8/20/ai-commercial-firms-key-to-future-of-geoint ......... even having ready access to too much of a good thing can so easily render one blind to what is really on offer and worth whatever it takes to safely secure it rather than successfully driving it away into the hearts and minds of others thought foreign and alien and intent on one's destruction or subjugation ....... as may be the perceived intent of one's own avid interest.

    That's for real, get used to living with it ..... and having to deal with it.

    1. Chris Coles

      Re: Garbage In Garbage Out/What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander

      So you were there that night, but as I passed the rest of my question to the First Sea Lord, am I to assume you have neither had access to my full question; nor had read and fully understood the underlying implications of the treaty?

      The primary problem is; what do you mean by the term HMG? Yes, anyone can be certain that there are many under that heading who are fully professional, and importantly; care about such inputs to HMG. The continuing problem being that some of us out here have also come to the firm conclusion . . . that there is a very hard core of absolute corruption there as well.

      As for your use of the word "Subjugation", may I be so bold as to suggest that, having read the treaty, you also go purchase a copy of Enough Already, Time to end the war on terrorism, by Scott Horton. So far, 20 years of subjugation has cost the lives of millions of innocents.

      Life has taught me that it is vital never to deal with the corrupt; as one only creates further corruption by doing so. You might consider that it is equally important to step forward to find out why people like me have made that decision . . . not to deal with them; where good old fashioned common sense dialogue should have then stepped forward to assuage the expressed fears . . . which remain undiminished.

      There is always more than one side to a debate, which requires both sides to be heard and fully understood; what I received was a full on "silence him", leaving me to ask myself why?

      1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

        Re: Garbage In Garbage Out/What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander

        There is always more than one side to a debate, which requires both sides to be heard and fully understood; what I received was a full on "silence him", leaving me to ask myself why? .... Chris Coles

        Methinks that is perfectly clear evidence of those in a hard core whom you have firmly concluded are absolutely corrupt being desperately fearful of the likelihood of a catastrophic systemic weakness being exposed and able to be subjected to, and able to subject them to relentless indefensible exploitation and plunder by a party or parties on the other side of a peculiarly contentious and particularly sensitive debate.

        Sound advice in those situations is don't follow received corrupt instructions which have you asking yourself uncomfortable questions about one's own possible participation in stealthy remote perpetuation of an abominable anomaly intent on mischief and deceit to further survive and prosper/exist and fester. And leave the task of eradicating those sorts of parasitic infections to those experts in the field of eradications.

        And we appear to be in full agreement on that, for you have certainly said as much ....

        Life has taught me that it is vital never to deal with the corrupt; as one only creates further corruption by doing so. You might consider that it is equally important to step forward to find out why people like me have made that decision . . . not to deal with them; where good old fashioned common sense dialogue should have then stepped forward to assuage the expressed fears . . . which remain undiminished.

        To imagine and realise what Life brings to be taught is easily thought the stuff of fantasy and fiction, is it not, and thus is it rendered a surreal existence led by IT and AI ..... Immaculate Thought and Almighty IntelAIgents, which it is wise to note is a statement of facts and not a question of fiction.

        1. Chris Coles

          Re: Garbage In Garbage Out/What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander

          Having had the remarkable experience of, having voiced my concerns at the Royal Society introduction of the new European Commissioner for Science and technology, and having attended the first of two OECD conferences in Paris, where I asked, as always . . . questions; I watched a full on team, (doing exactly what we often see in a movie), moreover, in a quiet dead end street in Combs la Ville in France . . . a string of black vehicles, light aircraft flying low overhead, lots of people from their vehicles walking down either side of the street looking over the hedge into my elder sisters garden where I was staying . . . only to find myself, the next appointed time for the OECD, having being stopped at the introduction desk, only to find myself marched out of the OECD between two security guards; letter delivered to my home here in the UK telling me they do not like me asking questions and never to attempt to try and attend ever again.

          Considering no one ever reported my concerns, acknowledged by Mrs May, I assume a D Notice was presented to editors from your department. Oh! Yes! Your department; your use of the word Abomination gives you away. Have you yet read the second full page of my question that I was unable to present verbally?

          If what I am describing is such utter rubbish . . . why bother?

          Each time your answer seems to verbally point in both directions . . . leaving me to wonder why?

          The United Kingdom has been colonised; we no longer have full control of our proudly home grown technology, and dare I say so, all because a small group of absolutely corrupt employees in your department . . . gladly received the buckets of silver cast at their feet.

          I will NOT work with such corruption. Period!

          Not one sign of anyone with the courage to strip out the corrupt and put matters right since.

          Not one sign.

          1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

            Re: Garbage In Garbage Out/What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander

            Not one sign of anyone with the courage to strip out the corrupt and put matters right since. .... Chris Coles

            Corrupt and ignorant of pertinent leading facts politicians don't do courage, CC, and thus be they juicy prey to the public and private and pirate military and paramilitary minded blooded in the fields of special force operations which take no prisoners nor entertain any witnesses to the matters they put right.

            Or do you believe their chiefs are also easily bribed to fail in their duty to lead their assets into successes which are designedly challenging but overpoweringly rewarding and attractively lucrative and thus be renegade rogue mercenary services on the loose to boot and employ/engage with and deploy?

  10. Chris Coles

    For the record, this is the question I tried to present to an EAG dinner debate Wednesday 12th December 2012 "Delivering Security in an Age of Austerity"

    During the 1980's Israel developed a new ground attack fighter, VERY similar to the US F16, called the Lavi, which ultimately contained a lot of US defence technology. But that development led to concerns that doing business with an Israeli company would result in ideas and designs being appropriated without proper compensation; when the US supports a foreign competitor.

    Airpower Journal Vol. IV, No. 3, (Fall 1990): 34-44

    In 1995 eight Special Ops Chinook helicopters were ordered by the UK MOD, but the contract did not include access to security codes which were to have been created, without Boeing's involvement, by the MOD to reduce costs. That contract omission in turn became a very long story taking many years to resolve resulting with a first flight in 2009.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wki/Boeing_Chinook)(UK_varients)

    Such difficulties, caused by the absolute, and, dare I say it, admirable commitment by the US; to retain complete control over its defence technology; led the US to propose a new Defence Trade Cooperation treaty between the UK, (and Australia), to achieve fully interoperable forces which was signed into existence by the US Congress in 2007.

    On the face of it, this is an excellent treaty, removing many previous obstacles to UK MoD access to US defence related technology.

    The problem is; for the individual British private inventor; this treaty is an abomination.

    What it has done in effect is remove my British citizenship, my right to defend my nation; and replace it with a right presented to the US to take any new technology I might create; and use it for their own purposes:

    "without a license or other written authorization".

    [For clarity; the Treaty reads:

    ARTICLE 2

    Purpose

    This Treaty provides a comprehensive framework for Exports and Transfers, without a license or other written authorization, of Defence Articles, whether classified or not, to the extent that such Exports and Transfers are in support of the activities identified in Article 3(1).

    ARTICLE 3

    Scope

    (1) (d) United States Government end-use].

    All the US need do is list any technology and it automatically becomes subject to the treaty.

    But this has much wider implications; as my interpretation reads that, from now onwards; the treaty precludes the UK from ever again developing its own unique defence technology base.

    We have become a defence colony of the US.

    Two points:

    1. Many of us, outside of the MoD "charmed circle" have felt for some decades now that the UK executive government does not have our interests in mind at all; that the civil service only cares for itself, first and foremost, with the wider interests of the nation following a long way behind. This treaty illustrates that perfectly. We have been summarily "Rolled Over" and have agreed to a very one sided treaty that; if it had been presented to a strong organisation, visibly dedicated to the development of a long term British industrial defence structure; invented, designed and manufactured by British inventors and designers; they would not have accepted it. Instead, once again, they traded British long term potential for a short term fix from the US defence industry.

    2. On the other hand, British inventors have grown to understand that the US does not abide by international treaties such as the Patent Cooperation Treaty and that within the US, today, the rule of law is moot.

    That the government of the United States is quite prepared to ignore their own law, if that will suit their own purposes. (Chapter 12, The Road Ahead from a Grass Roots Perspective).

    I say this to the UK government:

    You sir, are the leader of the Royal Navy, and not the leader of the civil service, so this is a little unfair; but we outside can see no one acting as the leader of the United Kingdom executive government; which in turn seems weak and leaderless; so I ask you to please take my concerns inward with a view to establishing who exactly IS supposed to lead them; and to strengthen their moral, ethical and leadership structures with a view to returning this once fine industrial nation; Great Britain; back to full strength.

    Lastly to the United States:

    You claim to be the world leader; the strongest nation; but that in turn presents the responsibility to defend the rule of law; dare I say it; beyond any other related responsibility. What I see is a nation being driven down a dark alley by a defence industry dedicated to always winning by force of arms; when the rest of the planet yearns for peace.

    At the end of WW2 you forced the UK to abandon it's colonies; yet here, with this treaty, you have colonised the inventive and industrial capacity of the United Kingdom.

    That treaty is an abomination and must be revised to permit the British inventive spirit to once again prosper and succeed.

    Chris Coles

    www.chriscoles.com

    1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

      Seconded, CC. ..... with the British Inventive Spirit hereby Being Betatested BetaTesting. Yes? No?

      But that development led to concerns that doing business with an Israeli company would result in ideas and designs being appropriated without proper compensation; when the US supports a foreign competitor.

      Yes, and that tends very easily to remain systemically problematical if not recognised and treated as an unavoidable and acceptable attractive feature drivering and supplying further AWEsome developments in such business doing business with foreign competitors and/or alien opposition and even the friendliest of allies with alternate intelligent means of doing significantly greater business which reward one and all involved excessively and exceptionally well.

      Capture or captivate that prime prize performance improvement and such concerns are rendered unwarranted with future results being fantastically remunerative to all and way beyond any imagined expectation to prove the point/make present and prescient the view.

      The problem is; for the individual British private inventor; this treaty is an abomination.

      What it has done in effect is remove my British citizenship, my right to defend my nation; and replace it with a right presented to the US to take any new technology I might create; and use it for their own purposes:

      "without a license or other written authorization".

      Certainly one might realise the intention might be to try and remove such nationalistic citizenship rights via signed paper treaties. It is but a virtual assault to seek to prevent effect responsive and reactionary physical attack bringing wider attention to such businesses best always left to work diligently alone in the stealthy shadows of secure shade and alongside the leading businesses involved.

      Has the United Nations not got Advanced IntelAIgent Services which don't recognise national borders but rather server leading feed seeding info and intel for the SMARTR Beings scattered everywhere around, below and above, the surfaces of an Earthly globe ‽ . Whyever not? What possible valid excuse could they offer to try justify that crazy tactical omission and insane strategic failure?

      Or is it a past failing of the Private/Pirate Business Sector not exercising its Available Options with the Presentation of Novel Opportunities to the Public Sector for Greater JOINT Leadership?

      What sort of a greater future success do you want to make of the disappearance of that former universal failing ‽ .

      El Regers would surely like to know?

      1. Chris Coles

        No!

        Then you have accepted the complete collapse of the rule of law? yes, law! Why would I open with such a statement? Because every action of the inventor comes very strictly; within an fully agreed framework of national law and interlocking international law.

        Instead, what you are telling everyone that reads this debate . . . the primary driving force of . . . recent events . . . is to, as you so succinctly put it: "remove such nationalistic citizenship rights via signed paper treaties"

        So your message is we must all accept that from now onward; Our personal intellectual input must no longer be seen as a means to create new business/employment opportunities within our own nations under our own personal leadership; ergo; classic industrial competition . . . returning the British nation back to the level of great success we attained during the majority of the last century . . . that instead we have to accept that there never will be any further need for such attainment because we must now accept . . . "the stealthy shadows of secure shade and alongside the leading businesses involved."

        That all present suppliers must from now onward be preserved . . . so excuse my asking . . . Under Whose control? And for that matter; why remove competition? Surely the true answer is that as you and your masters in Virginia want to prevent any competition with your own national champions? That the concept of free enterprise competition from what is your closest ally is an anathema, (someone or something cursed, reviled, or detested).

        And if we take what at first glance seems odd; the deliberate theft of 15 copies of a new book describing a completely new way to look at the subject of gravity . . . from the UPS depot in Philadelphia; was in fact; a complete rejection of EVERY international law regarding . . . copyright . . . intellectual property . . . forcing the understanding that we have no option but to come right back to my previous point; that this whole debate is nothing to do with the points you have been trying to make above . . . it is all about retaining absolute complete control over every other nations to retain your perceived advantage.

        Now we have to return to your statement above:

        "Or is it a past failing of the Private/Pirate Business Sector not exercising its Available Options with the Presentation of Novel Opportunities to the Public Sector for Greater JOINT Leadership?"

        The important phrase is: "exercising its available options" . . . which clearly to repeat; are an anathema. The available options are, first and foremost free trade, which in turn is fully underpinned by intellectual property law in the form of copyright and patents, which are owned by the originator, the author and inventor; who, under law, retains the right to act within their own personal moral compass; to do their best to improve the lot of the citizens of their nation.

        Always remembering . . . there is no such thing as "Leadership" when faced with the actions of absolutely corrupt civil servants who have completely turned their backs on both their own nation . . . and the rule of the law. You want people like me to present novel opportunities to a clearly deeply corrupt Public Sector, and seem so surprised that I will not do that. To repeat; I will NOT do that.

        1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

          Re: No!

          Hi, CC,

          The entire essence of Seconded, CC. ..... with the British Inventive Spirit hereby Being Betatested BetaTesting. Yes? No? you have misinterpreted to a surprising degree, for rather than disagreeing with your view, it surely would recognise and support your concerns about the present systemic and endemic difficulties which be responsible for ongoing expanding problems. A closer rereading of that which has been said should evidence that. Failing that though, please be advised that it be so.

          Dominic Cummings, whom you might think would know a thing or two about politicians and their true worth, tells it like it is in a recent Aug 22 post on his Substack blog entitled ... Afghanistan SNAFU (situation normal all fucked up): 'normal' politics,'normal' results

          The PM destroyed his own grip of Whitehall/Treasury & accidentally provoked discussions about the assembly of his own firing squad...Why the government does not control the government...... which you would normally have to subscribe to, to read. Sometimes though it can appear and be read for free.

          It makes for a jolly good read which reinforces all of your views and the notion that it is tall tales that lead events for the masses to consume and presume be an unchangeable reality rather than realise it be simply something else altogether quite different and infinitely variable, if one knows what need to be done and how to do it ...... which a very select few most certainly do.

          However, one has to accept it is not for everyone as has been told to us many times by more than just this one beautifully manic voice ....... It's a Big Club and You Ain't In It! The American Dream ...... now realising itself as a Relentless Nightmare as sensitive information and greater intelligence is more wwwidely shared freely for all to understand the nature of their existence and the levers used to effect its future direction and preferred and approved destinations ‽ .

          IT's a Mad, Rad, Bad, Sad World and aint that the gospel truth but it is not extremely difficult to change it fundamentally at speeds which are astounding. And should the intellectual property necessary for that be hard core British, how would that not be an added bonus increasing value?

  11. Chris Coles

    No!

    It is also important that I add that my personal experience of the American people is very positive indeed. They are very generous and I have over the years made great friendships with people that I admire. This debate is not about the underlying American belief in freedom; to me, this is all about what I believe to be the failed mindset of a few misguided individuals, who have to be brought to accept that they are wrong; that they must change direction.

    1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

      Re: No!

      This debate is not about the underlying American belief in freedom; to me, this is all about what I believe to be the failed mindset of a few misguided individuals, who have to be brought to accept that they are wrong; that they must change direction...... Chris Coles

      And whenever one realises the beast for a change of direction is a crazed herd of rogue elephants, CC ‽ . There is only answer for that, isn't there?

      1. Chris Coles

        Re: No! and again; NO!

        Your answer follows an earlier mistake on your part. You were referencing Dominic Cummings who to my mind is a classic case of failed morality. Yes, at first sight he seemed to have what it might take to bring in needed change; but instead he has failed the test by suddenly turning against the very people that opened the door for him in the first place, no doubt with an associated grand income to boot! Then following with flying off into a world of recriminations. What we need are level headed people that care about an orderly debate; wildly lashing out; because he did not get his way; has destroyed his credibility.

        There is no crazed herd of elephants, and your perception of an answer is similarly misconceived. So my answer is again . . . NO!

        Yes, by all means let people know that you are not backing down; but throwing bricks through the opposition window does nothing but bring on further trouble. The misguided need to be brought to understand their mistake, in a manner that allows them room for reflection, and the need to change direction.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021