The Unofficial and Independent Leyton Orient Message Board
https://lofcforum.com/forum1/phpBB3/
I'm not defending anyone, assuming by "them" you mean the government or the BBC, I just posted a link to a story of interest to the Cummings discussion.StillSpike wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 8:50 pm Not whataboutery at all, just pointing out the shocking inconsistency in the BBC's treatment of its journalists.
Plus there's not a word she uttered that's refutable. But you carry on defending them if you like.
https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/bbc-back ... -cummings/faldO wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 8:38 pmAt least post some evidence or a link, or is it just classic whataboutery?StillSpike wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 8:15 pm And yet Laura Kuenssberg happily parrots every briefing from the "Number 10 source" (that's DC) as a solid fact and she gets away scot free. Extraordinary.
Not the same thing at all.RedO wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 9:38 pmhttps://www.pressgazette.co.uk/bbc-back ... -cummings/faldO wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 8:38 pmAt least post some evidence or a link, or is it just classic whataboutery?StillSpike wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 8:15 pm And yet Laura Kuenssberg happily parrots every briefing from the "Number 10 source" (that's DC) as a solid fact and she gets away scot free. Extraordinary.
Say something bad about Dom - get suspended.
Say something good about Dom - get pat on the back.
Typical leftie bbc bias.
Makes complete sense.faldO wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 10:09 pmNot the same thing at all.RedO wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 9:38 pmhttps://www.pressgazette.co.uk/bbc-back ... -cummings/
Say something bad about Dom - get suspended.
Say something good about Dom - get pat on the back.
Typical leftie bbc bias.
So you feel his story makes sense?faldO wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 9:19 pmI'm not defending anyone, assuming by "them" you mean the government or the BBC, I just posted a link to a story of interest to the Cummings discussion.StillSpike wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 8:50 pm Not whataboutery at all, just pointing out the shocking inconsistency in the BBC's treatment of its journalists.
Plus there's not a word she uttered that's refutable. But you carry on defending them if you like.
Not often I agree with what N.O says but he does have a point here. You may respect the position that somebody holds but that doesn't mean you have to respect the person themselves.NuneatonO's wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 5:49 pmOnce again, pure unsubstantiated rhetoric.Nice Username wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 5:17 pmEvery time I come back here I remember why I don't post much any more: the bullying. Anyone who disagrees is labelled 'gullible' or a 'WUM' - what happened to people being able to disagree? Good to know you don't respect people in higher positions than you, no wonder the world is going to hell. Let me put this simply for you: some people are in such important jobs that obviously the law doesn't apply in the same way that it would for me and you. Edgy insults like you're throwing out don't help anyone, and I'd appreciate an apology.NuneatonO's wrote: ↑Wed May 27, 2020 5:05 pm
You are either a pretty poor WUM; or sadly, a very gullible individual.
(Quote): the guy is a senior government adviser and obviously privileges come with that role.
Do they?
Care to show us the evidence of where these 'obvious privileges' are documented anywhere?
Or, like Cummings and Johnson, do you just 'make things up' to fit your agenda?
The way that I and most others see it, Cummings SHOULD be sacked. In fact any decent person would resign. However, Cummings is clearly anything but a decent person. He is pond life.
Moreover, there is every chance that the little weirdo is still in his job, because Johnson simply hasn't got the balls to sack him.
One can only wonder why?
If you consider my post bullying, then you must have led a very sheltered life.
Just to pick up on a few points from your diabtribe:
Good to know you don't respect people in higher positions than you,
That's actually incorrect. For example, I respect our Emergency Services; and most definitely respect workers within our NHS (not least because my Wife is a nurse)! I also respect the guys who cleared our bins yesterday. The list of people that I respect is endless. However, I don't quite understand your point about 'higher positions than you'. Are you suggesting these are the only people that one should respect? Or are you suggesting that I respect the Prime Minister of England - who is a proven liar; or indeed his unelected advisor - who is yet another proven liar?
Do you seriously 'doff cap, tug forelock' for these utter charlatans?
no wonder the world is going to hell
Is the World voing to hell? Well, certainly not all of it. A number of countries that I visit through my work, are most certainly not 'going to hell'; in fact, anywhere but! Australia, Canada and New Zealand to name just three that spring instantly to mind.
Let me put this simply for you: some people are in such important jobs that obviously the law doesn't apply in the same way that it would for me and you
You can put it as simply as you like (isn't that somewhat derogatory - should I deem that as you bullying me?). Now, it's the second time that you have mentioned this; and again, I'm going to ask you for evidence of those LAWS which do not apply to Government Advisors? Please refer me to where you have gleaned that information from; because, quite simply, I think you are making it up. I am however more than happy to be proved wrong. I will await your response to this particular point in great anticipation.
Edgy insults like you're throwing out don't help anyone
It wasn't an insult - more a statement of fact.
and I'd appreciate an apology.
I'd appreciate answers instead of rhetoric!
But life's a bitch and then you die.
Nice timing from Durham plod. Fresh wind into a story that was starting to go stale. Tories everywhere will be delighted. Not.
Oh i didnt know She had one .
My god - what a reprehensible tweet.
I wouldn't have put it like that but the general point is valid.Disoriented wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 7:21 pmMy god - what a reprehensible tweet.
Last shred of credibility gone Gilson/Thor.
Spot on faldO, if only the government could have issued 67,000,000 different instructions we'd all know what we're supposed to do!faldO wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 7:44 pmI wouldn't have put it like that but the general point is valid.Disoriented wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 7:21 pmMy god - what a reprehensible tweet.
Last shred of credibility gone Gilson/Thor.
No one was "encouraged" to have a BBQ and the implication that having a BBQ will end with drunken hugs is ridiculous. If there had been no mention of BBQs the tweet would have asked why people were allowed to sit in the garden and not eat or drink anything.
Most people are going to figure this out for themselves and apply some common sense, others seem to want a 6 inch thick rule book of what to do in every conceivable scenario.
What part of the initial lockdown did you struggle with?Apple Wumble wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 7:57 pm The non-committal of the government over all of this. And not just after cummings, from the very start, means that we've had to guess at what the rules are and interpret them as we see fit.
No ones expecting this government to be clear and consistent about anything.
The Z list Twitter Brigade Jumping on the bandwagon.
Well personally I’ve been isolating from about 2 weeks before the government started moving.Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 8:03 pmWhat part of the initial lockdown did you struggle with?Apple Wumble wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 7:57 pm The non-committal of the government over all of this. And not just after cummings, from the very start, means that we've had to guess at what the rules are and interpret them as we see fit.
No ones expecting this government to be clear and consistent about anything.
Thanks for taking the time to reply but you failed to answer the questionApple Wumble wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 8:18 pmWell personally I’ve been isolating from about 2 weeks before the government started moving.Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 8:03 pmWhat part of the initial lockdown did you struggle with?Apple Wumble wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 7:57 pm The non-committal of the government over all of this. And not just after cummings, from the very start, means that we've had to guess at what the rules are and interpret them as we see fit.
No ones expecting this government to be clear and consistent about anything.
And then they tried protecting big business and insurance companies by providing unclear and woolly guidance on places like pubs. Every step has been unclear. How anyone can argue that it hasn’t is beyond me.
I get that it’s not hard to stay indoors but most people are thick and to be honest, in what the government deem as the worst thing since ww2, I don’t think clarity is asking too much from our ‘leaders’
