Activity

…. seems an obvious follow up question Dana … of course obvious follow up questions are never asked here (U.S.) either.
Q: “Yes, Mr. Prime Minister in your recent speech you expressed support for the development (“continued support” or “continued development?” … did he just use the words “support” and “development” without “continued” preceding them? – meaning? we haven’t been but we will now initiate support?) of British assets in space.”

Mr. Prime Minister one question, reserving the right for follow ups in that politicians who like yourself rise to such great heights of power have mastered the skill of producing the “vague, saying words without communicating any meaning” response, concerning that statement if you please.
Have we, the British (and while you’re at it would you please define specifically to whom you refer, or whom you include, when you say “British”), not been developing British assets in space?

If he says, “Yes, of course we have been doing so.”, Ask … Do you mean consistently? [define consistently – every year, every 2 years?] and from what date? (use 1947 and 1980 – Roswell and Rendlesham) … Then follow up by asking him to specify the details of those “developed assets” and in those details please include from where and what level of funding it took to achieve those space assets [seeing that the National Health Service appears to be terribly underfunded].

If he says “No, we have not been developing space assets.”, Ask him why not and why are we just now seeing the development of space assets as something of national interest that we should pursue. Also, Mr. Prime Minister since you have used the term “space assets” specifically what is on the list of “space assets” to which you refer that we will (or have) fund (ed) and produce (d). This will be a difficult question for him. If “space assets” have been developed they will be classified and he will not be able to speak of them. If “space assets” have not been worked on, given the great likelihood that the phrase / idea, was just thrown into the speech as a type of Brexit diversion [yes, if your read in that last comment that I do not believe that the content of any politicians speech is ever meaningfully substantive you are correct] , there will be no list of which to refer.

I think it would be amusing, or possibly enlightening, in this context to ask “Boris the Spider” (my apologies to John Entwistle, but you must admit the refrain does describe most politicians) if by “space assets” you mean assets of the type claimed to have been seen by Gary McKinnon.

… in the immortal words of Ted Mack, “Round and round she goes, where she stops, nobody knows.”

and . . . Boris Johnson in first speech as UK’s new prime minister promotes GMO crops https://www.gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/19059-boris-johnson-in-first-speech-as-uk-s-new-prime-minister-promotes-gmo-crops