Idiotic post, every point you have made is massively flawed. To claim that you needed hindsight to see what was about to happen is idiotic. If you had watched the news from Italy, Spain and France you could see what was about to unfold and there was plenty on here pointing that out at the time.
If there are any police or legal persons on here can you explain what a "slight breach" is please? Surely its a breach or it isnt.
Well it's obvious tbh mate. A breach is when you're dealing with someone of limited means who can't fight back. A slight breach is where you may be risking promotion or acceptance by the Masons.
Which ****ing genius in the government decided today just before the hottest weekend of the year was a good time to announce garden gatherings were allowed from Monday?
Just explain,if you don't mind, the flaw about Diane Abbott giving us the daily statistics update? Seriously I'm very interested because I can't find any flaw in that point whatsoever.
Everyone else can see that a pre announcement of an announcement results in the immediate implementation of the announcement by the public if that suits the public. Yet they still do it ----- and expect the police to be able to prevent it. Probably part of the plan to be able to say that a second wave is all the blame of the public who went into the garden 24 hours early
5. Why did Dominic Cummings say he had written about the threat of coronaviruses last year? In his prepared statement at the recent press conference Mr Cummings said: "For years I have warned of the dangers of pandemics. Last year I wrote about the possible threat from coronaviruses and the urgent need for planning." Journalists quickly found a blog by the adviser from last year that mentioned SARS a single time. But it was soon established by a bit of internet sleuthingthat the blog had been edited to contain this coronavirus reference on the evening of 14 April this year, the day Mr Cummings returned to work from Durham. When originally published it had contained just a link to another article. Mr Cummings has not revealed why he made the edit when he did.
The guardian explains the Durham police statement in legal terms, "might have" means that they could have charged him, but a court would need to decide whether he broke the rules. It's this article. What does Durham police's statement on PM's aide's trip tell us?
It's deliberately isn't it, I think we all know that ... ... give the public enough rope to hang themselves so they'll take the blame. Sad isn't it?
Sad, disappointing, unbelievable, avoidable words that will be associated with the mess our government have made during this
If Cummings and these people are actually so clever I must've suddenly become super intelligent .... ... they're so transparent its like trying to ignore the wires on the Thunderbird puppets.
The worst for me is that in trying to deflect from the **** they are rushing through supposed good news without a thought for the consequences
Despite spending around 20 years in France I'm not a big fan of the French. But things have been remarkably cool and ordered here compared to the UK. Despite various land access, including Italy and Spain, this has been managed surprisingly well.
Is that the best you can do? This government has been so inept in this crisis and you try to look for a negative in the political opposition to hide their incompetence. That says more about you and your twisted political mindset that you cant see the evidence before your eyes. Has this Government performed as well as you would expect it would compared to its Europe neighbours considering it was forewarned of the crisis that was to come?
If the Chief Medical Officer says he has no view to express on whether or not people should drive 60 miles to test their eyesight, I don’t think that they should be the Chief Medical Officer.