• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

What about the 2 labour massive breaches, obviously nothing said ??
Whoever was in power the opposition would have said different its political points scoring nothing more


Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has criticised the prime minister for stopping his experts answering questions about his chief aide.

During the press conference, a number of journalists posed questions to Prof Chris Whitty and Sir Patrick Vallance about Dominic Cummings' trip to Durham during lockdown - but the PM stepped in to stop them from giving their views.

Sir Keir said "of course" he would have let the experts answer, saying: "We want transparency.

"Nobody should be stopped from answering questions from journalists… but it’s the PM here that’s the issue. He’s been too weak throughout.”

He added the Cummings issue had been a "needless distraction... when we should have been focusing on easing of restrictions and doing that safely".

"Instead it’s been wasted because the PM has been frankly too weak to draw a line under this and take the necessary action.”
 
Aldo said:
That news about 6 people being able to meet up has come out of nowhere hasn’t it?
A cynic would say that Boris is trying to get the nation to move on from Cumgate by drenching us in positive news.
Click to expand...
Its a huge lift for peoples spirits and mental health so I really couldn’t care less if it was a deflection tactic
 
markysimmo said:
Its a huge lift for peoples spirits and mental health so I really couldn’t care less if it was a deflection tactic
Click to expand...
I could.
The 6 people meet-up hasn’t been put forward in anything I’ve seen recently. I really hope this isn’t being pushed through before we are ready just to deflect from the brickstorm he’s created.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
Aldo said:
I could.
The 6 people meet-up hasn’t been put forward in anything I’ve seen recently. I really hope this isn’t being pushed through before we are ready just to deflect from the brickstorm he’s created.
Click to expand...

Aren't Scotland introducing something very similar?

I don't think they could be accused of the same sort of motivation you're proposing. I'm therefore minded to see it as nothing more than the intended progression.
 
markysimmo said:
Its a huge lift for peoples spirits and mental health so I really couldn’t care less if it was a deflection tactic
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
Aldo said:
I could.
The 6 people meet-up hasn’t been put forward in anything I’ve seen recently. I really hope this isn’t being pushed through before we are ready just to deflect from the brickstorm he’s created.
Click to expand...

Why on Earth do you need that validation?

You need to hear about something before you hear about it??
 
Parklaner81 said:
She basically wanted to ask the scientific advisors to comment on Cummings.

Johnson wouldn't allow the question to go to them, as it was obviously political (and she pretty quickly got bounced off the screen).
Click to expand...
He then decided to do it to every other journalist.
It was stupid/arrogant - delete as approved. I'm going with the latter, because that is what a majority of his size can dictate.

It just creates a other unnecessary story. If he has just left it to Valance and Whitty, they could have said, "sorry, that appears to be a political question. I am a civil servant and stay politically neutral" - which would have
I. Dismissed the mischievous question (it really was unnecessary)
II. Improved confidence in the independence of the science.
Instead, certainly for me, I now have a huge ? over how independent of political influence the science is that unpins the policy - that was entirely avoidable.

If this kind of bullish approach continues, it will be interesting to see how the parliamentary Tory party react. They will welcome the ability to shape narrative, but they are smart enough to know it has limits to retain integrity. Johnson is pushing them very close to looking like they lack integrity as a Party - you only have to ask Labour post Blair how difficult it is to recover from that, I'm not sure they have yet.
 
scaramanga said:
I'd agree with all of that but the breaking the rules part - caveats are there for a reason and he worked within one.

I don't think he's at all autistic, I just think he (like many others) is stunned by the stupidity of the general public and their ability to just lap up whatever the Mirror tells them to think.
Click to expand...

That we only disagree on one thing in that whole lump of text is a miracle :D
 
monkeybarry said:
Completely agree.
I guess (I do really want to see their decision making published) the angle is that everyone will be socially distanced off the pitch.
However, the contract tracing is going to include anyone you come into contact with at less than a metre - so that is everyone involved in a corner. One person gets CVD 19 and suddenly both teams have to quarantine for 14 days.
I really don't see how it's feasible without creating exceptional rules - which is not acceptable for me.
And in line with my views re; Cummings and anyone breaking the rules except under serious health endangering circumstances, it will be the end of football for me. It will clearly put £ before people - that's not acceptable.

Maybe I'm missing something here? I hope I am, because I quite like football.
Click to expand...

What about if all PL players and their families self isolate. Then all of them - circa 1000 to 2000 people - get tested twice a month and then a week before the first game. Something like that might work. How are they managing it in the Bundesliga?
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
I'd agree with a lot of that but your hate of him appears to have caught up with you in the conclusion?......and appears to belie your second sentence

A fathers strongest instinct is to protect/look after his children and his wife at all costs. Whether he's a chief policy maker for the gov or centre forward for Real Madrid. We're all the same on that level....it's primal.

To be challenged about that instinctive behaviour (and not always in a pleasant way).....will quite easily lead to a 'f.uck you' attitude

Should he act differently because of his position, probably yes......but he, you, me wont because of the above.

Then you're kicker........i thought it was going to read like this......

And here's the kicker, the BIG difference between Cummins and me, you, the general public. He is a major policy maker/influencer who is in a position of enormous importance and leadership. Again, I am keeping my own personal views about this off the table...the fact remains that in his current role, he needs to be a leader who cannot, literally, be left holding the baby. To be involved in policy-making and running the country, surely if the main carer for your (autistic) son is bed ridden for 14 days, you can not step into that 24 hour role the with workload, responsibility and importance that your current job carries. In a fluid escalating situation he needs to think quickly and find a solution?

Thats why i'd let this one pass. Of course if more came to light and it starts unravelling then i can and will reassess. The castle bit is a bit gonad*y, only because of the eyesight nonsense. But If all three of them have been laid up with covid for 2 weeks and then all feel a load better, then natrually the idea of a run out to a nice outdoor place is normal. (possibly against the rules, but normal thinking).

Thats why i said the 'blog thing' was more interesting as it obviously calculated and pre-meditated but of course slightly stupid having no awareness of digital footprints
Click to expand...

No mate. My utter contempt for his work has not caught up with my conclusion.
It really hasn't bellied anything. Such a shame that is what you extrapolated from what I felt was a very honest, fair appraisal (disagreeing with the conclusion is all good obviously :) )

Again. Given the position he is in, he will be held to a higher standard of behavior. Quite rightly. I expressed my honest sympathy for his situation, and also stated that I would not be sure I would not have done the same in his situation. I think you're hung up on my honest opinion of the man versus breaking down the situation bit by bit. It would take a blinkered fool not to feel empathy for his situation, but that does not alter the fact that as a major policy maker he needs to lead by example.

Let me put to you that his behavior, whatever mitigation it might or might not deserve, will make any potential "second lockdown" if there is a second spike in the Autumn very, very difficult. He has done a lot in the public view to weaken the case for any gvmt rules. I understand he made a choice and one that I believe many of us would've if we can check the "hate" for a moment and see the parental concern.

But he should still resign, as it was a choice.
He won't of course because Bozo cannot live without him. And because he won't give up his power. Welcome to the next chapter of "51st State - The Lateset Addition to a Nation Covered by Open Lies and Lack of Public Concern"...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back