Jump to content

Coronavirus


robf

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Iron Curtain said:

68% believe he did break the guidance.

As I said earlier, it’s all fun and games us having a good discussion on here. The point is, Boris and Cummings have messed up here big time and that poll shows the impact of their actions.

Either he broke guidance or that guidance was misunderstood by the majority of the people polled... a failure either way.

Boris has further damaged himself and Shows weakness by not getting rid. He looks like a puppet now, people don’t like puppets I would guess.

 

Just seen this also - https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2020/05/23/56b74/2

 

Worth noting that they were both conducted on Saturday, I believe that number will come in a lot after today.

 

And 52% thought he should resign - they obviously didn't know what they were voting for and we should have a second referendum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


11 minutes ago, Regal Beagle said:

Not at all.

 

I said on Saturday evening that the drive to the castle was possible. I also said that the second sighting days later sounded like rubbish. It wasn't predicated on anything, I even clarified by saying that we have no allegation of wrongdoing, we don't know why he went to the castle or what for. Clearly if he had gone for a picnic then that would have been breach. As it stands, driving is a bit of a grey area, not entirely believable but not illegal also.

 

It turns out he has offered an explanation which may or may not be legitimate. If we had competant journalists at number 10 today they may have pushed him on that, as it stands, they made it very easy for him today.

 

 

As discussed previously, as the countries most senior unelected bureaucrat, Cummings is held against higher levels of scrutiny. And so he should be.

Driving is a “bit of a grey area” doesn’t cut the mustard.

Again... even YOU don’t believe him.

Even you think there is a chance he was 250 miles from home and thought, I will take the family to the castle.

And if that’s true, he should go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

Respectfully disagree geo. They cant just demand your documents like they're the SS. 

That's not to say they dont hold a strong hand but there is a reason our country is so free, and a big part of that is the clearly defined limits on state power, to avoid abuses. They still happen of course but no system is perfect. 

Legally they can't but that doesn't stop them actually doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


With enough time to write a Harry potter novel....... I was testing my eyesight..... ? I was checking if I was able to drive distance...... ? Is the best they can do.

It sounds to me as though someone has scanned for loopholes and concocted a story that might be acceptable to the great unwashed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes officer I have consumed alcohol, I was just driving to the next pub to check my ability to drive.

I'm driving on the pavement just in case there are drunk drivers on the road officer.

I was trying to read the number plate of the parked car to check my eyesight when it jumped out in front of me constable.

I helped make the rule that people shouldn't leave home if they have symptoms, but it doesn't apply to me officer, especially with upcoming birthdays

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATED Dominic Cummings specifically stated now in the press briefing that he had been eager to “get back to work to get vaccine deals through, move regulations aside” and that is why he drove to Barnard Castle to test his eyesight.

Now it may be entirely a coincidence that the place to which he chose to drive for his eyesight test happened to be the site of the major factory of GlaxoSmithKline. It may be an entire coincidence that two days later, on the very day Cummings actually started work back in Downing Street he has stated was “to get vaccine deals through”, GlaxoSmithKline announced an agreement to develop the vaccine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Iron Curtain said:

The answer given to the question below is yes... it was a clause added at the request of some child focused charities to safeguard children at risk of abuse or neglect.

Not incase both parents potentially became ill.

 

5D2FEEE4-64F4-489E-B191-3F15D5A64151.jpeg

Please IC,not Alistair Campbell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


12 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

Haha ok Joe.

I'm not the one that's believed a load of sketchy rubbish in the media and is now clinging on to the last reminents I can do without admitting I got it wrong.

 

Let's start with Duhram police offering two completely contradictory statements, they initially said they'd given advice about the guidelines and social distancing. Today they say that they did not offer any advice on Covid 19, only security measures.

 

How do we feel about the Police force telling lies?

The police are a separate issue RB. the focus and scrutiny must remain on one man only - no red herrings please.

If DC weathers this ugly episode I cannot help but think it relegates Boris et al to a 'Rump Parliament'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

His wife being able to drive is not really relevant. It's like saying his PA in london can look after his kid. It adds no weight to whether or not his claim is true or false.

I missed this bit yesterday... absolute rubbish.

It’s added to the context that he wants the public to believe that him testing his ability to drive By driving to a beauty spot on his wife’s birthday was a better option that his wife driving.... or her taking over if he started to feel like he couldn’t continue... or sharing the driving when he’s topped to get petrol.

He needs the public to believe he had no other option, for the safety of his child. He did.

 

Edited by Iron Curtain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Howjy04 said:

Please IC,not Alistair Campbell.

Haha... not everyone’s cup of tea for sure!

There were many mentioning it, his was just the one that came up first.

I personally don’t think it’s that relevant other than it shows how confusing the message the government gave has proven to have been.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Iron Curtain said:

Haha... not everyone’s cup of tea for sure!

There were many mentioning it, his was just the one that came up first.

I personally don’t think it’s that relevant other than it shows how confusing the message the government gave has proven to have been.

 

It’s a certain fact he wouldn’t thank you for a cup of tea.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


10 hours ago, Iron Curtain said:

The answer given to the question below is yes... it was a clause added at the request of some child focused charities to safeguard children at risk of abuse or neglect.

Not incase both parents potentially became ill.

 

5D2FEEE4-64F4-489E-B191-3F15D5A64151.jpeg

Domestic abuse = exceptional circumstance

 

Parents who become ill and are unable to look after a child = exceptional circumstance

 

Threats of violence to your address which is known to many in the public = exceptional circumstance. Probably.

 

 

"Clearly if you have adults who are unable to look after a small child, that is an exceptional circumstance"

 

Interesting that we've now accepted that this clause exists, but only when we think we have a reason for it not applying to Cummings.

 

What do you think @TheSage - would a woman leaving her home in the face of a violent partner be breaching the lockdown? I have to assume given your "YOU MUST STAY IN YOUR HOUSE IT'S VERY CLEAR" line is that she should be prosecuted?

Edited by Regal Beagle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Iron Curtain said:

I missed this bit yesterday... absolute rubbish.

It’s added to the context that he wants the public to believe that him testing his ability to drive By driving to a beauty spot on his wife’s birthday was a better option that his wife driving.... or her taking over if he started to feel like he couldn’t continue... or sharing the driving when he’s topped to get petrol.

He needs the public to believe he had no other option, for the safety of his child. He did.

 

 

Nah you are talking rubbish actually. I find it suffocating to think that there are people who want to actually prosecute others for apparently wrongly deciding who should drive a car.

 

She didn't drive to London. She didn't drive back from London. We don't know why Cummings does the driving, but we know that he does. Any more conclusions above that is a guess, pure and simple.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 60 mile round trip with your family to test your eye sight is not the same thing as being a victim of domestic abuse.

A 60 mile round trip with your family to test your eye sight is not an exceptional circumstance.

A 60 mile round trip with your family to test your eye sight has nothing to do with being able to look after your child.

Someone who always argues in bad faith though, doesnt necessarily even believe or care about what he argues. Thats not the point. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Reporting Posts and Ignoring Users

    Admin don't read everything. Don't assume we'll spot rule breaking. Please report posts and we'll act on ASAP. If you're logged in use the orange report post button. If you're not logged in, please use the contact form

    If you can't get on with another user you can "ignore" them. Follow the link, type in their username and save - Click here

    Check with admin if you wish to sell/auction any items. We're happy to support good causes but check first - Contact us here

  • Friends of OVF




×
×
  • Create New...