B
PM Dominic Cummings either resigns or is sacked.
- Thread starter SirGalahad
- Start date
- Status
Sponsored Links
I think we can all agree that poor Dominic has been very unfairly treated. Just look at all the criticism he received just because there was nobody within 260 miles who he could ask to help a young child.
Apart from his sister in law a couple of streets away, who he didn't ask.
And then perhaps he was not safe to drive, and being unable to think of any better action that putting his wife and child in the car and setting off on a 60 mile round trip, to see if he'd crash.
And more bad luck:
Apart from his sister in law a couple of streets away, who he didn't ask.
And then perhaps he was not safe to drive, and being unable to think of any better action that putting his wife and child in the car and setting off on a 60 mile round trip, to see if he'd crash.
And more bad luck:
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 42,713
- Reaction score
- 2,629
- Country
Even some Tory papers want those two Covidiots out now.
You know you've outstayed your welcome when that happens....
You know you've outstayed your welcome when that happens....
Sponsored Links
Curious thing. That foreign policy was fully supported by the Torys and all at the time. Rumours that are old now reckon that the UK always agrees with the USA to retain their support at the IMF. I'd suspect weaponry has some bearing on it as well. As some senators were heard to say "We have our empire now, an economic one". The USA is very clear - accept their aid means supporting their foreign policy. Extensive use if the USD helps them a lot.
Iraq. Earlier Saddam Hussein was seen to be defending the west from Iran. Shown on TV standing next to a fighter. What happened, pass. Probably his decision to invade another oil producer but some reckon the real reason was their oil. Tribal problems.
Afghanistan. When for some reason the Russians went in TV showed pictures of Bin Laden complete with a stinger very probably provided by the west. A hero for the west. A commentator at the time said bad idea as the bloke hates all interfering countries. The Russian involvement goes way back. The wiki gives details. Some sources as always will be suppressors of the free arguments. Tribal problems of sorts but war lords etc.
Libya. Gaddafi bit like Cuba, revolution but deposed their Royal family. Blare seemed to be trying to organise an oil contract with them.
Syria. Shia and Sunni pop up again as per Iraq. One side does support Assad. Chemical weapons use videos seen are reckoned to be fake. Pass but the things are lethal so some things shown don't make much sense. They are sent here by the insurgents.
Iran. Bit more difficult to take on but the usual embargoes to start with. They stir up the population, very effective in Iraq. The current lot in power got there via revolution.
The so called Arab Spring. I wonder what started that.
There have been a number of mini wars no one really hears about. This was a bigger one
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1285708.stm
Makes a change from Cummins.
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2016
- Messages
- 5,874
- Reaction score
- 1,081
- Country
Let's just say that he drove to the Castle and felt that his eyesight wasn't up to it?
Who drives home to Durham? His wife? Presumably with perfect eyesight?
So she could have driven home (to durham)
He said that he felt sick at the castle. Did it not occur to him that he might still be Covid positive?
Apparently, (according to his wife) being sick was one of the first symptoms that lead them to believe they were C19 positive.
Who drives home to Durham? His wife? Presumably with perfect eyesight?
So she could have driven home (to durham)
He said that he felt sick at the castle. Did it not occur to him that he might still be Covid positive?
Apparently, (according to his wife) being sick was one of the first symptoms that lead them to believe they were C19 positive.
Lying to the public is endemic in politics, all parties do it.
There doesn't seem to any incentive to be honest anymore, even on the rare occasion when a lying politician gets sacked it isn't very long before they are allowed back again to tell even more lies.
There doesn't seem to be any answer to this problem.
There doesn't seem to any incentive to be honest anymore, even on the rare occasion when a lying politician gets sacked it isn't very long before they are allowed back again to tell even more lies.
There doesn't seem to be any answer to this problem.
"Be reasonable, mate. When you say you took your wife and kid on a 60-mile round trip to a local beauty spot, on your wife's birthday, nobody's going to believe you did it because you thought you weren't safe to drive."
That pack of newshounds pushing each other out of the way outside the Cummings home.
Were they obeying the law ?
Or were they a pack of hyenas and jackals baying for some one's blood and ignoring the law to do so ?.
They could have spread the virus among themselves where as Cummings did not have any contact during his journey.
Were they obeying the law ?
Or were they a pack of hyenas and jackals baying for some one's blood and ignoring the law to do so ?.
They could have spread the virus among themselves where as Cummings did not have any contact during his journey.
Blair and Bush knew that Saddam Hussein didn't have WMDs, but to convince their respective publics that the war on Iraq was one of necessity rather than one of choice they used fabricated and misleading intelligence reports.Curious thing. That foreign policy was fully supported by the Torys and all at the time. Rumours that are old now reckon that the UK always agrees with the USA to retain their support at the IMF. I'd suspect weaponry has some bearing on it as well. As some senators were heard to say "We have our empire now, an economic one". The USA is very clear - accept their aid means supporting their foreign policy. Extensive use if the USD helps them a lot.
Iraq. Earlier Saddam Hussein was seen to be defending the west from Iran. Shown on TV standing next to a fighter. What happened, pass. Probably his decision to invade another oil producer but some reckon the real reason was their oil. Tribal problems.
Afghanistan. When for some reason the Russians went in TV showed pictures of Bin Laden complete with a stinger very probably provided by the west. A hero for the west. A commentator at the time said bad idea as the bloke hates all interfering countries. The Russian involvement goes way back. The wiki gives details. Some sources as always will be suppressors of the free arguments. Tribal problems of sorts but war lords etc.
Libya. Gaddafi bit like Cuba, revolution but deposed their Royal family. Blare seemed to be trying to organise an oil contract with them.
Syria. Shia and Sunni pop up again as per Iraq. One side does support Assad. Chemical weapons use videos seen are reckoned to be fake. Pass but the things are lethal so some things shown don't make much sense. They are sent here by the insurgents.
Iran. Bit more difficult to take on but the usual embargoes to start with. They stir up the population, very effective in Iraq. The current lot in power got there via revolution.
The so called Arab Spring. I wonder what started that.
There have been a number of mini wars no one really hears about. This was a bigger one
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1285708.stm
The Americans were spooked by the 9/11 and wanted to show the muslim world that there would be a price to pay for that attack.
Even though the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi Arabian and not Iraqi, the Americans chose to insinuate that Iraq was involved in 9/11 based on the assumption that most Americans were too stupid to know the difference between a Saudi Arab and an Iraqi Arab.
You mean, whataboutery means Cummings did not breach the rules issued by the government he leads?
Where should Cummings have gone, and stayed?
For how long?
Who should he not be meeting?
"Today therefore we are moving forward with our plan. From tomorrow, if you have coronavirus symptoms, however mild – either a new continuous cough or a high temperature – then you should stay at home for at least 7 days to protect others and help slow the spread of the disease."
12 March 2020
www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-on-coronavirus-12-march-2020
How about
"So, first, we need to ask you to ensure that if you or anyone in your household has one of those two symptoms, then you should stay at home for fourteen days."
www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-on-coronavirus-16-march-2020
Or maybe:
"New guidance to stay at home for 14 days if someone in your household has symptoms of COVID-19 is the focus of the next stage of a public awareness campaign launched by Health and Social Care Secretary Matt Hancock today.
The new guidance will set out that individuals will still be asked to self-isolate for 7 days from the onset of COVID-19 symptoms but any individuals in the household will now be asked to self-isolate for 14 days from that moment as well.
If other members of your household develop symptoms, however mild, at any time during the 14 days, they must not leave the home for 7 days from when symptoms started."
www.gov.uk/government/news/new-guidance-for-households-with-possible-covid-19-infection
Or even:
"From this evening I must give the British people a very simple instruction - you must stay at home.
Because the critical thing we must do is stop the disease spreading between households.
That is why people will only be allowed to leave their home for the following very limited purposes:
shopping for basic necessities, as infrequently as possible
one form of exercise a day - for example a run, walk, or cycle - alone or with members of your household;
any medical need, to provide care or to help a vulnerable person; and
travelling to and from work, but only where this is absolutely necessary and cannot be done from home.
That’s all - these are the only reasons you should leave your home.
You should not be meeting friends. If your friends ask you to meet, you should say No.
You should not be meeting family members who do not live in your home."
www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-address-to-the-nation-on-coronavirus-23-march-2020
For how long?
Who should he not be meeting?
"Today therefore we are moving forward with our plan. From tomorrow, if you have coronavirus symptoms, however mild – either a new continuous cough or a high temperature – then you should stay at home for at least 7 days to protect others and help slow the spread of the disease."
12 March 2020
www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-on-coronavirus-12-march-2020
How about
"So, first, we need to ask you to ensure that if you or anyone in your household has one of those two symptoms, then you should stay at home for fourteen days."
www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-on-coronavirus-16-march-2020
Or maybe:
"New guidance to stay at home for 14 days if someone in your household has symptoms of COVID-19 is the focus of the next stage of a public awareness campaign launched by Health and Social Care Secretary Matt Hancock today.
The new guidance will set out that individuals will still be asked to self-isolate for 7 days from the onset of COVID-19 symptoms but any individuals in the household will now be asked to self-isolate for 14 days from that moment as well.
If other members of your household develop symptoms, however mild, at any time during the 14 days, they must not leave the home for 7 days from when symptoms started."
www.gov.uk/government/news/new-guidance-for-households-with-possible-covid-19-infection
Or even:
"From this evening I must give the British people a very simple instruction - you must stay at home.
Because the critical thing we must do is stop the disease spreading between households.
That is why people will only be allowed to leave their home for the following very limited purposes:
shopping for basic necessities, as infrequently as possible
one form of exercise a day - for example a run, walk, or cycle - alone or with members of your household;
any medical need, to provide care or to help a vulnerable person; and
travelling to and from work, but only where this is absolutely necessary and cannot be done from home.
That’s all - these are the only reasons you should leave your home.
You should not be meeting friends. If your friends ask you to meet, you should say No.
You should not be meeting family members who do not live in your home."
www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-address-to-the-nation-on-coronavirus-23-march-2020
Did Cummings meet with members of any other household ?
he travelled with members who were members of this own family
A four year old is vulnerable and if both parents are incapacitated will need care
He didn't,
Cummings said 'he may have stopped for fuel'
in that case, the 17 year old niece could have travelled to London.
Questions too difficult for you?
- Status
Sponsored Links
