Forum menu
Yet plenty of eeeejits in Essex think she's suitable to represent them.
Not sure whom it speaks more lowly of.
TBH, he will probably get away with it, and all the OAP's will vote Conservatives again next election. We've been so mean to Boris. We are screwed with some of the old folk.
Because WE are better than them.
It's a close run thing....
Didn’t see this (yet) but what a brilliant intro!
Got to see if I can find that on yt.👍
Has to be cleared. He was the headpiece our country needed in difficult times, and, I have a feeling we will be needing him at the reins again soon.
We all acknowledge the weapons of mass distraction that politicians use, but will Sunak face down the monsters from the east like Boris can?
You appear to have spelt ringpiece wrong
Quick summary of yesterday.
I'm sure it'll be markedly different to the Daily Mail summary...
Good article, but no one seems to be asking the obvious question:
If Johnson & Co partied whilst the rest of us were locked down for our own safety, why weren't they scared of the virus?
I believe his defence yesterday was because they were doing extensive covid testing in#10 so they didn't need to social distance as much.
Is that what you were insinuating?
If Johnson & Co partied whilst the rest of us were locked down for our own safety, why weren’t they scared of the virus?
Because the availability of any required medical treatment and facilities would be guaranteed for "important" people, they wouldn't have to risk the contention ratios enforced on the proles through the NHS which has been damaged by austerity and asset stripped for profit.
Incredible the police they have on the door and gate, took no notice of people arriving in party frocks and carrying bottles of wine along with home made cake selections.
A student in Leeds was fined £10,000 for organising a snowball fight. A beggar was fined £434 for having his cap out at King's Cross station. A homeless man was arrested at Liverpool Street station for being outside without a reasonable excuse'. Staff at a London chip shop were told to attend a 'business meeting' during the second lockdown, when work meetings were allowed. They all received a fine because the police decided the meeting could have been held online. A Devon landlord held a Christmas gathering for staff on the same day as the Downing Street Christmas bash
- and received a £4,000 fine.
Spectator, 2022
This was quoted on Novara Live last night.
Has to be cleared. He was the headpiece our country needed in difficult times, and, I have a feeling we will be needing him at the reins again soon.
We all acknowledge the weapons of mass distraction that politicians use, but will Sunak face down the monsters from the east like Boris can?
Please expand on this.
What on earth did he do as our "headpiece" that would justify his return?
If that includes "he got brexit done" and "vaccine roll out", please put your copy of the Daily Mail down and seek medical attention.
For some reason I woke up with this earworm this morning
Good article, but no one seems to be asking the obvious question:
If Johnson & Co partied whilst the rest of us were locked down for our own safety, why weren’t they scared of the virus?
Makes you think.....🤔
Welcome (back?) to the forum
If Johnson & Co partied whilst the rest of us were locked down for our own safety, why weren’t they scared of the virus?
Complacency and group think. IIRC they did have outbreaks
I was working as a nurse with covid around tho I was really lucky in that there were no outbreaks on the wards I was on. However clearly the greatest risk to me was at work and the risk I posed to others outside of work was higher than the average. This made it hard for me psychologically to take the precautions to prevent me getting infected outside of work. This was common amongst my colleagues. However I recognised I was a risk to others and took precautions for their sake and also tried to stay within the guidance even when it seemed ridiculous to me - for the sake of the greater good.
I am so angry about this because due to 1) not want to risk infecting others and 2) trying to do the right thing even when it seemed daft I missed out on a lot.
1) I could not go to the funeral of my god(less) child ( like a godchild but with no religion involved)
2) I did not see my parents for over a year even when my mother had a stroke
3)Mrs TJ had to go to the testing where her cancer was confirmed on her own. I could not support her
4) at Mrs TJs funeral we took far more vehicles that she would have wanted - no car sharing and had to maintain distancing and NO HUGS!
5) after Mrs TJ died I only visited friends outside in their gardens and again NO HUGs and as a result spent a lot of time alone in my misery
Given all that I still did not have the issues that many folk faced.
This lying oaf was just completely ignoring the rules, not taking the basic precautions and then lying about it over and over again. I have no words to describe how much I despise him and how angry this makes me
I believe his defence yesterday was because they were doing extensive covid testing in#10 so they didn’t need to social distance as much.
Is that what you were insinuating?
Nope, I was insinuating that anyone who was in good health and under the age of 60 (ish) was at a vanishingly small risk from Covid. Thats not an insinuation though - it is a scientific fact backed up by the data.
The government knew this but they still scared the population into compliance with their increasingly daft and hugely damaging rules regardless.
I have no words to describe how much I despise him
...and those that enable him.
Well said TJ
it is a scientific fact backed up by the data
Data that was gathered after the fact. At the time it was not well established and the issue fogged by bullshitters who felt they understood scientific/research processes. You know, liars and charlatans.
I was insinuating that anyone who was in good health and under the age of 60 (ish) was at a vanishingly small risk from Covid.
Looking after others. Protecting them. That was what the guidance was for. Not self protection. Anyway, the point of this enquiry is that the PM knew the guidance, knew it was broken, lied to the house claiming that it was not. Whether the PM should have set that guidance and told us all about it is another matter… it is simply insulting for him to maintain that he didn’t know about them and didn’t “believe” that he and his teams were not following them. He knows what happened and lied to parliament in the hope that they and we would never get to know the truth, at least not while he was PM.
Also roger melrose those under 60 could still transport the virus around and infect those at higher risk by increasing the pool of virus around the population. You clearly have no understanding of how an infective epidemic works. Symptom less infection and vectors for the virus to travel around. Johnson and co where not at high risk themselves but their actions increased the risk to others
Of course this is something the right wing do not understand. Acting for the interests of others
Looking after others. Protecting them. That was what the guidance was for. Not self protection.
So what you are saying is that in a misguided zero-evidence attempt to protect an elderly person from Covid (which we/they will all catch at some point anyway) we must throw the lives and mental health of younger people under the bus?
Decisions have consequences.
Also roger melrose those under 60 could still transport the virus around and infect those at higher risk by increasing the pool of virus around the population. You clearly have no understanding of how an infective epidemic works.
The virus is endemic. This means that almost everyone is exposed to it repeatedly. With each exposure our immune system strengthens. What transmission are you trying to prevent exactly?
that is not what is being said at all. Try reading.
What is being said is that by taking precautions to reduce the amount of infected people in the population and reducing the vectors for virus transmission this provides a protective effect for all vulnerable people - and this is well known, well proven and factual.
Try reading, learning and hopefully you will gain some understanding
Are you really attempting to claim the science of epidemiology has no evidence base? This is very basic stuff
roger melrose
Free MemberSo what you are saying is that in a misguided zero-evidence attempt to protect an elderly person from Covid (which we/they will all catch at some point anyway) we must throw the lives and mental health of younger people under the bus?
Decisions have consequences
How about taking this over to the covid thread so we can ignore it there instead please?
Will someone get this idiot out of here before I lose my temper?
what is your professional qualification to say the entire science of epidemiology is wrong?
So what you are saying is that in a misguided zero-evidence attempt to protect an elderly person from Covid (which we/they will all catch at some point anyway) we must throw the lives and mental health of younger people under the bus?
Except it did work didn't it. The elderly were largely kept clear of the virus and didn't catch it.
And where it didn't work where the rules were insufficiency strict it had catastrophic consequences on the care homes affected.
Roger's trying to throw a carboard bus containing a dead cat into this thread - can we ignore that and get back to discussing the PMs apparent disregard for rules that he was instrumental in setting, communicating and reinforcing.
roger melrose
Free Member
TJ with all due respect, you do not have a clue what you are talking about. If you were in any way correct, why did over 40 years of thorough and scientifically agreed upon pandemic planning, up to the point we abandoned it in panic in early 2020, say the opposite.If you are correct, then how do you explain this:
Iceland v’s Faroe Islands
The Brownstone Institute and it's links to The Barrington Declaration etc etc etc.
It's all been done on the covid thread...
https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/95601
Anyway, Johnson, what a dick head.
what is your professional qualification to say the entire science of epidemiology is wrong?
I'm someone who can argue with facts and reasoning, using the evidence of experts, instead of throwing around insults.
What's yours?
The Brownstone Institute and it’s links to The Barrington Declaration etc etc etc.
So you disagree that the Faroe Islands did far better than Iceland, despite no lockdown then?
I’m someone who can argue with facts and reasoning, using the evidence of experts, instead of throwing around insults.
What’s yours?
Seriously, take it over to the covid thread if you must do this conversation we've all heard a hundred times.
Argue about it on the Coronavirus thread then, please.
This is a CV thread, it's about the CV lockdown rules that Boris broke. Rules that I explained were ridiculous and very damaging.
No it isn't. It's about the fly-tipped sofa lying to parliament.
Ok, I'll pop back later to talk about whether BJ lied to parliament and the ramifications there of.
Good luck all.😉
(re)joined March 21st 2023
I'm no good at the tracking stuff but who's this back again?
Back to the point - whether the pandemic response was flawed or not, whether the guidance was correct or not, it was the guidance and he can not have been ignorant of it (and ignorance is not a defence)
The point is he repeatedly told parliament, months after the events, that all the rules and guidance had been followed. His defence, like all these charlatans, is that either it was someone else's advice or 'Ah, but those weren't my exact words, what I meant was' Weaselling out of what any reasonable thinking person knows to be the truth.
I can't for the life of me see what other conclusion the SC can reach. When is their judgement / report / whatever? Only contentious issue is what sanction is felt appropriate.
I once again post this
Boris really has adopted a disgracefully cavalier attitude to his classical studies. [He] sometimes seems affronted when criticised for what amounts to a gross failure of responsibility (and surprised at the same time that he was not appointed Captain of the school for the next half).
I think he honestly believes that it is churlish of us not to regard him as an exception, one who should be free of the network of obligation that binds everyone else.
The other irrelevant point
FTFY. No need to thank me.
The other important point is that they were clearly not at all scared about catching Covid, such that they didn’t think it important to follow the rules themselves.
The point that has been answered several times, but like boris you want to ignore anything that is inconvenient for the narrative you wish to spin.
like boris you want to ignore anything that is inconvenient for the narrative you wish to spin.
What narrative is that? The narrative of being able to ask questions rather than blindly follow what we are told by our lying politicians and media?
Johnson probably thought he was immune to it a second time around, on account of getting infected in April 2020 with the subsequent time he spent in critical care in a very bad way. That was the belief for lots of people back then, that you became immune after catching it. He wasn't very well at all, and almost paid the price, but as mentioned, having the support near to hand from colleagues and facilities saved him then.
He's thinking it will do the same now for his political career.
^ This helmet joined two days ago specifically to trot out this tripe and derail threads.
You all know better than to respond, particularly you TJ you big soft git.
Ok, youve now posted on the CV thread but are continuing to post here too.
Time to flag you up as spamming.
Just looking at the front pages after yesterday, clearly the mail headline writers have their noses packed with some Colombian marching powder again. Totally divorced from reality.
You all know better than to respond
Can't upset the far left echo chamber by allowing opposing point of view eh?
People might reply if you posted on the correct thread. Piss off over to the covid thread
Ok, youve not posted on the CV thread
Errr I have actually.
Yeah us far lefties are all part of the government machine trying to silence the truth which you are so helpfully trying to enlighten us with. Either that or you're shouting into the void on the wrong thread.
Take it to the COVID thread, you might find a more receptive audience.
I reckon a 5 day suspension and a flounce out of politics before the next GE, focusing all his efforts on getting a seat in the HOL
Failing that he'll end up with the Boris Johnson Side Boob Hour on GBNews, sandwiched between Neil Oliver's Conspiracy Rundown and Lee Andersons Rants About MPs with Second Jobs...
Is there a time scale for the committee to come to its conclusion, anyone know?
You clearly haven’t seen the Twitter files then where it has been proven that dissenting voices (including Nobel wining scientists) on the Covid narrative have been censored or banned from most of the social media platforms and other media. Under instructions from governments no less.
Well I'm pleased that finally somebody is prepared to take on you members of the liberal elite on this forum and finally reveal the truth about how we've all been enslaved under the cover of a fake pandemic and had mind-control drugs administered under cover of a vaccine
Welcome Andrew and please keep speaking your truth
If they mock you, then to quote Jack Nickleson... erm.... or is it Jack Niclous... the actor not the golfer, in that film he did with Tom Cruise "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"
I seem to remember a wodge of evidence that suggested he wasn't at death's door at all, it was a ploy. The nurse who looked after him resigned soon afterwards. Plus all the CV victims' hands he was meant to have shaken at KGH produced silence from the medical staff. He's an inveterate insidious inventor.
The narrative of being able to ask questions rather than blindly follow what we are told by our lying politicians and media?
Lyndsey Hoyle has said that Bridgen “has a right to express his views whether others agree with them or not” and a spokesperson for the speaker has said Sir Lindsay had “no plans” to stop him. so y'know, no one is stopping him saying what he wants to. Whether people want to stay and listen to it, is another thing altogether
Ah nickc - never let the truth ( which is what you posted) get in the way of a good conspiracy theory ( that our new troll posted)
🙂
roger, with absolutely no respect you are either:
- a troll
or
- clueless
As for 'the Twitter files', what drivel is this?
Just a flurry of conspiracy/antivax talking points, he'll flame out in due course.
Also... why do you always do your tie up so tight? It looks really uncomfortable, like your heads about to pop.
Bridgen needs it to maintain the lack of blood supply to the brain.
Guys - we have got the troll to go to the covid thread.. Lets ignore him on here
So back to our lying oaf of an exPM
I mislead parliament in good faith
An oxymoron from a moron?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion ,even if it is glaringly wrong .
Interesting that the Telegraph are running with the implied kangaroo court line - he'll probably not accept the findings, in true Trump style.
I reckon a 5 day suspension and a flounce out of politics before the next GE, focusing all his efforts on getting a seat in the HOL
Problem with HOL is you need to turn up to get the cash (even if just to sign the register before heading back out) whereas as an mp he gets it even if he is on a speaking tour in the US.
So think he would prefer to keep the mp job going.
he’ll probably not accept the findings, in true Trump style.
Hopefully this will influence the committee when it comes to deciding any length of suspension. Is it possible that Sunak will be so keen to get rid of him after his performance yesterday that a recall and by-election is a price worth paying?
I fully expect him to go Full Trump if he is found guilty and suspended, even more so if it forces a by-election. His supporters in the media are just testing the waters to see if they can follow him there or not.
Is there a time scale for the committee to come to its conclusion, anyone know?
Can't find any specific timetable anywhere, be good to know so I can ignore all the media crap around right now and come back for the finale.
An oxymoron from a moron?
It isnt an oxymoron since its based on saying something you believed was true at the time. Hence whilst you misled the other person you in turn had been misled.
Of course in this particular case its rubbish.
Also mildly interesting that the best rated comments (and in fact most of them) on that hilarious piece of fiction by Mrs Gove on DM website are all anti Boris.
Its not often I laugh with a DM comment as opposed to at them but there were actually a couple surrounding her 'agile as a cat' title that made me chuckle.
'agile as a cat'
No, there isn't a timetable for the committee to publish their report.
My understanding is the committee hope to publish '...by the summer' which would suggest before the summer recess.
Interesting that the Telegraph are running with the implied kangaroo court line – he’ll probably not accept the findings, in true Trump style.
Its obvious from what he said himself yesterday, in his refusal to actually commit to respecting the verdict of the committee, that thats where we're heading with this.
He'll definitely go full Trump.
The problem for Boris is that Trump still has a huge supporter base within his party who believe he will win the next election for them. Boris has got Mad Nad, the Haunted Pencil and...erm... nope... thats pretty much it
Johnson probably thought he was immune to it a second time around
If not immune that the effects and symptoms would not be as severe
The other important point is that they were clearly not at all scared about catching Covid, such that they didn’t think it important to follow the rules themselves.
I don't know who "they" are ... but I don't think "the boss" was and everyone else had to follow suit (whatever they personally believed)
I once again post this
Boris really has adopted a disgracefully cavalier attitude to his classical studies. [He] sometimes seems affronted when criticised for what amounts to a gross failure of responsibility (and surprised at the same time that he was not appointed Captain of the school for the next half).
I think he honestly believes that it is churlish of us not to regard him as an exception, one who should be free of the network of obligation that binds everyone else.
It seems to me in his head the rules didn't apply to him or anyone working for him.. any more than any other rules apply to him but I don't think that is in anyway abnormal for politicians.
The step he seems to have taken is he struggles to pretend differently.
His whole defence seems to be "we were doing important stuff" (and inherently more important than doctors and nurses) and he frankly seems to struggle with the concept that anyone should even question that.
His attempt to appeal to "including the current prime minister" just seems to reinforce this to me.
Guys – we have got the troll to go to the covid thread.. Lets ignore him on here
No what you mean is you piled onto someone doesn't agree with you and bullied them
roger, with absolutely no respect you are either:
– a troll
or
– cluelessAs for ‘the Twitter files’, what drivel is this?
I'd have thought someone as clued up as you would have known this, surely?
Anyway here they are:
Interesting that the Telegraph are running with the implied kangaroo court line – he’ll probably not accept the findings, in true Trump style.
It won't matter if he accepts it or not, his party have engaged in the process so implicitly accept the outcome in advance of publication. They have multiple members on the committee and could have withdrawn them at any point if they felt it wasn't fair (or more likely in their political interest). The Kangaroo court line is being peddaled by the haunted pencil and the walking auto-erotic asphyxiator* not the leaders of the party
*Thanks @Binners for pointing out the tie too tight thing, i can't unsee it now!
The other important point is that they were clearly not at all scared about catching Covid, such that they didn’t think it important to follow the rules themselves.
For me the important point is that they didn't GAS about giving Covid to someone it could harm; the old, infirm, weak, fat and/or ethnics - because fundamentally they're selfish bastards goaded on by a first rate selfish bastard.
No what you mean is you piled onto someone doesn’t agree with you and bullied them
Whether he agrees with me or not is irrelevant
when he is making demonstrably false statements and relying on discredited conspiracy theorists its rather differnt
if yo want to go against decades of well known and well proven science you need something robust to back it up. When you cannot do so then you are in a very poor position. Nothing he has claimed is backed by anything real.