Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: albie on June 16, 2021, 12:58:31 pm
-
Over on his blog, DC has started posting his evidence from the Bozo clusterf..k;
https://dominiccummings.substack.com/p/the-pm-on-hancock-totally-f**king
The FT has coverage, but it might be paywalled;
https://www.ft.com/content/54fe6f07-1b17-4674-9e6c-e48d88538edd
Here we go!
-
So we are getting what should have come out from questions
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-57498845
-
Over on his blog, DC has started posting his evidence from the Bozo clusterf..k;
https://dominiccummings.substack.com/p/the-pm-on-hancock-totally-f**king
The FT has coverage, but it might be paywalled;
https://www.ft.com/content/54fe6f07-1b17-4674-9e6c-e48d88538edd
Here we go!
Only a matter of time before he went into full meltdown mode.
This is where he detonates and tries to bring the whole house down.
-
Will there be repercussions for hancock lying to the science and technology committee?
-
You’d hope so
-
the Guardian 'live' has started to publish screen grabs from cummings blog
-
Anything tasty Syd?
-
Hancock not resigned yet?
I suppose in this age it will be no surprise if he tries to brazen it out after revelations his boss thinks he's f***ing hopeless.
It just shows how far standards have fallen.
-
Cummings is a nasty piece of work and he is manoeuvring himself into practically unemployable mode with this latest rant - however amusing it may be to view...
-
MM. Been saying it for years. Cummings is a maniac with a very nasty streak. But that's irrelevant to the question of whether the substantive aspects of what he is talking about are genuine or not. Unless he's absolutely batshit and is forging WhatsApp exchanges, it looks like he has been telling the truth on this and Johnson & Hancock have been lying.
-
Just thought!
I was wondering why Hancock was fiddling the testing numbers to imply that he'd hit 100k per day by the end of April. We hadn't actually got anywhere near that of course, but there was a sudden spike at the end of April so that he could claim we had the CAPACITY to do 100k tests per day. It seemed a bizarre thing to be obsessing about hitting an arbitrary number on an arbitrary day. Now it's clear why. It's because Cummings had been chewing his b*llocks for a month on the topic.
https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1405112267729952770
-
MM. Been saying it for years. Cummings is a maniac with a very nasty streak. But that's irrelevant to the question of whether the substantive aspects of what he is talking about are genuine or not. Unless he's absolutely batshit and is forging WhatsApp exchanges, it looks like he has been telling the truth on this and Johnson & Hancock have been lying.
If he is forging them, then he's going to land himself in hot water legally.
-
Surely nobody is that stupid to forge something that could easily be disproved very quickly.
-
Anything tasty Syd?
went to bed
-
''are you hopeless'' the reporter asked ........
''I don't think sooooooooooooooooooooo''
-
Surely nobody is that stupid to forge something that could easily be disproved very quickly.
No of course he hasn't forged them. And this is the point I was making a few weeks ago. Whatever a man's reputation, if he says something and has irrefutable evidence to support it, he's telling the truth. Whatever Cummings's motive is for putting this out, the fact is that at the height of the first wave, Johnson thought his Health Secretary was "totally f**king hopeless". But he didn't replace him.
-
Fly + wall
Hi, erm argh, cum in cum in, sit down err hope .. erm argh Matt, well argh, how's it going erm old chum .............
-
MM. Been saying it for years. Cummings is a maniac with a very nasty streak. But that's irrelevant to the question of whether the substantive aspects of what he is talking about are genuine or not. Unless he's absolutely batshit and is forging WhatsApp exchanges, it looks like he has been telling the truth on this and Johnson & Hancock have been lying.
If he is forging them, then he's going to land himself in hot water legally.
He would be ... and he is aware of that - and the "telling sign" for me is Johnson / Number 10 have made no attempt to deny the accusations - because they KNOW the WhatsApp stuff is genuine and I suspect they know / fear there are more - probably many more to come
-
If somone let the cat out of the bag about everything we'd said in private we wouldn't have a friend on earth. I haven't got a friend or workmate that I haven't called totally f**king hopeless or words to that effect.
Cummings is totally f**king hopeless.
-
His biggest failure is not being hard enough to complete the shake out of the people he was put into the job to get rid of them.
At the top of the civil service there are some right dead wood just jogging along living off the rest of us, they are the people he wants to open the book on.
-
When he made these allegations some asked for proof, now he’s published proof, some think he’s a Kitson for doing so, I just think he’s a Kitson full stop
-
As with anything, context is key.
1. Anyone who believes that the type of person Cummings is in all this is irrelevant, are going to be very disappointed with the outcome. It's all about public opinion. Much public opinion is that Cummings is a dishonest, slimy toad. Does that mean he is lying? Of course not. But, as his credibility is below zero, his comments and 'proof' will not have the impact they could, or should.
It's like Ian Brady offering proof that his human rights were being neglected in Broadmoor. Everybody believes in equal human rights, but not when Ian f**king Brady's banging on about it.
2. WhatsApp messages. How many times have you (anyone) shouted 'f**king useless ref' to someone who is actually very good at their job?
How many times have you moaned about someone (in private) to another colleague/friend who you regard as a confidante? Even if that someone is actually, most of the time, a good friend/good at their job?
Does anyone really, REALLY believe that a private 'totally useless' comment to a bitter, narcissist scorned, about a specific incident, is proof that Johnson thinks/thought that Hancock is 'totally f**king useless' at his job as Health Minister?
-
Whataboutery is all very well, but irrelevant, because none of the people you say 'whatabout' are running this country for the rest of us.
-
What whataboutery, Glyn?
Let’s put the ‘irrelevant’ argument aside for a second:
Do YOU believe that the private WhatsApp comment is definitive ‘proof’ that Johnson (not you, or anyone else) thinks, and has thought for a long time, that Hancock is ‘totally f**king useless’ at his Job as Health Minister?
-
What Johnson thinks about Hancock is beside the point, and utterly immaterial.
So too is whether you think Cummings is trustworthy.
The issue is whether Johnson and Hancock have breached ministerial rules, and sought to mislead the HoC and the public with deliberate misinformation.
Cummings is showing that at key stages in the decision making process, Johnson and Hancock misled their own colleagues, and in doing so promoted policy choices which cost lives.
They placed management of their image above the public interest.
This is unforgivable, and potentially could lead to criminal action at a later date.
Anyone who cannot see the importance of this from senior elected government personnel should give some consideration to the implications of allowing it to go unchecked.
-
What whataboutery, Glyn?
Let’s put the ‘irrelevant’ argument aside for a second:
Do YOU believe that the private WhatsApp comment is definitive ‘proof’ that Johnson (not you, or anyone else) thinks, and has thought for a long time, that Hancock is ‘totally f**king useless’ at his Job as Health Minister?
If that message is genuine it means one of two things.
Johnson did think Hancock was useless, but he was too weak to remove someone useless from an office of state - at a time of national crisis, no less.
Or Johnson didn't think Hancock was useless, in which case he is an indiscreet, abusive blowhard.
Neither scenario shows him to be acting how a Prime Minister should.
That's what I think.
-
I don’t disagree with that Glyn.
But you never answered my question.
-
I don’t disagree with that Glyn.
But you never answered my question.
Becuase it doesn't need answering, it doesn't matter if I think it proves what Johnson was thinking when he wrote it because either way one of those two scenarios apply.
What I think it proves is that Johnson wrote it, and that's all it needs to prove.
-
Intelligent piece by Prof Bill Hanage on the management of care homes by Hancock, signed off by Bozo;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/17/hancock-care-homes-health-secretary
The real value of Cummings input is throwing some clarity by way of explanation on the posturing of the key players.
Did some people die because of the misleading presentation of information by the corrupt crooks in the driving seat?
-
If somone let the cat out of the bag about everything we'd said in private we wouldn't have a friend on earth. I haven't got a friend or workmate that I haven't called totally f**king hopeless or words to that effect.
Cummings is totally f**king hopeless.
A/ that doesn't surprise anyone that reads your comments &
B/ neither you or your mate were running the country when thousands of lives were in the balance
-
have always wondered what "Cummings" real "end game" was
from "my" limited knowledge he was hired to do a job "BREXIT" we all know in "what country" he spent time in his earlier life
googling
"russia want the uk out of the eu"
throws up some interesting links
including
https://fedtrust.co.uk/why-putin-wanted-johnson-to-win-brexit-and-end-up-in-no-10/
"In 2012 Putin told the Russian Embassy to set up a group of MPs called “Conservative Friends of Russia”. The Russian Ambassador held a launch party in the Russian embassy attended by Carrie Symonds then a Tory party press officer now mother of Johnson’s latest baby. The former Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind was conned into being president of the group. The Kremlin organised an all-expenses paid junket to Moscow and St Petersburg for the latter-day useful pro-Moscow idiots amongst anti-European Tory MPs. On the junket was another Cummings associate, Matthew Elliot, who set up anti-European fronts before emerging as one of the chief ideologues of the Johnson-Cummings-Farage campaign for Brexit in 2016."
now if CLH can find this info in 10 minutes ..... it "allegedly" makes you wonder what the "Cummings real end game is "
-
I don’t disagree with that Glyn.
But you never answered my question.
Becuase it doesn't need answering, it doesn't matter if I think it proves what Johnson was thinking when he wrote it because either way one of those two scenarios apply.
What I think it proves is that Johnson wrote it, and that's all it needs to prove.
My error then Glyn.
When you responded to my original post, incorrectly accusing me of whataboutery. I mistakenly thought you wanted to engage in the point I raised. Instead, quite ironically, you engaged in whataboutery.
-
What whataboutery, Glyn?
Let’s put the ‘irrelevant’ argument aside for a second:
Do YOU believe that the private WhatsApp comment is definitive ‘proof’ that Johnson (not you, or anyone else) thinks, and has thought for a long time, that Hancock is ‘totally f**king useless’ at his Job as Health Minister?
Given Johnson was seriously considering sacking him and replacing him with Gove, then I think he wasn't overly impressed with Hancock.
It only seems to be this conviction Johnson holds, that sacking ministers is bad for the government and his position, that saved him.
-
If somone let the cat out of the bag about everything we'd said in private we wouldn't have a friend on earth. I haven't got a friend or workmate that I haven't called totally f**king hopeless or words to that effect.
Cummings is totally f**king hopeless.
A/ that doesn't surprise anyone that reads your comments &
B/ neither you or your mate were running the country when thousands of lives were in the balance
For someone who I imagine has few friends, if any, you seem to be somewhat expert in your assumptions of other people's friends.
Your naivety in real-world occurrences is well documented in your constant politically driven bile.
-
If somone let the cat out of the bag about everything we'd said in private we wouldn't have a friend on earth. I haven't got a friend or workmate that I haven't called totally f**king hopeless or words to that effect.
Cummings is totally f**king hopeless.
A/ that doesn't surprise anyone that reads your comments &
B/ neither you or your mate were running the country when thousands of lives were in the balance
For someone who I imagine has few friends, if any, you seem to be somewhat expert in your assumptions of other people's friends.
Your naivety in real-world occurrences is well documented in your constant politically driven bile.
tehe
-
Intelligent piece by Prof Bill Hanage on the management of care homes by Hancock, signed off by Bozo;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/17/hancock-care-homes-health-secretary
The real value of Cummings input is throwing some clarity by way of explanation on the posturing of the key players.
Did some people die because of the misleading presentation of information by the corrupt crooks in the driving seat?
It is interesting that no one from the government has stood up and said these are lies or bullshit, nothing to hear except from the fanclub that don't actually address any of the issues on a point by point basis, is that because they can't bb?
-
I never said Cummings' claim of Boris calling Hancock 'f**king hopeless' in private was untrue. Many things are said in confidentiality that would cause uproar if someone broke that confidentiality, like Cummings, has done.
Only you and the likes of you would use such a story from such a poisonous, bitter individual to pursue your politically driven bile.
-
I never said Cummings' claim of Boris calling Hancock 'f**king hopeless' in private was untrue. Many things are said in confidentiality that would cause uproar if someone broke that confidentiality, like Cummings, has done.
Only you and the likes of you would use such a story from such a poisonous, bitter individual to pursue your politically driven bile.
Don't get so angry and hateful bb, johnson isn't really your friend that much should be obvious to you by now, he treats yourself and all his followers with disdain as he lies his way through his daily life, he knows you stick up for him.
-
If Johnson was as bad as you make him out to be you wouldn't have to scrape the bottom of the barrel in pursuit of political bile against him by means of a poisonous, bitter individual such as Dominic Cummings.
-
If Johnson was as bad as you make him out to be you wouldn't have to scrape the bottom of the barrel in pursuit of political bile against him by means of a poisonous, bitter individual such as Dominic Cummings.
gentley bentley, instead of chewing yourself up with nonsense, open the link and factually rebut that within.
https://www.bbc.com/news/57500637
-
You're being a slippy Skippy, aren't you? Stick to the subject old boy.
-
You're being a slippy Skippy, aren't you? Stick to the subject old boy.
It's all in the link bb, cummings is only confirming what most already know, it's just you and yours refuse to accept the truth, you can't handle the truth, owd lad
-
Strange though Skippy how all the way through May the UK had the least amount of cases per 1000 in that list, yet you failed to mention it back then. Not ever! Methinks you'll also fail to mention when any future improvements in our position occur in that league.
Don't you agree? I guess not, and you're just gonna continue your one-sided negative reporting of the UK's situation in pursuit of your political agenda, aren't you?
If you acted in such a negative way on the football forum, by for instance only rubbishing the team in adversity and ignoring the successes, even the handful of lefty sympathizers on here would call you a traitor to the club and advise you to f**k off and go and support L**ds. I think, likewise, you're a traitor to your own country on this forum, and should maybe f**k off and support Australia.
-
BB.
This really has nothing to do with whether Cummings is bitter, twisted, untrustworthy or unpleasant. It is to do with competence at the heart of Govt.
We KNOW that we chose to go into the first lockdown late. We KNOW that decision cost maybe 20-30k lives and meant that when the lockdown did come, it was longer and more damaging than it needed have been. Cummings has shown that the Govt also knew that at the time.
We KNOW that we were painfully slow at ramping up testing capacity, and that added to the disaster. Cummings's evidence shows that Govt knew AT THE TIME what a disaster that was.
That's really all that matters. You can engage with that or you can try to make it about personalities. Your choice.
-
Of Course, that is all that matters BST, to you in pursuit of your political agenda.
-
Go on then BB.
What about this matters to you more than the competence of our Govt in managing the crisis?
-
BB.
This really has nothing to do with whether Cummings is bitter, twisted, untrustworthy or unpleasant. It is to do with competence at the heart of Govt.
We KNOW that we chose to go into the first lockdown late. We KNOW that decision cost maybe 20-30k lives and meant that when the lockdown did come, it was longer and more damaging than it needed have been. Cummings has shown that the Govt also knew that at the time.
We KNOW that we were painfully slow at ramping up testing capacity, and that added to the disaster. Cummings's evidence shows that Govt knew AT THE TIME what a disaster that was.
That's really all that matters. You can engage with that or you can try to make it about personalities. Your choice.
But do we KNOW that Johnson thinks Hancock is a 'f**king hopeless' health minister, because of a private comment on WhatsApp? And if that doesn't matter, why suggest it does?
-
Go on then BB.
What about this matters to you more than the competence of our Govt in managing the crisis?
No BST, for once, you start answering questions. You can start by telling me what is untrue about my last post.
-
Belton.
You talk about context. Look at the context of that exchange. Look at what Johnson's ejaculation was in response to.
Cummings had just, correctly, pointed out that in March the USA had massively upped its testing capacity while under Hancock's watch, our capacity had stuttered. And remember that Hancock was on record at that time saying the problem was that industry wasn't producing enough chemical reagents - a claim flatly denied at the time by several leading industry figures.
Now ask yourself: If Johnson DIDN'T think that Hancock was totally f**king hopeless in that light, what would it take for him to think someone was?
And then there is Glyn's point. Either Johnson DID think that. Or he has no control over his responses to his subordinates. The comparison to what you or I would shout at a Rovers match is ludicrous. We are biased and emotionally invested. We expect our leaders in a crisis to act like f**king leaders. Not blow off. Especially to a man like Cummings who (as anyone who has tracked him knows) is ruthless in taking people on. At an absolute bare minimum, it shows a totally lack of discipline from Johnson.
-
Go on then BB.
What about this matters to you more than the competence of our Govt in managing the crisis?
No BST, for once, you start answering questions. You can start by telling me what is untrue about my last post.
.......And the one before that.
-
BB.
Eeh lad it doesn't work like that. I'm dealing in facts. You are dealing in your obsessive personal trolling.
If you want to engage in a discussion of facts, I'm game. If you're going to drag this back down your obsessive rabbit hole, I'll get back to work and leave you to it.
-
But you're only interested in trolling the internet for anti-government propaganda, aren't you? You only deal in Anti-government facts, don't you? You call it grown-up politics, don't you?
-
Billy. You really think a prime minister should never ‘blow off’? In private? To someone he regarded as a good friend?
The prime minister’s job is far more more reason to blow off than you or I might want to do at the Keepmoat.
Would you rather have an emotionless robot in charge?
Actually, I already know the answer to that one.
And in yet another unnecessarily long winded post, you forgot to answer the original question. Again.
-
Short summary here of some of the points raised by Cummings;
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/all-the-key-claims-and-evidence-from-dominic-cummings-bombshell-blog
It might help some, who are posting here without having read the Cummings blog.
Not that reading Cummings is easy, but posting a reply to something you have not read is a sign of potential issues for the poster.
-
Billy. You really think a prime minister should never ‘blow off’? In private? To someone he regarded as a good friend?
The prime minister’s job is far more more reason to blow off than you or I might want to do at the Keepmoat.
Would you rather have an emotionless robot in charge?
Actually, I already know the answer to that one.
And in yet another unnecessarily long winded post, you forgot to answer the original question. Again.
Cummings claims Johnson repeatedly put forward the opinion that he thought Hancock was useless. I think he published two screen grabs showing that. Johnson also appeared to be on the verge of replacing him with Gove.
It wasn't a onetime emotional exchange. It seemed to be the opinion he held.
-
Short summary here of some of the points raised by Cummings;
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/all-the-key-claims-and-evidence-from-dominic-cummings-bombshell-blog
It might help some, who are posting here without having read the Cummings blog.
Not that reading Cummings is easy, but posting a reply to something you have not read is a sign of potential issues for the poster.
at the minute he has not backed much of what he has said up, a couple of texts calling Hancock names, he really needs to provide proper evidence that he has been asked for to be taken seriously
-
Billy. You really think a prime minister should never ‘blow off’? In private? To someone he regarded as a good friend?
The prime minister’s job is far more more reason to blow off than you or I might want to do at the Keepmoat.
Would you rather have an emotionless robot in charge?
Actually, I already know the answer to that one.
And in yet another unnecessarily long winded post, you forgot to answer the original question. Again.
BB.
If he thought Cummings was a good friend, he's a bigger fool than I thought. Cummings is the wildest of loose cannons. He used Johnson as a front man to get himself into the centre of Govt. Cummings always had one aim. To smash up Govt and reinvent it according to how he thought it ought to work. Johnson was his means to that end.
He was never a friend. If Johnson really thought that, his lack of judgement is staggering.
-
Belton.
The answer to your question was there all along if you read a bit rather than chucking out insults.
Cummings laid out the context, showing that the Health Dept had totally failed to get testing sorted out. Johnson could have argued the toss. But he didn't. Of course he wouldn't because the failure was unarguable.
The reason why Johnson's response matters is because it demonstrates that he was aware of the testing shambles at the time that he was telling us they were doing all they could to keep us safe.
It's not about personalities. It's about competence right at the top. THAT is why it matters.
-
Billy. You really think a prime minister should never ‘blow off’? In private? To someone he regarded as a good friend?
The prime minister’s job is far more more reason to blow off than you or I might want to do at the Keepmoat.
Would you rather have an emotionless robot in charge?
Actually, I already know the answer to that one.
And in yet another unnecessarily long winded post, you forgot to answer the original question. Again.
BB.
If he thought Cummings was a good friend, he's a bigger fool than I thought. Cummings is the wildest of loose cannons. He used Johnson as a front man to get himself into the centre of Govt. Cummings always had one aim. To smash up Govt and reinvent it according to how he thought it ought to work. Johnson was his means to that end.
He was never a friend. If Johnson really thought that, his lack of judgement is staggering.
Yet another response that completely ignores the questions.
-
Belton.
The answer to your question was there all along if you read a bit rather than chucking out insults.
Cummings laid out the context, showing that the Health Dept had totally failed to get testing sorted out. Johnson could have argued the toss. But he didn't. Of course he wouldn't because the failure was unarguable.
The reason why Johnson's response matters is because it demonstrates that he was aware of the testing shambles at the time that he was telling us they were doing all they could to keep us safe.
It's not about personalities. It's about competence right at the top. THAT is why it matters.
Insults?
-
What Johnson thinks about Hancock is beside the point, and utterly immaterial.
So too is whether you think Cummings is trustworthy.
The issue is whether Johnson and Hancock have breached ministerial rules, and sought to mislead the HoC and the public with deliberate misinformation.
Cummings is showing that at key stages in the decision making process, Johnson and Hancock misled their own colleagues, and in doing so promoted policy choices which cost lives.
They placed management of their image above the public interest.
This is unforgivable, and potentially could lead to criminal action at a later date.
Anyone who cannot see the importance of this from senior elected government personnel should give some consideration to the implications of allowing it to go unchecked.
“What Johnson thinks about Hancock is beside the point and utterly immaterial”.
Albie, I’m not having a pop at you here but if that is true then why are so many posters highlighting those very things and making such a big deal of them.
-
Belton. If you don't see the answer, I'm not sure what more I can do short of being condescending.
And my apologies if "yet another unnecessarily long winded post" was meant as a compliment and I misread you. I know you really don't like it when people pollute the atmosphere by chucking out insults so perhaps I was wrong.
-
Hound.
It's irrelevant what the PM thinks about his Health Secretary as a person. It's absolutely relevant what he thinks about his competence as a Health Secretary.
-
Belton. If you don't see the answer, I'm not sure what more I can do short of being condescending.
And my apologies if "yet another unnecessarily long winded post" was meant as a compliment and I misread you. I know you really don't like it when people pollute the atmosphere by chucking out insults so perhaps I was wrong.
Several paragraphs responding to a simple yes or no question, without actually answering it is a long winded response. You do that a lot.
That’s not an insult. Just an observation.
-
Hound.
It's irrelevant what the PM thinks about his Health Secretary as a person. It's absolutely relevant what he thinks about his competence as a Health Secretary.
And which option did he mean BST.
-
A hopeless man talking about a hopeless man who accused another hopeless man of being hopeless.
Desperate politics.
-
A hopeless man talking about a hopeless man who accused another hopeless man of being hopeless.
Desperate politics.
Yeah but it gives some people stuff to talk about NR.
-
Whatever next?
My dads bigger than your dad?
-
Whatever next?
My dads bigger than your dad?
It would not surprise me at all.
-
Hound.
We are discussing decisions that have led to tens of thousands of avoidable deaths.
What political issues would you think really ARE worthy of discussion if this isn't?
-
Short summary here of some of the points raised by Cummings;
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/all-the-key-claims-and-evidence-from-dominic-cummings-bombshell-blog
It might help some, who are posting here without having read the Cummings blog.
Not that reading Cummings is easy, but posting a reply to something you have not read is a sign of potential issues for the poster.
at the minute he has not backed much of what he has said up, a couple of texts calling Hancock names, he really needs to provide proper evidence that he has been asked for to be taken seriously
Sorry Blackpool, but what do you think DC has not backed up?
I am not sure what you are looking for when you talk about proper evidence.
Some of the claims made by DC have been established by others, and for some time.
Best not to just look at DC, but how it adds to what we already know!
-
Hound.
We are discussing decisions that have led to tens of thousands of avoidable deaths.
What political issues would you think really ARE worthy of discussion if this isn't?
So I guess you won’t be answering my question, and then asking me one.
-
Since you were asking me to read someone's mind Hound, I assumed it wasn't a serious question.
-
That’s ok, I thought your post:
Hound.
It's irrelevant what the PM thinks about his Health Secretary as a person. It's absolutely relevant what he thinks about his competence as a Health Secretary.
…….was indicating that you might have known which option Johnson meant.
It would have added to the debate but maybe it was just an off the cuff comment and not relevant to the discussion.
-
No Hound. It meant I know which one is important and which one is superfluous fluff.
I would have explained that, but yer man Belton would have said that was being unnecessarily long winded, when a curt answer will do.
-
Then I won’t ask you the bleeding obvious question.
-
No Hound. It meant I know which one is important and which one is superfluous fluff.
I would have explained that, but yer man Belton would have said that was being unnecessarily long winded, when a curt answer will do.
I didn’t realise I had so much influence over you, Billy.
It’s like Cummings/Johnson all over again.
-
I do try to be accomodating Belton. Just so we can stick to the substantive comments and not get sidetracked.
-
At the end of the day we have a Prime Minister who lies about anything on a regular basis and a minister not fit for purpose.
However many to and fro spats, that is the bottom line.
Trading insults and scoring points doesn't alter that.
-
At the end of the day we have a Prime Minister who lies about anything on a regular basis and a minister not fit for purpose.
However many to and fro spats, that is the bottom line.
Trading insults and scoring points doesn't alter that.
It's must quite obvious to anyone why the government doesn't want an inquiry any time soon.
-
At the end of the day we have a Prime Minister who lies about anything on a regular basis and a minister not fit for purpose.
However many to and fro spats, that is the bottom line.
Trading insults and scoring points doesn't alter that.
Agree Idler ... I posted this about 2 weeks ago which [long windedly] agrees with what you point out
Spot on RR
I have almost totally given up commenting on Political threads because ;
a] I think leaving the EU was a huge error although time will tell
b] I think Johnson is little better than a corrupt liar in charge of a bunch of fawning nobodies
Right I could repeat that ad nausem and roughly 43 % would disagree with me and of those 0 pc would change their views after reading my views SO I simply choose not to try to change their minds
Similarly NO post by any Leaver on here or elsewhere would EVER convince me I was wrong on either a] or b] so as you say I moderated my own Posts by not making them - and I long since gave up reading the other stuff - so great point ravenrover
PS If anyone wants to try to pick unpick my a] and b] please start a new Thread as I added them as an example only and we dont want another thread going bang lol
Reply
Quote
Notify
-
Dominic Grieve had a right pop at The Clown and the Govt in general this morning whilst commenting on the Cheshem by election Lib Dem win by 8000 overturning a 16000 majority from last election. Tories becoming too Nationalistic spending money hand over fist. Claiming that the more affluent, degree types who live there have seen through the Tories.
-
There's little doubt that this government is amongst the most dysfunctional in UK history.
The fact that we've spent over £400 billion - yep, 400 thousand million pounds - trying to deal with the pandemic is a testament to this. Unfortunately, we will all pay economically for what has been an astonishing level of governmental ineptitude.
There's absolutely nothing surprising about Johnson's reference to Hancock. So no dirt really. In fact I could imagine Hancock saying something similar about Johnson. (Remember the f*** business jibe?)
What's surprising is that anybody should be surprised.
-
Pater Capaldi has his say in recent events
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-57544203
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBN4sOQbYxk
-
Cummings has released a new post on his blog;
https://dominiccummings.substack.com/p/more-evidence-on-how-the-pms-and
Summary in the Guardian here;
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/25/pm-said-test-and-trace-would-be-like-whistling-in-the-dark-says-cummings