Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hancock apparently released a bunch of - possibly all - of his whatsapp messages to Oakeshott when she was helping him wrie his self-serving, shitty Pandemic Diaries. Oakeshott just leaked them to the Telegraph. They seem to show Hancock ignored the chief medical officer's advice to test all residents entering care homes for Covid. So Hancock seems to be complicit in tens of thousands of care home deaths. (Oakeshott's a self-serving shit too. But at least she hasn't - as far as I know - been involved in tens of thousands of deaths.)" I despise Hancock but testing would not have stopped those deaths. The vast majority of people in care homes are in their final days/weeks/months of their lives. They are generally the most susceptible to illness as they often have multiple Co-morbidities. Any death is sad but testing would not have stopped those deaths as they would more than likely have died anyway. I think some people have forgotten that people in their 80s/90s are at the very end of their lives and very few leave a care home to go home…. Blunt I know but it is a fact of life. The most cruel thing they did was not allowing relatives/friends in to visit these people in their final days. That was absolutely wicked!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hancock apparently released a bunch of - possibly all - of his whatsapp messages to Oakeshott when she was helping him wrie his self-serving, shitty Pandemic Diaries. Oakeshott just leaked them to the Telegraph. They seem to show Hancock ignored the chief medical officer's advice to test all residents entering care homes for Covid. So Hancock seems to be complicit in tens of thousands of care home deaths. (Oakeshott's a self-serving shit too. But at least she hasn't - as far as I know - been involved in tens of thousands of deaths.) I despise Hancock but testing would not have stopped those deaths. The vast majority of people in care homes are in their final days/weeks/months of their lives. They are generally the most susceptible to illness as they often have multiple Co-morbidities. Any death is sad but testing would not have stopped those deaths as they would more than likely have died anyway. I think some people have forgotten that people in their 80s/90s are at the very end of their lives and very few leave a care home to go home…. Blunt I know but it is a fact of life. The most cruel thing they did was not allowing relatives/friends in to visit these people in their final days. That was absolutely wicked!!" For those whose loved ones died if Hancock ignored clear medical advice, I suspect they'll want better than a shrug &: ah they were old anyway. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think the big take away here is medical advisors advise, ministers decide. This hierarchy needs to be reviewed in my opinion. At the very start of the pandemic should we have followed medical advice and once information became available that represented a more wider view of impact and how society is managing, it then transfers to ministers. " Most of the advice seemed to come from SAGE, which had a lot of communist behavioural scientists and seriously poor modelling. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book?" Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me." I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think the big take away here is medical advisors advise, ministers decide. This hierarchy needs to be reviewed in my opinion. At the very start of the pandemic should we have followed medical advice and once information became available that represented a more wider view of impact and how society is managing, it then transfers to ministers. Most of the advice seemed to come from SAGE, which had a lot of communist behavioural scientists and seriously poor modelling. " Not sure of the SAGE make up, but in my opinion there needs to be better qualified people on the ministerial side to make decisions. Hancock has no medical experience or understandings as secretory of state for health and social care, he is the budget man. He should have had input but ultimately been the signature only, until such a point a degree of control is reached. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I despise Hancock but testing would not have stopped those deaths. The vast majority of people in care homes are in their final days/weeks/months of their lives. They are generally the most susceptible to illness as they often have multiple Co-morbidities. Any death is sad but testing would not have stopped those deaths as they would more than likely have died anyway. I think some people have forgotten that people in their 80s/90s are at the very end of their lives and very few leave a care home to go home…. Blunt I know but it is a fact of life. " The over 80s were prioritised for vaccination | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you "Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity..."Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does anyone else think 'here we go again', another 'leak' another person ' journalist trying to make name for themselves. Has Hancock paid her for her work?" Or do we think the public has the right to know ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy "Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does anyone else think 'here we go again', another 'leak' another person ' journalist trying to make name for themselves. Has Hancock paid her for her work? Or do we think the public has the right to know ?" Well she's had the info for a year  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths."This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines? And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
"So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow."If you care to look at my posts, they are direct questions or comments to you, not the subject of deaths. So to be clear, I'm not laughing or joking at the story, or the headlines | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
If you care to look at my posts, they are direct questions or comments to you, not the subject of deaths.
So to be clear, I'm not laughing or joking at the story, or the headlines "I'm glad for that clarification. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow."He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see "And now you're laughing. Lovely. To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice. So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this."We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice. You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did. To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage."Faux outrage? No, this is real outrage. It's real disgust. Please do me a favour & stop talking to me on this thread. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Faux outrage? No, this is real outrage. It's real disgust.
Please do me a favour & stop talking to me on this thread."You're outraged and disgusted today by something we've known for at least a year. You do you. I'll stop now | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Seriously folks, sometimes we need to put our political drums to the side so we can stop banging them and instead remember we might be discussing human beings and people’s genuine emotions.
If Matt Hancock had been a Company CEO this evidence (rather than hearsay and suspicion) would make him culpable for Corporate Manslaughter charges.
Bit more compassion needed at times I think! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hancock apparently released a bunch of - possibly all - of his whatsapp messages to Oakeshott when she was helping him wrie his self-serving, shitty Pandemic Diaries. Oakeshott just leaked them to the Telegraph. They seem to show Hancock ignored the chief medical officer's advice to test all residents entering care homes for Covid. So Hancock seems to be complicit in tens of thousands of care home deaths. (Oakeshott's a self-serving shit too. But at least she hasn't - as far as I know - been involved in tens of thousands of deaths.)" So, evidence of something that was denied. WhatsApp is clearly a serious problem for transparency in Government. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Faux outrage? No, this is real outrage. It's real disgust.
Please do me a favour & stop talking to me on this thread.
You're outraged and disgusted today by something we've known for at least a year.
You do you. I'll stop now "I'm interested in why you claimed that this was "faux" outrage. Can you not remain outraged about something you have known about for some time? Are racism or sexism or the holocaust well known things that should not create outrage? Do you think that you might be minimising someone's feelings because you dislike them for some reason? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Faux outrage? No, this is real outrage. It's real disgust.
Please do me a favour & stop talking to me on this thread.
You're outraged and disgusted today by something we've known for at least a year.
You do you. I'll stop now
I'm interested in why you claimed that this was "faux" outrage.
Can you not remain outraged about something you have known about for some time?
Are racism or sexism or the holocaust well known things that should not create outrage?
Do you think that you might be minimising someone's feelings because you dislike them for some reason?"I claimed it was faux outrage because said poster has form. He seems to think this is new information and that is the reason for his 'outrage'. No objectivity, no questions as to why this journalist would release now, after a year, just a straight 'I hate the fucking tories so will find a reason to be outraged' Not sure why you're bringing sexism, racism etc into it, if there was new information of course you can be outraged, but there isn't. As for minimising his feelings, nope, I can't feel sorry for faux outrage. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Faux outrage? No, this is real outrage. It's real disgust.
Please do me a favour & stop talking to me on this thread.
You're outraged and disgusted today by something we've known for at least a year.
You do you. I'll stop now
I'm interested in why you claimed that this was "faux" outrage.
Can you not remain outraged about something you have known about for some time?
Are racism or sexism or the holocaust well known things that should not create outrage?
Do you think that you might be minimising someone's feelings because you dislike them for some reason?
I claimed it was faux outrage because said poster has form. He seems to think this is new information and that is the reason for his 'outrage'. No objectivity, no questions as to why this journalist would release now, after a year, just a straight 'I hate the fucking tories so will find a reason to be outraged'
Not sure why you're bringing sexism, racism etc into it, if there was new information of course you can be outraged, but there isn't.
As for minimising his feelings, nope, I can't feel sorry for faux outrage."That was actually the point. "We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time..." You can still be genuinely outraged with no new information, just something to remind you of the problem. Hence the reference to sexism etc. So you are using it as a argumentative tool because you dislike them. Can they really not feel so strongly on these topics even though you don't? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Faux outrage? No, this is real outrage. It's real disgust.
Please do me a favour & stop talking to me on this thread.
You're outraged and disgusted today by something we've known for at least a year.
You do you. I'll stop now
I'm interested in why you claimed that this was "faux" outrage.
Can you not remain outraged about something you have known about for some time?
Are racism or sexism or the holocaust well known things that should not create outrage?
Do you think that you might be minimising someone's feelings because you dislike them for some reason?
I claimed it was faux outrage because said poster has form. He seems to think this is new information and that is the reason for his 'outrage'. No objectivity, no questions as to why this journalist would release now, after a year, just a straight 'I hate the fucking tories so will find a reason to be outraged'
Not sure why you're bringing sexism, racism etc into it, if there was new information of course you can be outraged, but there isn't.
As for minimising his feelings, nope, I can't feel sorry for faux outrage.
That was actually the point.
"We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time..."
You can still be genuinely outraged with no new information, just something to remind you of the problem. Hence the reference to sexism etc.
So you are using it as a argumentative tool because you dislike them. Can they really not feel so strongly on these topics even though you don't?"If we want to pick on what I'm 'using' I initially told him that the other poster was laughing at him and not the topic. He chose to respond in the way he did. That's not my problem. As far as 'That's the point', I think you've missed the point. He seems to think this is new information to be outraged about | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Faux outrage? No, this is real outrage. It's real disgust.
Please do me a favour & stop talking to me on this thread.
You're outraged and disgusted today by something we've known for at least a year.
You do you. I'll stop now
I'm interested in why you claimed that this was "faux" outrage.
Can you not remain outraged about something you have known about for some time?
Are racism or sexism or the holocaust well known things that should not create outrage?
Do you think that you might be minimising someone's feelings because you dislike them for some reason?
I claimed it was faux outrage because said poster has form. He seems to think this is new information and that is the reason for his 'outrage'. No objectivity, no questions as to why this journalist would release now, after a year, just a straight 'I hate the fucking tories so will find a reason to be outraged'
Not sure why you're bringing sexism, racism etc into it, if there was new information of course you can be outraged, but there isn't.
As for minimising his feelings, nope, I can't feel sorry for faux outrage.
That was actually the point.
"We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time..."
You can still be genuinely outraged with no new information, just something to remind you of the problem. Hence the reference to sexism etc.
So you are using it as a argumentative tool because you dislike them. Can they really not feel so strongly on these topics even though you don't?
If we want to pick on what I'm 'using' I initially told him that the other poster was laughing at him and not the topic.
He chose to respond in the way he did. That's not my problem.
As far as 'That's the point', I think you've missed the point. He seems to think this is new information to be outraged about"Hmmm I don’t agree with your take on this. The leaking of Whatsapp messages is the new news. It confirms what we thought we knew (for various reasons) but THIS info is new. So I think the outrage is well placed as it justifiably re-raises the issue. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Faux outrage? No, this is real outrage. It's real disgust.
Please do me a favour & stop talking to me on this thread.
You're outraged and disgusted today by something we've known for at least a year.
You do you. I'll stop now
I'm interested in why you claimed that this was "faux" outrage.
Can you not remain outraged about something you have known about for some time?
Are racism or sexism or the holocaust well known things that should not create outrage?
Do you think that you might be minimising someone's feelings because you dislike them for some reason?
I claimed it was faux outrage because said poster has form. He seems to think this is new information and that is the reason for his 'outrage'. No objectivity, no questions as to why this journalist would release now, after a year, just a straight 'I hate the fucking tories so will find a reason to be outraged'
Not sure why you're bringing sexism, racism etc into it, if there was new information of course you can be outraged, but there isn't.
As for minimising his feelings, nope, I can't feel sorry for faux outrage.
That was actually the point.
"We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time..."
You can still be genuinely outraged with no new information, just something to remind you of the problem. Hence the reference to sexism etc.
So you are using it as a argumentative tool because you dislike them. Can they really not feel so strongly on these topics even though you don't?
If we want to pick on what I'm 'using' I initially told him that the other poster was laughing at him and not the topic.
He chose to respond in the way he did. That's not my problem.
As far as 'That's the point', I think you've missed the point. He seems to think this is new information to be outraged about
Hmmm I don’t agree with your take on this. The leaking of Whatsapp messages is the new news. It confirms what we thought we knew (for various reasons) but THIS info is new. So I think the outrage is well placed as it justifiably re-raises the issue."This is from an article dated Apr22: Public Health England advised the Government in March 2020 against allowing hospital patients who may have had Covid-19 who did not have symptoms to be transferred from hospitals to care homes – but this was overruled by ministers or officials, it has emerged. This is not new 'news'. Have we even seen these WhatsApp messages? Or are we just believing the journalist without question? All I have seen is isolated messages. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hancock apparently released a bunch of - possibly all - of his whatsapp messages to Oakeshott when she was helping him wrie his self-serving, shitty Pandemic Diaries. Oakeshott just leaked them to the Telegraph. They seem to show Hancock ignored the chief medical officer's advice to test all residents entering care homes for Covid. So Hancock seems to be complicit in tens of thousands of care home deaths. (Oakeshott's a self-serving shit too. But at least she hasn't - as far as I know - been involved in tens of thousands of deaths.)" Bring back the death sentence | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hancock apparently released a bunch of - possibly all - of his whatsapp messages to Oakeshott when she was helping him wrie his self-serving, shitty Pandemic Diaries. Oakeshott just leaked them to the Telegraph. They seem to show Hancock ignored the chief medical officer's advice to test all residents entering care homes for Covid. So Hancock seems to be complicit in tens of thousands of care home deaths. (Oakeshott's a self-serving shit too. But at least she hasn't - as far as I know - been involved in tens of thousands of deaths.)" Also, completely unethical for Oakshott to share these messages. It's one of those paradoxes. They were clearly provided confidentially so shouldn't be shared. However, if they had been dug up for the purposes of discovering what really happened then it would be good, investigative journalism. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage."Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair. One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever. Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream! I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb "One of my ‘friends’ is an undertaker and he states that your ‘friend’ who is an undertaker is taking shite | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Consulted him really quick there? Isn't he busy catching up with work?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb "This demonstrates an important point. People will vote for and defend the Tories, even if it leads them to an early grave. That's the power of their PR machine and the press that support them. Astounding. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb "Which poster are you quoting saying “my money works for me”? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb
This demonstrates an important point.
People will vote for and defend the Tories, even if it leads them to an early grave.
That's the power of their PR machine and the press that support them. Astounding. "Your posts in this regard are getting increasingly paranoid and melodramatic. Being in your 80s and 90s leads you to an early grave as much as we all don't want it and as sad as it may be. Younger people like you and I have been kept away from the grave by class-leading and world-beating vaccines | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb
Which poster are you quoting saying “my money works for me”?"The cap will fit him as appropriate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb "Your point on hindsight totally misses the point here. Hancock was advised by medical experts to not move untested elderly patients into care homes. He still ordered it done. No hindsight is needed here. Hindsight would be areas such as whether we locked down soon enough, or closed borders soon enough. We were dealing with unknowns in the early stages of the pandemic. But blatantly ignoring advice from medical experts and scientists (and let’s face it, bloody common sense) is akin to gross negligence and corporate manslaughter. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb
Which poster are you quoting saying “my money works for me”?
The cap will fit him as appropriate. "Not sure I have seen anyone post that point you quoted though? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I doubt your friend exists
Consulted him really quick there? Isn't he busy catching up with work? "My ‘friend’ is as real as yours | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb
Which poster are you quoting saying “my money works for me”?
The cap will fit him as appropriate.
Not sure I have seen anyone post that point you quoted though?"It was aimed at me, I posted it in response to an accusation that I was unemployed, tories seem to think that they are the only ones who have any money | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb
This demonstrates an important point.
People will vote for and defend the Tories, even if it leads them to an early grave.
That's the power of their PR machine and the press that support them. Astounding.
Your posts in this regard are getting increasingly paranoid and melodramatic. Being in your 80s and 90s leads you to an early grave as much as we all don't want it and as sad as it may be.
Younger people like you and I have been kept away from the grave by class-leading and world-beating vaccines "The vaccines are an amazing band, All In White is a masterpiece | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Your posts in this regard are getting increasingly paranoid and melodramatic. Being in your 80s and 90s leads you to an early grave as much as we all don't want it and as sad as it may be. " This was my only singular post on the subject. So I guess you would struggle to argue they are getting "increasingly paranoid". But yes, this reinforces my point. Not only will people vote themselves to an earlier grave, but also attempt to insult people who point it out. Once again. Astounding example of the power the Tory PR machine and the right leaning media have over the electorate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Your posts in this regard are getting increasingly paranoid and melodramatic. Being in your 80s and 90s leads you to an early grave as much as we all don't want it and as sad as it may be. This was my only singular post on the subject. So I guess you would struggle to argue they are getting "increasingly paranoid". But yes, this reinforces my point. Not only will people vote themselves to an earlier grave, but also attempt to insult people who point it out. Once again. Astounding example of the power the Tory PR machine and the right leaning media have over the electorate. "Astounding example how exactly | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb "I think that it could easily be argued that you have "considerable form" too. Rather a self-owning accusation to throw about. Your imaginary friend was clearly in a strange bubble. Was the surge in funerals putely due to young people then? https://www.independent.co.uk/news/pandemic-takes-a-toll-on-exhausted-uk-funeral-directors-zaman-staff-funeral-directors-service-virus-b1801278.html I tend to tune out when anyone starts rambling about "lefties" when they actually mean "people who disagree with me". It was a form of catch-phrase word-salad bingo. You definitely won. I do wonder what "political capital" can be made here. Do tell. Our vaccine programme was good because the Government weren't involved. We were lucky (nothing more) that one of the most effective vaccins came out of the UK. The vaccine roll out was caught and passed after we got an early start. Our track and trace was a disaster and would have saved more lives as it was needed at the most dangerous time. Not "negative" as I'm sure you'll try to characterise it, just realistic. Accept the good with the bad and learn from it rather than act like an ostrich. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb
I think that it could easily be argued that you have "considerable form" too. Rather a self-owning accusation to throw about.
Your imaginary friend was clearly in a strange bubble.
Was the surge in funerals putely due to young people then?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/pandemic-takes-a-toll-on-exhausted-uk-funeral-directors-zaman-staff-funeral-directors-service-virus-b1801278.html
I tend to tune out when anyone starts rambling about "lefties" when they actually mean "people who disagree with me". It was a form of catch-phrase word-salad bingo. You definitely won.
I do wonder what "political capital" can be made here. Do tell.
Our vaccine programme was good because the Government weren't involved. We were lucky (nothing more) that one of the most effective vaccins came out of the UK. The vaccine roll out was caught and passed after we got an early start. Our track and trace was a disaster and would have saved more lives as it was needed at the most dangerous time.
Not "negative" as I'm sure you'll try to characterise it, just realistic. Accept the good with the bad and learn from it rather than act like an ostrich."Wow you take criticism oh so well. Might I suggest a career in politics? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb
I think that it could easily be argued that you have "considerable form" too. Rather a self-owning accusation to throw about.
Your imaginary friend was clearly in a strange bubble.
Was the surge in funerals putely due to young people then?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/pandemic-takes-a-toll-on-exhausted-uk-funeral-directors-zaman-staff-funeral-directors-service-virus-b1801278.html
I tend to tune out when anyone starts rambling about "lefties" when they actually mean "people who disagree with me". It was a form of catch-phrase word-salad bingo. You definitely won.
I do wonder what "political capital" can be made here. Do tell.
Our vaccine programme was good because the Government weren't involved. We were lucky (nothing more) that one of the most effective vaccins came out of the UK. The vaccine roll out was caught and passed after we got an early start. Our track and trace was a disaster and would have saved more lives as it was needed at the most dangerous time.
Not "negative" as I'm sure you'll try to characterise it, just realistic. Accept the good with the bad and learn from it rather than act like an ostrich.
Wow you take criticism oh so well. Might I suggest a career in politics?"You have a strange obsession with me. It's still creepy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Your posts in this regard are getting increasingly paranoid and melodramatic. Being in your 80s and 90s leads you to an early grave as much as we all don't want it and as sad as it may be. This was my only singular post on the subject. So I guess you would struggle to argue they are getting "increasingly paranoid". But yes, this reinforces my point. Not only will people vote themselves to an earlier grave, but also attempt to insult people who point it out. Once again. Astounding example of the power the Tory PR machine and the right leaning media have over the electorate.
Astounding example how exactly "Are you suggesting it's not astounding? Maybe "interesting" is a better word. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You think? Believe me fella if you stop your left leaning shite you and I will most likely never cross paths " It's a stock answer he uses to malign people who simply hold a different view to him and dare to express it. He'll be calling you Pat next which is, ironically, another unsettling tactic of his. Pat happened to be, or still is, another Tory supporter on here. He can't fathom why people don't vote 'correctly' for left leaning parties and appears bewildered that anyone would vote Conservative. Very sad really. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Your posts in this regard are getting increasingly paranoid and melodramatic. Being in your 80s and 90s leads you to an early grave as much as we all don't want it and as sad as it may be. This was my only singular post on the subject. So I guess you would struggle to argue they are getting "increasingly paranoid". But yes, this reinforces my point. Not only will people vote themselves to an earlier grave, but also attempt to insult people who point it out. Once again. Astounding example of the power the Tory PR machine and the right leaning media have over the electorate. "You should read more carefully what I wrote. I wrote 'in this regard' not 'in this thread' On other threads too, you display a kind of fear that some strange PR machine is at work at Tory HQ, instructing people to vote blue. You also display a kind of fear that the Tories will sneak a last minute victory at the 24/25 GE because of this, despite current polls. You don't seem to credit people with independent thought of mind and the ability to weigh things up and decide for themselves, based on many factors. But then you're a dyed in the wool remainer | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb
I think that it could easily be argued that you have "considerable form" too. Rather a self-owning accusation to throw about.
Your imaginary friend was clearly in a strange bubble.
Was the surge in funerals putely due to young people then?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/pandemic-takes-a-toll-on-exhausted-uk-funeral-directors-zaman-staff-funeral-directors-service-virus-b1801278.html
I tend to tune out when anyone starts rambling about "lefties" when they actually mean "people who disagree with me". It was a form of catch-phrase word-salad bingo. You definitely won.
I do wonder what "political capital" can be made here. Do tell.
Our vaccine programme was good because the Government weren't involved. We were lucky (nothing more) that one of the most effective vaccins came out of the UK. The vaccine roll out was caught and passed after we got an early start. Our track and trace was a disaster and would have saved more lives as it was needed at the most dangerous time.
Not "negative" as I'm sure you'll try to characterise it, just realistic. Accept the good with the bad and learn from it rather than act like an ostrich."What a lengthy, verbose post from someone who has 'tuned out' | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb
This demonstrates an important point.
People will vote for and defend the Tories, even if it leads them to an early grave.
That's the power of their PR machine and the press that support them. Astounding.
Your posts in this regard are getting increasingly paranoid and melodramatic. Being in your 80s and 90s leads you to an early grave as much as we all don't want it and as sad as it may be.
Younger people like you and I have been kept away from the grave by class-leading and world-beating vaccines
The vaccines are an amazing band, All In White is a masterpiece "This pains me, but how I agree
It is extremely unfair that they have never cracked the top 30 singles chart, despite belters such as 'If you wanna', 'Post break up sex' and 'Teenage Icon'. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" This was my only singular post on the subject. So I guess you would struggle to argue they are getting "increasingly paranoid". But yes, this reinforces my point. Not only will people vote themselves to an earlier grave, but also attempt to insult people who point it out. Once again. Astounding example of the power the Tory PR machine and the right leaning media have over the electorate.
You should read more carefully what I wrote. I wrote 'in this regard' not 'in this thread'
"Okay. " On other threads too, you display a kind of fear that some strange PR machine is at work at Tory HQ, instructing people to vote blue. You also display a kind of fear that the Tories will sneak a last minute victory at the 24/25 GE because of this, despite current polls. You don't seem to credit people with independent thought of mind and the ability to weigh things up and decide for themselves, based on many factors. " It is my opinion yes. Why do you think people relentlessly vote against their own interests? " But then you're a dyed in the wool remainer "Yes, I did vote against the brexit clusterfuck. Not sure what this has to do with anything. But I do appreciate not using "remoaner". It makes dialogue much better. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb
Which poster are you quoting saying “my money works for me”?
The cap will fit him as appropriate.
Not sure I have seen anyone post that point you quoted though?
It was aimed at me, I posted it in response to an accusation that I was unemployed, tories seem to think that they are the only ones who have any money "If you go to the thread you will see I made no such comment to you personally about being 'unemployed'. Interesting why you should consider it 'an accusation' and talk about things being 'aimed' at you. Your use of weopanry-based language is odd. If you use a phrase, which you presumably want people to read it's odd, if they later quote it back to you, to use 'aimed'. You said it, own it and I'm happy for you btw! I'm a Tory so why wouldn't I be? As Mandy once said, I'm intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich. Even lefty Mancunians | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" This was my only singular post on the subject. So I guess you would struggle to argue they are getting "increasingly paranoid". But yes, this reinforces my point. Not only will people vote themselves to an earlier grave, but also attempt to insult people who point it out. Once again. Astounding example of the power the Tory PR machine and the right leaning media have over the electorate.
You should read more carefully what I wrote. I wrote 'in this regard' not 'in this thread'
Okay.
On other threads too, you display a kind of fear that some strange PR machine is at work at Tory HQ, instructing people to vote blue. You also display a kind of fear that the Tories will sneak a last minute victory at the 24/25 GE because of this, despite current polls. You don't seem to credit people with independent thought of mind and the ability to weigh things up and decide for themselves, based on many factors.
It is my opinion yes. Why do you think people relentlessly vote against their own interests?
But then you're a dyed in the wool remainer
Yes, I did vote against the brexit clusterfuck. Not sure what this has to do with anything. But I do appreciate not using "remoaner". It makes dialogue much better. "I'm sure a man like you can handle 'remoaner' if Brexit voters can handle what's thrown at them. Chiefly by the Remain side. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" This was my only singular post on the subject. So I guess you would struggle to argue they are getting "increasingly paranoid". But yes, this reinforces my point. Not only will people vote themselves to an earlier grave, but also attempt to insult people who point it out. Once again. Astounding example of the power the Tory PR machine and the right leaning media have over the electorate.
You should read more carefully what I wrote. I wrote 'in this regard' not 'in this thread'
Okay.
On other threads too, you display a kind of fear that some strange PR machine is at work at Tory HQ, instructing people to vote blue. You also display a kind of fear that the Tories will sneak a last minute victory at the 24/25 GE because of this, despite current polls. You don't seem to credit people with independent thought of mind and the ability to weigh things up and decide for themselves, based on many factors.
It is my opinion yes. Why do you think people relentlessly vote against their own interests?
But then you're a dyed in the wool remainer
Yes, I did vote against the brexit clusterfuck. Not sure what this has to do with anything. But I do appreciate not using "remoaner". It makes dialogue much better. "People vote the way they do for a variety of factors. They don't always vote in their own self-interest, sometimes they will vote selflessly. And yes, often people right of centre will vote selflessly. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb
Which poster are you quoting saying “my money works for me”?
The cap will fit him as appropriate.
Not sure I have seen anyone post that point you quoted though?
It was aimed at me, I posted it in response to an accusation that I was unemployed, tories seem to think that they are the only ones who have any money
If you go to the thread you will see I made no such comment to you personally about being 'unemployed'.
Interesting why you should consider it 'an accusation' and talk about things being 'aimed' at you. Your use of weopanry-based language is odd.
If you use a phrase, which you presumably want people to read it's odd, if they later quote it back to you, to use 'aimed'. You said it, own it and I'm happy for you btw!
I'm a Tory so why wouldn't I be? As Mandy once said, I'm intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich. Even lefty Mancunians "Make sure you work extra hard tomorrow whilst I am relaxing in bed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You think? Believe me fella if you stop your left leaning shite you and I will most likely never cross paths " You make no actual points pertinent to the thread. You just make comments about me and make insults. Your behaviour remains creepy. Are you really unable to see that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" This was my only singular post on the subject. So I guess you would struggle to argue they are getting "increasingly paranoid". But yes, this reinforces my point. Not only will people vote themselves to an earlier grave, but also attempt to insult people who point it out. Once again. Astounding example of the power the Tory PR machine and the right leaning media have over the electorate.
You should read more carefully what I wrote. I wrote 'in this regard' not 'in this thread'
Okay.
On other threads too, you display a kind of fear that some strange PR machine is at work at Tory HQ, instructing people to vote blue. You also display a kind of fear that the Tories will sneak a last minute victory at the 24/25 GE because of this, despite current polls. You don't seem to credit people with independent thought of mind and the ability to weigh things up and decide for themselves, based on many factors.
It is my opinion yes. Why do you think people relentlessly vote against their own interests?
But then you're a dyed in the wool remainer
Yes, I did vote against the brexit clusterfuck. Not sure what this has to do with anything. But I do appreciate not using "remoaner". It makes dialogue much better.
People vote the way they do for a variety of factors. They don't always vote in their own self-interest, sometimes they will vote selflessly.
And yes, often people right of centre will vote selflessly. "That's really interesting! Why do you think they feel like they need to vote selflessly in the interests of billionaires and big corporations over the interests of themselves and of other British people? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage."Well said! He has a lot of faux outrage | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Well said! He has a lot of faux outrage "Lovely. If you bothered to read my post, you might realise there's nothing false about my outrage on this topic. But I dout you care. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb "Plenty of screaming socialists living a capitalist lifestyle.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" This was my only singular post on the subject. So I guess you would struggle to argue they are getting "increasingly paranoid". But yes, this reinforces my point. Not only will people vote themselves to an earlier grave, but also attempt to insult people who point it out. Once again. Astounding example of the power the Tory PR machine and the right leaning media have over the electorate.
You should read more carefully what I wrote. I wrote 'in this regard' not 'in this thread'
Okay.
On other threads too, you display a kind of fear that some strange PR machine is at work at Tory HQ, instructing people to vote blue. You also display a kind of fear that the Tories will sneak a last minute victory at the 24/25 GE because of this, despite current polls. You don't seem to credit people with independent thought of mind and the ability to weigh things up and decide for themselves, based on many factors.
It is my opinion yes. Why do you think people relentlessly vote against their own interests?
But then you're a dyed in the wool remainer
Yes, I did vote against the brexit clusterfuck. Not sure what this has to do with anything. But I do appreciate not using "remoaner". It makes dialogue much better.
I'm sure a man like you can handle 'remoaner' if Brexit voters can handle what's thrown at them.
Chiefly by the Remain side.
"Don’t use “ remoaner “ they will accuse you of insulting them.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" This was my only singular post on the subject. So I guess you would struggle to argue they are getting "increasingly paranoid". But yes, this reinforces my point. Not only will people vote themselves to an earlier grave, but also attempt to insult people who point it out. Once again. Astounding example of the power the Tory PR machine and the right leaning media have over the electorate.
You should read more carefully what I wrote. I wrote 'in this regard' not 'in this thread'
Okay.
On other threads too, you display a kind of fear that some strange PR machine is at work at Tory HQ, instructing people to vote blue. You also display a kind of fear that the Tories will sneak a last minute victory at the 24/25 GE because of this, despite current polls. You don't seem to credit people with independent thought of mind and the ability to weigh things up and decide for themselves, based on many factors.
It is my opinion yes. Why do you think people relentlessly vote against their own interests?
But then you're a dyed in the wool remainer
Yes, I did vote against the brexit clusterfuck. Not sure what this has to do with anything. But I do appreciate not using "remoaner". It makes dialogue much better.
I'm sure a man like you can handle 'remoaner' if Brexit voters can handle what's thrown at them.
Chiefly by the Remain side.
Don’t use “ remoaner “ they will accuse you of insulting them.... "How else is the phrase intended? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. " Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not?" So it seems that you would have kept those people in the hospitals, because they couldn't be sent back to their care homes. How many Nurse and doctors would you have allocated to look after them? Remember that these are people with complex care needs and they can't simply be left in bed to look after themselves. What would you have done with all the covid cases arriving at hospitals, that couldn't be treated because all the beds were full? You've already said that they couldn't be sent back home, so what would you have done with them? I'm inferring from your words that you would have been happy to release people back to care homes after they had been tested and proved covid-free. Testing at the time was in limited supply. Which group of people would you have denied tests to, so that you could allocate them to care home returners? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense!" That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. " Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? So it seems that you would have kept those people in the hospitals, because they couldn't be sent back to their care homes. How many Nurse and doctors would you have allocated to look after them? Remember that these are people with complex care needs and they can't simply be left in bed to look after themselves. What would you have done with all the covid cases arriving at hospitals, that couldn't be treated because all the beds were full? You've already said that they couldn't be sent back home, so what would you have done with them? I'm inferring from your words that you would have been happy to release people back to care homes after they had been tested and proved covid-free. Testing at the time was in limited supply. Which group of people would you have denied tests to, so that you could allocate them to care home returners?" It's a balance. Returning potentially infected individuals into environments filled with those most medically vulnerable under the best of circumstances with staff provided with even less PPE than hospitals. We know the consequences of that process. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals." Those arriving from hospitals into care homes were tested, when test were available. Chris Whitty advised that those coming from private homes be tested too, Hancock agreed then pulled it, only testing those arriving from hospital. At the time those at home should have been isolating under the shielding advice. In theory they should be clear if they followed the guidance as being vulnerable | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals. Those arriving from hospitals into care homes were tested, when test were available. Chris Whitty advised that those coming from private homes be tested too, Hancock agreed then pulled it, only testing those arriving from hospital. At the time those at home should have been isolating under the shielding advice. In theory they should be clear if they followed the guidance as being vulnerable " What are you expecting anyone to say? The person that you responded to did not advocate not testing people coming to care homes from private homes. The problem was caused early in the pandemic when there was no testing and no movement from private homes. Are you not having a different discussion? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals. Those arriving from hospitals into care homes were tested, when test were available. Chris Whitty advised that those coming from private homes be tested too, Hancock agreed then pulled it, only testing those arriving from hospital. At the time those at home should have been isolating under the shielding advice. In theory they should be clear if they followed the guidance as being vulnerable What are you expecting anyone to say? The person that you responded to did not advocate not testing people coming to care homes from private homes. The problem was caused early in the pandemic when there was no testing and no movement from private homes. Are you not having a different discussion?" No, not at all, I'm very clear thank you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals. Those arriving from hospitals into care homes were tested, when test were available. Chris Whitty advised that those coming from private homes be tested too, Hancock agreed then pulled it, only testing those arriving from hospital. At the time those at home should have been isolating under the shielding advice. In theory they should be clear if they followed the guidance as being vulnerable What are you expecting anyone to say? The person that you responded to did not advocate not testing people coming to care homes from private homes. The problem was caused early in the pandemic when there was no testing and no movement from private homes. Are you not having a different discussion? No, not at all, I'm very clear thank you." The NAO reported: “Due to government policy at the time, not all patients were tested for covid-19 before discharge, with priority given to patients with symptoms. On 15 April 2020, the policy was changed to test all those being discharged into care homes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals. Those arriving from hospitals into care homes were tested, when test were available. Chris Whitty advised that those coming from private homes be tested too, Hancock agreed then pulled it, only testing those arriving from hospital. At the time those at home should have been isolating under the shielding advice. In theory they should be clear if they followed the guidance as being vulnerable What are you expecting anyone to say? The person that you responded to did not advocate not testing people coming to care homes from private homes. The problem was caused early in the pandemic when there was no testing and no movement from private homes. Are you not having a different discussion? No, not at all, I'm very clear thank you. The NAO reported: “Due to government policy at the time, not all patients were tested for covid-19 before discharge, with priority given to patients with symptoms. On 15 April 2020, the policy was changed to test all those being discharged into care homes." Before the new policy of testing everyone before their admission to care homes was rolled out, around 25?000 people were discharged from NHS hospitals to care between 17 March and 15 April, the NAO said. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
So maybe give up on the laughing & joking for this sort of topic. Otherwise your words ring hollow.
He's definitely taking the piss out of your faux outrage and not the subject, that's clear to see
And now you're laughing. Lovely.
To be clear, I lost a loved 1 in a care home with Covid. At a time when Hancock discharged patients without testing. Now, as it seems we've learned, against expert advice.
So maybe it's best not to laugh & say I'm displaying faux fucking outrage over this.
We haven't learnt anything by this 'leak', we've known for a long time that patients were released against advice.
You're not the only person to have lost a loved one, plenty of us did.
To be clear, I always do and will continue to laugh at your faux outrage.
Me too. The poster has considerable form and we have all lost people to COVID-19. I'm sorry for his loss if he's sorry for mine - that seems fair.
One of my friends is an undertaker and says apart from mild upticks in May 2020 and January/February 2021, he dealt with the same number of over 75s as he's done over the last 30 years. Human beings are not designed to live forever.
Excess mortality is to be expected in a global pandemic and all I can see is people working incredibly hard to save lives and develop a vaccine as fast as possible. The self righteous lefties with wonderful hindsight on here are just out to make political capital. If they have all the answers, why are they not in Govt /public service? They seem content having made significant money in various property /start up schemes, boasting they need not now put in regular hours. 'My money works for me' has been quoted more than once by one poster, who sounds like he'd be more at home in the House of Lords! The epitome of capitalist Tories! But they're posing as socialists living the holier-than-though, left leaning, wokerati dream!
I've seen nothing compelling to suggest we made a worse fist of it than other comparable countries. On the contrary, our vaccines programme has been quicker and overall superb
Which poster are you quoting saying “my money works for me”?
The cap will fit him as appropriate. "The cap fitted our socialist commentator an absolute treat | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"'leaked WhatsApp messages'.. Publicity perhaps for his book? Pretty unlikely, given what they seem to portray. But who knows? The likes of Hancock mix a gobsmacking amount of nastiness, arrogance & incompetence. At this point, I'm not sure what they could do that would shock me. I don't know what you would do with yourself if they didn't shock you, you need them more than they need you
Yep tens of thousands of deaths is a good reason for jollity...
Oh dear, Cheer up, the news has given you what you enjoy
Cheer up? No. Tens of thousands of deaths.
This is not new news to you is it? You have been banging this drum for a while, so why the apparent shock again, does this news have this effect on you every time it is makes the headlines?
And for the record, I'm not down playing and I have huge sympathy for those people who lost their lives and their families.
"He likes to bang the drum again and again and again..... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals. Those arriving from hospitals into care homes were tested, when test were available. Chris Whitty advised that those coming from private homes be tested too, Hancock agreed then pulled it, only testing those arriving from hospital. At the time those at home should have been isolating under the shielding advice. In theory they should be clear if they followed the guidance as being vulnerable What are you expecting anyone to say? The person that you responded to did not advocate not testing people coming to care homes from private homes. The problem was caused early in the pandemic when there was no testing and no movement from private homes. Are you not having a different discussion? No, not at all, I'm very clear thank you. The NAO reported: “Due to government policy at the time, not all patients were tested for covid-19 before discharge, with priority given to patients with symptoms. On 15 April 2020, the policy was changed to test all those being discharged into care homes." Considering you have the data and hindsight, tell me what should have happened. A little more than all entering a care home should have been tested, because on those dates we had drive in test centres only. Numbers of testers, NHS policies to empty beds etc will probably need to play a part too. Also when did he not follow the advice of Whitty and what was that advice? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals. Those arriving from hospitals into care homes were tested, when test were available. Chris Whitty advised that those coming from private homes be tested too, Hancock agreed then pulled it, only testing those arriving from hospital. At the time those at home should have been isolating under the shielding advice. In theory they should be clear if they followed the guidance as being vulnerable What are you expecting anyone to say? The person that you responded to did not advocate not testing people coming to care homes from private homes. The problem was caused early in the pandemic when there was no testing and no movement from private homes. Are you not having a different discussion? No, not at all, I'm very clear thank you. The NAO reported: “Due to government policy at the time, not all patients were tested for covid-19 before discharge, with priority given to patients with symptoms. On 15 April 2020, the policy was changed to test all those being discharged into care homes. Considering you have the data and hindsight, tell me what should have happened. A little more than all entering a care home should have been tested, because on those dates we had drive in test centres only. Numbers of testers, NHS policies to empty beds etc will probably need to play a part too. Also when did he not follow the advice of Whitty and what was that advice? " It’s amazing how everyone is an expert AFTER the event...... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals. Those arriving from hospitals into care homes were tested, when test were available. Chris Whitty advised that those coming from private homes be tested too, Hancock agreed then pulled it, only testing those arriving from hospital. At the time those at home should have been isolating under the shielding advice. In theory they should be clear if they followed the guidance as being vulnerable What are you expecting anyone to say? The person that you responded to did not advocate not testing people coming to care homes from private homes. The problem was caused early in the pandemic when there was no testing and no movement from private homes. Are you not having a different discussion? No, not at all, I'm very clear thank you. The NAO reported: “Due to government policy at the time, not all patients were tested for covid-19 before discharge, with priority given to patients with symptoms. On 15 April 2020, the policy was changed to test all those being discharged into care homes. Considering you have the data and hindsight, tell me what should have happened. A little more than all entering a care home should have been tested, because on those dates we had drive in test centres only. Numbers of testers, NHS policies to empty beds etc will probably need to play a part too. Also when did he not follow the advice of Whitty and what was that advice? It’s amazing how everyone is an expert AFTER the event...... " Thats how humans, evolved. Learned from experience and observing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals. Those arriving from hospitals into care homes were tested, when test were available. Chris Whitty advised that those coming from private homes be tested too, Hancock agreed then pulled it, only testing those arriving from hospital. At the time those at home should have been isolating under the shielding advice. In theory they should be clear if they followed the guidance as being vulnerable What are you expecting anyone to say? The person that you responded to did not advocate not testing people coming to care homes from private homes. The problem was caused early in the pandemic when there was no testing and no movement from private homes. Are you not having a different discussion? No, not at all, I'm very clear thank you. The NAO reported: “Due to government policy at the time, not all patients were tested for covid-19 before discharge, with priority given to patients with symptoms. On 15 April 2020, the policy was changed to test all those being discharged into care homes. Considering you have the data and hindsight, tell me what should have happened. A little more than all entering a care home should have been tested, because on those dates we had drive in test centres only. Numbers of testers, NHS policies to empty beds etc will probably need to play a part too. Also when did he not follow the advice of Whitty and what was that advice? It’s amazing how everyone is an expert AFTER the event...... Thats how humans, evolved. Learned from experience and observing." Very true, however there is ridiculing the mistakes and learning from them. Trying to score political points from mistakes is poor in my opinion. Deliberately making something worse, fair game for ridicule. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals. Those arriving from hospitals into care homes were tested, when test were available. Chris Whitty advised that those coming from private homes be tested too, Hancock agreed then pulled it, only testing those arriving from hospital. At the time those at home should have been isolating under the shielding advice. In theory they should be clear if they followed the guidance as being vulnerable What are you expecting anyone to say? The person that you responded to did not advocate not testing people coming to care homes from private homes. The problem was caused early in the pandemic when there was no testing and no movement from private homes. Are you not having a different discussion? No, not at all, I'm very clear thank you. The NAO reported: “Due to government policy at the time, not all patients were tested for covid-19 before discharge, with priority given to patients with symptoms. On 15 April 2020, the policy was changed to test all those being discharged into care homes. Considering you have the data and hindsight, tell me what should have happened. A little more than all entering a care home should have been tested, because on those dates we had drive in test centres only. Numbers of testers, NHS policies to empty beds etc will probably need to play a part too. Also when did he not follow the advice of Whitty and what was that advice? It’s amazing how everyone is an expert AFTER the event...... Thats how humans, evolved. Learned from experience and observing. Very true, however there is ridiculing the mistakes and learning from them. Trying to score political points from mistakes is poor in my opinion. Deliberately making something worse, fair game for ridicule." From what I've read of the leaks, Hancock was more focused on appearing to hit testing targets than anything else. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals. Those arriving from hospitals into care homes were tested, when test were available. Chris Whitty advised that those coming from private homes be tested too, Hancock agreed then pulled it, only testing those arriving from hospital. At the time those at home should have been isolating under the shielding advice. In theory they should be clear if they followed the guidance as being vulnerable What are you expecting anyone to say? The person that you responded to did not advocate not testing people coming to care homes from private homes. The problem was caused early in the pandemic when there was no testing and no movement from private homes. Are you not having a different discussion? No, not at all, I'm very clear thank you." You may be. I don't understand what point you are making though, so won't say any more unless you wish to clarify. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Patients arriving from the protective bubble at home to a care home considered safe due to isolation. Fair or not? Patients arriving at care homes from a hospital considered a risk due to exposure to others. Fair or not? Try answering those 2 questions without hindsight. Here’s the question you should be asking... People already safe in the protective bubble of a care home become exposed to an exponential increase in risk due to more people being transferred into their care home from high risk hospital environments without first testing them to see if they are infected carriers. Fair or not? It was akin to moving a fox into the hen house to stop it shitting in your garden. No hindsight needed. Bloody obvious common sense! That is not the question I need to ask, you have got it wrong. Patients moving to care homes from hospitals were tested and isolated until they had the results. Patients from their private homes were not tested. Those patients in a home setting should have been in their own bubbles, they should have been shielding as per the advice given. Those moves from hospitals to care homes were not tested early in the pandemic. There were no tests. I don't believe that there were any new transfers to care homes for much of the pandemic. It was only returns and this was almost completely from hospitals. Those arriving from hospitals into care homes were tested, when test were available. Chris Whitty advised that those coming from private homes be tested too, Hancock agreed then pulled it, only testing those arriving from hospital. At the time those at home should have been isolating under the shielding advice. In theory they should be clear if they followed the guidance as being vulnerable What are you expecting anyone to say? The person that you responded to did not advocate not testing people coming to care homes from private homes. The problem was caused early in the pandemic when there was no testing and no movement from private homes. Are you not having a different discussion? No, not at all, I'm very clear thank you. The NAO reported: “Due to government policy at the time, not all patients were tested for covid-19 before discharge, with priority given to patients with symptoms. On 15 April 2020, the policy was changed to test all those being discharged into care homes. Considering you have the data and hindsight, tell me what should have happened. A little more than all entering a care home should have been tested, because on those dates we had drive in test centres only. Numbers of testers, NHS policies to empty beds etc will probably need to play a part too. Also when did he not follow the advice of Whitty and what was that advice? It’s amazing how everyone is an expert AFTER the event...... " SAGE (doctors and scientists) were advising AT THE TIME so no need for hindsight. It was a live issue. Hancock decided to ignore expert advice AT THE TIME. His decision to share confidential Whatsapp messages (when it is conversations between Ministers and Officials it would be classed as at least OFFICIAL SENSITIVE) with a person like Oakenshot shows yet again how poor his judgement is. A classic example of someone promoted beyond their ability. The ONLY reason he held a Ministerial position was his support of Johnson. He wouldn’t have even been allowed to carry Thatcher or Major’s umbrella! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The back & forths are too long now, so I'll sum up my position. The thing that makes me angriest is that Hancock apparently ignored Whitty's advice to test all people before sending them into care homes. And we saw how that tuned out. Tens of thousands died. Worse, the leaked messages seem to show Hancock was more interested in hitting an arbritary target elsewhere & get headlines. So he's complicit in tens of thousands of deaths while he was chasing headlines. Oh and remember Hancock also seemed to be engaging in corruption to get a mate a huge Covid contract. Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones. I despise this man."
Although there will be some who still accuse you of “political point scoring” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones." I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones. I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me." Hancock should be fucking condemned for breaking the rules he was telling all of us to follow while he was the bloody health secretary. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hancock apparently released a bunch of - possibly all - of his whatsapp messages to Oakeshott when she was helping him wrie his self-serving, shitty Pandemic Diaries. Oakeshott just leaked them to the Telegraph. They seem to show Hancock ignored the chief medical officer's advice to test all residents entering care homes for Covid. So Hancock seems to be complicit in tens of thousands of care home deaths. (Oakeshott's a self-serving shit too. But at least she hasn't - as far as I know - been involved in tens of thousands of deaths.) I despise Hancock but testing would not have stopped those deaths. The vast majority of people in care homes are in their final days/weeks/months of their lives. They are generally the most susceptible to illness as they often have multiple Co-morbidities. Any death is sad but testing would not have stopped those deaths as they would more than likely have died anyway. I think some people have forgotten that people in their 80s/90s are at the very end of their lives and very few leave a care home to go home…. Blunt I know but it is a fact of life. The most cruel thing they did was not allowing relatives/friends in to visit these people in their final days. That was absolutely wicked!!" That must be sicks and saddest comment i have ever read on here what a disgusting person you are , think you need to have a good long hard look at yourself. Would you think the same if that was a member of your own family | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hancock apparently released a bunch of - possibly all - of his whatsapp messages to Oakeshott when she was helping him wrie his self-serving, shitty Pandemic Diaries. Oakeshott just leaked them to the Telegraph. They seem to show Hancock ignored the chief medical officer's advice to test all residents entering care homes for Covid. So Hancock seems to be complicit in tens of thousands of care home deaths. (Oakeshott's a self-serving shit too. But at least she hasn't - as far as I know - been involved in tens of thousands of deaths.) I despise Hancock but testing would not have stopped those deaths. The vast majority of people in care homes are in their final days/weeks/months of their lives. They are generally the most susceptible to illness as they often have multiple Co-morbidities. Any death is sad but testing would not have stopped those deaths as they would more than likely have died anyway. I think some people have forgotten that people in their 80s/90s are at the very end of their lives and very few leave a care home to go home…. Blunt I know but it is a fact of life. The most cruel thing they did was not allowing relatives/friends in to visit these people in their final days. That was absolutely wicked!! That must be sicks and saddest comment i have ever read on here what a disgusting person you are , think you need to have a good long hard look at yourself. Would you think the same if that was a member of your own family " The left have no shame. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones. I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me." Do you actually mean this? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hancock will have his days in Hell soon. " What a dramatic comment. I've lost count of the number of casual sex swinging profiles prepared to condemn their fellow human beings to screaming agony for eternity with no hint of irony or hypocrisy. Judge not, lest ye be judged, give your head a wobble and cast the first stone only if you're without sin. And other such phrases  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones. I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me." Talk about taking things out of context. Not very pedantic of you! There were rules around household bubbles and distance and all sorts at that time. This also happened after Hancock had condemned the scientist (whose name I can’t remember) for meeting up with his girlfriend (who lived in a different house/place). Context is everything. You know that! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones. I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me. Hancock should be fucking condemned for breaking the rules he was telling all of us to follow while he was the bloody health secretary. " thats more on you for following what they were saying, do u always do what m.ps tell you to do, i certainly dont and never will, for someone who comes across as knowing about politics surley u must know wat most of them say is a load of bollox | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones. I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me. Hancock should be fucking condemned for breaking the rules he was telling all of us to follow while he was the bloody health secretary. thats more on you for following what they were saying, do u always do what m.ps tell you to do, i certainly dont and never will, for someone who comes across as knowing about politics surley u must know wat most of them say is a load of bollox" Life, death,the safety of others. Why do you go to a doctor for medical advice if most of what they say is "a load of bollox". I guess "common sense" is all that's really needed during a global pandemic... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones. I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me. Hancock should be fucking condemned for breaking the rules he was telling all of us to follow while he was the bloody health secretary. thats more on you for following what they were saying, do u always do what m.ps tell you to do, i certainly dont and never will, for someone who comes across as knowing about politics surley u must know wat most of them say is a load of bollox Life, death,the safety of others. Why do you go to a doctor for medical advice if most of what they say is "a load of bollox". I guess "common sense" is all that's really needed during a global pandemic..." what are u talking about easy? I mentioned nothing about drs, i dont listen to politicians, im surprised most people belive any thing they say,amount on here that call the torys corrupt liars yet they all listend to them without question for two years, like i said thats on them for believing what they were saying | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones. I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me. Hancock should be fucking condemned for breaking the rules he was telling all of us to follow while he was the bloody health secretary. thats more on you for following what they were saying, do u always do what m.ps tell you to do, i certainly dont and never will, for someone who comes across as knowing about politics surley u must know wat most of them say is a load of bollox Life, death,the safety of others. Why do you go to a doctor for medical advice if most of what they say is "a load of bollox". I guess "common sense" is all that's really needed during a global pandemic...what are u talking about easy? I mentioned nothing about drs, i dont listen to politicians, im surprised most people belive any thing they say,amount on here that call the torys corrupt liars yet they all listend to them without question for two years, like i said thats on them for believing what they were saying" Except for a brief moment at the start of the pandemic it felt like we were on a “war footing” all in it together and our Government might actually have all our best interests at heart. Then it started to become apparent that the rules they were insisting we followed did not apply to them and that they had realised there was an unprecedented opportunity to cash in and get rich. Early on I would say 95% of people followed the rules. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones. I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me. Hancock should be fucking condemned for breaking the rules he was telling all of us to follow while he was the bloody health secretary. thats more on you for following what they were saying, do u always do what m.ps tell you to do, i certainly dont and never will, for someone who comes across as knowing about politics surley u must know wat most of them say is a load of bollox Life, death,the safety of others. Why do you go to a doctor for medical advice if most of what they say is "a load of bollox". I guess "common sense" is all that's really needed during a global pandemic...what are u talking about easy? I mentioned nothing about drs, i dont listen to politicians, im surprised most people belive any thing they say,amount on here that call the torys corrupt liars yet they all listend to them without question for two years, like i said thats on them for believing what they were saying" We had no direct access to Government medical data. What we had was the medical information as interpreted by "corrupt liars" and given as advice or law. How did you know what was and was not safe for yourself and for others? In that the medical advice would appear to have been watered down, the fact that our leaders were not even bothered with that due to how special they felt is what is telling. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones." "I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me." "Talk about taking things out of context. Not very pedantic of you! There were rules around household bubbles and distance and all sorts at that time. This also happened after Hancock had condemned the scientist (whose name I can’t remember) for meeting up with his girlfriend (who lived in a different house/place). Context is everything. You know that! " You seem to have forgotten the context that the woman Hancock had an affair with was one of his staff. They were allowed to be together, both in and out of the office. No covid rules were broken. If you want to complain that he shouldn't be having sexual contact with an employee, I will agree. If you want to complain that he is morally lax, I will agree. But if you're complaining that he had consensual sex, with a woman that he was allowed to be with, and that this is disgusting because other people were suffering at the time, then I'm going to disagree with you on that point. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Early on I would say 95% of people followed the rules. " That depends very much on where you were. I went to Cardiff during the first lockdown, and it was practically deserted. Your 95% figure certainly applied there. But back in my own town, 15 miles north, life carried on as though it were a long bank holiday. Traffic was about half of normal levels, people were visiting each other, and the main street was full of people chatting. In my own town I'd guess that about half of the people followed the rules. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm wondering if he was smart enough to have insisted on an NDA being signed by the journalist before handing over his whatsapp messages. If he did then he should sue her. If not then he truely is incompetent and I'd question his judgment." Apparently she acknowledged that there was an NDA in place. Her reputation as a "journalist" such as it was is done. Who's going to talk to her again as a journalist other than for friendly right wing puff pieces? Politics beckons. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones. I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me. Talk about taking things out of context. Not very pedantic of you! There were rules around household bubbles and distance and all sorts at that time. This also happened after Hancock had condemned the scientist (whose name I can’t remember) for meeting up with his girlfriend (who lived in a different house/place). Context is everything. You know that! You seem to have forgotten the context that the woman Hancock had an affair with was one of his staff. They were allowed to be together, both in and out of the office. No covid rules were broken. If you want to complain that he shouldn't be having sexual contact with an employee, I will agree. If you want to complain that he is morally lax, I will agree. But if you're complaining that he had consensual sex, with a woman that he was allowed to be with, and that this is disgusting because other people were suffering at the time, then I'm going to disagree with you on that point." If you want to take the pedantic route of what the rules state rather than there intent, then you are correct. The reality is that "contact" with colleagues was never intended to cover having sex and when you are a leader you do so in large part by example. Especially at a time of crisis. So, pretending that this does not send the wrong message is laughable. Just as much as claiming that it was necessary to drive to Barnard Castle for a daytrip to test your eyes or have a party that was not a party because you were under so much stress and needed it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones. I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me. Talk about taking things out of context. Not very pedantic of you! There were rules around household bubbles and distance and all sorts at that time. This also happened after Hancock had condemned the scientist (whose name I can’t remember) for meeting up with his girlfriend (who lived in a different house/place). Context is everything. You know that! You seem to have forgotten the context that the woman Hancock had an affair with was one of his staff. They were allowed to be together, both in and out of the office. No covid rules were broken. If you want to complain that he shouldn't be having sexual contact with an employee, I will agree. If you want to complain that he is morally lax, I will agree. But if you're complaining that he had consensual sex, with a woman that he was allowed to be with, and that this is disgusting because other people were suffering at the time, then I'm going to disagree with you on that point." CBA to go back digging but the “bubble rules” were broken despite working together. Couldn’t care less if the little slimeball was shagging anyone, but the hypocrisy was astounding. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones." "I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me." "Talk about taking things out of context. Not very pedantic of you! There were rules around household bubbles and distance and all sorts at that time. This also happened after Hancock had condemned the scientist (whose name I can’t remember) for meeting up with his girlfriend (who lived in a different house/place). Context is everything. You know that!" "You seem to have forgotten the context that the woman Hancock had an affair with was one of his staff. They were allowed to be together, both in and out of the office. No covid rules were broken. If you want to complain that he shouldn't be having sexual contact with an employee, I will agree. If you want to complain that he is morally lax, I will agree. But if you're complaining that he had consensual sex, with a woman that he was allowed to be with, and that this is disgusting because other people were suffering at the time, then I'm going to disagree with you on that point." "If you want to take the pedantic route of what the rules state rather than there intent, then you are correct. The reality is that "contact" with colleagues was never intended to cover having sex and when you are a leader you do so in large part by example. Especially at a time of crisis. So, pretending that this does not send the wrong message is laughable." I haven't claimed that it "does not send the wrong message". I said that criticising Hancock for having sex while other people suffered is a ridiculous position to take. There are plenty of reasons to criticise Hancock, but that isn't a sensible one. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oh and Hancock was busy shagging his mistress, who was paid for by us, while millions of us couldn't even see our dying loved ones. I really don't get this attitude. Are you really saying that Hancock should have refrained from having sex, just to set a good example in those difficult times? The idea that someone should be vilified just because they had a good time while others suffered sounds suspiciously like jealousy to me. Talk about taking things out of context. Not very pedantic of you! There were rules around household bubbles and distance and all sorts at that time. This also happened after Hancock had condemned the scientist (whose name I can’t remember) for meeting up with his girlfriend (who lived in a different house/place). Context is everything. You know that! You seem to have forgotten the context that the woman Hancock had an affair with was one of his staff. They were allowed to be together, both in and out of the office. No covid rules were broken. If you want to complain that he shouldn't be having sexual contact with an employee, I will agree. If you want to complain that he is morally lax, I will agree. But if you're complaining that he had consensual sex, with a woman that he was allowed to be with, and that this is disgusting because other people were suffering at the time, then I'm going to disagree with you on that point. If you want to take the pedantic route of what the rules state rather than there intent, then you are correct. The reality is that "contact" with colleagues was never intended to cover having sex and when you are a leader you do so in large part by example. Especially at a time of crisis. So, pretending that this does not send the wrong message is laughable. Just as much as claiming that it was necessary to drive to Barnard Castle for a daytrip to test your eyes or have a party that was not a party because you were under so much stress and needed it." The pedantic route of being correct?
Really? Come on. If you accept he's correct then there really is no need to try belittle him being correct. That's low, even for you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
