lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,813
|
Post by lidar2 on May 27, 2021 11:18:50 GMT
So Dominic Cummings, a fairly unpopular politician, who arrogantly broke the rules at the height of the Covid pandemic and then lied about it - leaving people clamouring for his resignation, and was subsequently removed from office - is now giving interviews complaining about the incompetence and shortfalls of the Covid response ... and people are now hanging on his every word?? Ah, politics! It could be argued that much of what he alleges was circulating in some form or the other at the time, but was not prominently covered by the press. Why not? Oh, because they were more concerned with the trip to Barnard Castle of one unelected advisor. The ultimate Dead Cat story. But yes, suddenly an untrustworthy character is now a paragon of truth and a reliable source without any need for corroboration. The phrase "unholy alliance" springs to mind. Or, as the good Dr said, my enemy's enemy is my ally.
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on May 27, 2021 11:54:03 GMT
It could be argued that much of what he alleges was circulating in some form or the other at the time, but was not prominently covered by the press. Why not? Oh, because they were more concerned with the trip to Barnard Castle of one unelected advisor. The ultimate Dead Cat story. But yes, suddenly an untrustworthy character is now a paragon of truth and a reliable source without any need for corroboration. The phrase "unholy alliance" springs to mind. Or, as the good Dr said, my enemy's enemy is my ally. Exactly, & no one is calling him "a paragon of truth" or saying he is completely trustworthy. It feels like corroboration of a lot that has been rumoured over the months.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2021 11:57:47 GMT
And we know it really went on because he says so. (Brief return from sabbatical) Oh, I still think Cummings is a piece of utter f(udging) s(ugar) who has a lot to answer for, but all he's done is basically reinforce stuff that was common knowledge and reported on for months beforehand: the ill-conceived herd immunity strategy, Boris not taking things seriously and Hancock not stepping up and doing his duty as Health Secretary. It's less 'I Believe Newly-ordained St. Dom' and more, one corroborates the other, even publications on the government's side like the Mail and Telegraph reported on these failings.
I will never understand why 'Boris made mistakes' should be such a controversial stance. Do the raw numbers and other evidence, long before Cummings opened his infernal yap, not speak for themselves? The vaccination programme, good as it is and to echo davy, cannot be allowed to be a cover for revisionist history or exculpation for the senseless loss of nearly 130K lives (and likely more, not properly or even recorded at all).
(And hop back out. Toodles!)
In a nutshell- exactly. Anything where he makes himself out to be a valiant crusader - throw it aside. Nonsense. But what he corroborated from over a year's worth of digging by journalists can't just be allowed to be thrown out with it just because it was Cummings who said it. Stopped clocks and all that. It's rather predictable really to see the "we can't believe any of it" stuff when, as you say, a lot of it was not his revelation of anything but confirming what was already out there from someone who was in the room. It's all just a prelude to what needs to be a full independent inquiry, conducted with the utmost transparency. As posted upthread, essentially the opposite of how the Grenfell fallout happened. Cummings is not a reliable source and that's on him. Even people in Government who know he's telling the truth about things (if he is) will be obliged to roll out the "spurned lover" nonsense when none of this matters. It's the ultimate inquest into the failings that does. The negligence, the stupidity, the malicious...it all needs to come out. Let the usual defenders call it "Tory-bashing", but since they were the Government - who else is expected to be held to account? I don't care about the colour of their rosette. I care about accountability. We're now outside the Top 100 for deaths per million over the last week (the US is about 46 and the top 20 are mostly South America and Eastern Europe's former Soviet bloc) so we're absolutely in a much better place. That's when we can start to take stock, surely. Again we just saw the Hillsborough case wither after over three decades of pain, grief and red tape. This can't be allowed to be the same.
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on May 27, 2021 20:14:50 GMT
There have been many things said by many people about this government. But this clip is so important, is so moving. There are real human beings that have died, that have been bereaved as a direct result of this governments systemic failings. & it is why I cannot & will not ever understand the rationale behind anyone's decision to vote for this government to remain in power at the next election.
|
|
|
Post by number13 on May 28, 2021 9:36:47 GMT
Very interesting analysis from Sky's data expert about the winter 'Kent variant' wave (the worst part of the pandemic in the UK) and the timing of the post-Christmas lockdown:
"Dominic Cummings's recollection of coronavirus spread was seen through lens of hindsight"
A lengthy and detailed article and well worth reading. Should especially be read by those people who are convinced the government really knew or should have forseen everything in advance and thus were stupid or even malicious.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on May 28, 2021 10:25:57 GMT
Very interesting analysis from Sky's data expert about the winter 'Kent variant' wave (the worst part of the pandemic in the UK) and the timing of the post-Christmas lockdown:
"Dominic Cummings's recollection of coronavirus spread was seen through lens of hindsight"
A lengthy and detailed article and well worth reading. Should especially be read by those people who are convinced the government really knew or should have forseen everything in advance and thus were stupid or even malicious.
Sorry man (btw the Ribos joke was funny), but I cannot agree. This is spin: scientists and other analysts spent the summer ringing alarm bells, saying something akin to what happened would happen in the winter, so for Sky to claim otherwise is the kind of revisionism I was railing against. Even then - okay, but the bulk of the anger, and the meat of the incompetence and malice accusations, aren't to do with the Kent variant - it's do with the events in March and the first lockdown. At that, I'm sorry again, but it cannot be denied that the government did not act accordingly and Boris himself bears a substantial amount of weight. And all of this, again, before Cummings reappeared.
I must ask a question plainly and without any malice here, to be clear; just on the level - if Corbyn or Starmer & Labour had been in charge, and done everything exactly the same as the Boris & the Tories had, and I mean to the T the exact same, would you be so readily jumping to their defence every time?
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on May 28, 2021 14:32:44 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2021 14:42:23 GMT
Or, to use another headline:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2021 18:00:56 GMT
Or, to use another headline:
Well, if you edit it down it does but clicking on it shows "Downing Street flat: PM cleared of misconduct but acted unwisely, says watchdog" as the headline.
|
|
|
Post by number13 on May 28, 2021 19:52:05 GMT
Very interesting analysis from Sky's data expert about the winter 'Kent variant' wave (the worst part of the pandemic in the UK) and the timing of the post-Christmas lockdown:
"Dominic Cummings's recollection of coronavirus spread was seen through lens of hindsight"
A lengthy and detailed article and well worth reading. Should especially be read by those people who are convinced the government really knew or should have forseen everything in advance and thus were stupid or even malicious.
Sorry man (btw the Ribos joke was funny), but I cannot agree. This is spin: scientists and other analysts spent the summer ringing alarm bells, saying something akin to what happened would happen in the winter, so for Sky to claim otherwise is the kind of revisionism I was railing against. Even then - okay, but the bulk of the anger, and the meat of the incompetence and malice accusations, aren't to do with the Kent variant - it's do with the events in March and the first lockdown. At that, I'm sorry again, but it cannot be denied that the government did not act accordingly and Boris himself bears a substantial amount of weight. And all of this, again, before Cummings reappeared.
I must ask a question plainly and without any malice here, to be clear; just on the level - if Corbyn or Starmer & Labour had been in charge, and done everything exactly the same as the Boris & the Tories had, and I mean to the T the exact same, would you be so readily jumping to their defence every time?
I wrote a detailed reply but I've just deleted it because I realised I hadn't read your post properly so I'd really wasted my time.
So, Sky are guilty of "revisionism" because they happen to "claim" something you don't agree with? By presenting the data. Aren't they independent broadcasters and frequently critical of the Government? Oh well, nothing more to be said then.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on May 28, 2021 20:26:31 GMT
Sorry man (btw the Ribos joke was funny), but I cannot agree. This is spin: scientists and other analysts spent the summer ringing alarm bells, saying something akin to what happened would happen in the winter, so for Sky to claim otherwise is the kind of revisionism I was railing against. Even then - okay, but the bulk of the anger, and the meat of the incompetence and malice accusations, aren't to do with the Kent variant - it's do with the events in March and the first lockdown. At that, I'm sorry again, but it cannot be denied that the government did not act accordingly and Boris himself bears a substantial amount of weight. And all of this, again, before Cummings reappeared.
I must ask a question plainly and without any malice here, to be clear; just on the level - if Corbyn or Starmer & Labour had been in charge, and done everything exactly the same as the Boris & the Tories had, and I mean to the T the exact same, would you be so readily jumping to their defence every time?
I wrote a detailed reply but I've just deleted it because I realised I hadn't read your post properly so I'd really wasted my time.
So, Sky are guilty of "revisionism" because they happen to "claim" something you don't agree with? By presenting the data. Aren't they independent broadcasters and frequently critical of the Government? Oh well, nothing more to be said then. Pity you deleted it, as I thought it was an engaging read and you ended on a candid note (indeed, I was going to thumbs it up because I appreciated said candour). But oh well - yes, it was revisionism because the article is spinning events in a way that did. not. happen and doesn't acknowledge or mention other events. 'The data' only works if you present it wholesale, not cherry pick to fit a narrative that glosses over what this government not only knew, but was more than aware had a high probability of occurring (something your prior post did acknowledge). Nothing to do with my political leaning, and everything to do with Sky trying to paint a picture that isn't correct and hiding behind stats to do it (something which your previous post also acknowledged when it come to other failings in the pandemic and the same tactic being used. Shame it's gone).
(Also, independent... until you remember it's Rupert Murdoch, who has relations with the Conservative Party and owns several papers that are seen to be aligned with it (or comparable right wing positions), all of which is common knowledge. Hardly some leCarre Smiley stuff here). However, I'm more disappointed that you traded in something thoughtful for something with barbs and snark. I know you can write and articulate better than that 13. Your prior version showed that - I gave you my comment on the level, and I thought you had too, which I appreciated on this kind of thread.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2021 22:23:06 GMT
Or, to use another headline:
Well, if you edit it down it does but clicking on it shows "Downing Street flat: PM cleared of misconduct but acted unwisely, says watchdog" as the headline. It didn't say that at the time I quoted it 7 hours ago (at the time of writing this, the story is dated 4 hours ago). I wouldn't highlight a headline and then edit it, as clicking it would reveal my distortion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2021 23:35:58 GMT
Well, if you edit it down it does but clicking on it shows "Downing Street flat: PM cleared of misconduct but acted unwisely, says watchdog" as the headline. It didn't say that at the time I quoted it 7 hours ago (at the time of writing this, the story is dated 4 hours ago). I wouldn't highlight a headline and then edit it, as clicking it would reveal my distortion. The BBC are working to bring down the government in response to Sky's actions discussed above. It's the only explanation that fits!
|
|
|
Post by number13 on May 28, 2021 23:58:15 GMT
I wrote a detailed reply but I've just deleted it because I realised I hadn't read your post properly so I'd really wasted my time.
So, Sky are guilty of "revisionism" because they happen to "claim" something you don't agree with? By presenting the data. Aren't they independent broadcasters and frequently critical of the Government? Oh well, nothing more to be said then. Pity you deleted it, as I thought it was an engaging read and you ended on a candid note (indeed, I was going to thumbs it up because I appreciated said candour). But oh well - yes, it was revisionism because the article is spinning events in a way that did. not. happen and doesn't acknowledge or mention other events. 'The data' only works if you present it wholesale, not cherry pick to fit a narrative that glosses over what this government not only knew, but was more than aware had a high probability of occurring (something your prior post did acknowledge). Nothing to do with my political leaning, and everything to do with Sky trying to paint a picture that isn't correct and hiding behind stats to do it (something which your previous post also acknowledged when it come to other failings in the pandemic and the same tactic being used. Shame it's gone).
(Also, independent... until you remember it's Rupert Murdoch, who has relations with the Conservative Party and owns several papers that are seen to be aligned with it (or comparable right wing positions), all of which is common knowledge. Hardly some leCarre Smiley stuff here). However, I'm more disappointed that you traded in something thoughtful for something with barbs and snark. I know you can write and articulate better than that 13. Your prior version showed that - I gave you my comment on the level, and I thought you had too, which I appreciated on this kind of thread.
I came back on here to apologise for being too dismissive in that last post of mine, when you are always courteous, which I appreciate. So I do. (Apologise, that is.) But I can't agree about the Sky News article being "revisionism" and from that beginning, there wasn't much point to the rest of my longer post which I wrote without realising the starting point.
I half-expected the "Murdoch" reply but hoped that wouldn't be the one you made. The TV news is not one of the newspapers and I honestly don't think it has any detectable editorial 'line' when compared with BBC or ITV news coverage of similar subjects. If it's a big national event, then for me it's got to be the BBC, but other than that I watch and read any of the three, without preference.
|
|
|
Post by number13 on May 29, 2021 0:04:14 GMT
It didn't say that at the time I quoted it 7 hours ago (at the time of writing this, the story is dated 4 hours ago). I wouldn't highlight a headline and then edit it, as clicking it would reveal my distortion. The BBC are working to bring down the government in response to Sky's actions discussed above. It's the only explanation that fits! Quite a bit of 'clickbaiting' creeping into the BBC news site recently imo and I've noticed headlines being revised, sometimes more than once in a fairly short period, to bring them in line with the normal BBC-standard of the contents of an article.
(There's a pun to be made about 'older and wiser headlines' I think... )
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on May 29, 2021 9:38:42 GMT
However, I'm more disappointed that you traded in something thoughtful for something with barbs and snark. I know you can write and articulate better than that 13. Your prior version showed that - I gave you my comment on the level, and I thought you had too, which I appreciated on this kind of thread. I came back on here to apologise for being too dismissive in that last post of mine, when you are always courteous, which I appreciate. So I do. (Apologise, that is.)
Accepted dear sir.
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on May 30, 2021 8:13:16 GMT
|
|
lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,813
|
Post by lidar2 on May 30, 2021 9:00:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Jun 1, 2021 16:02:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Jun 3, 2021 12:47:52 GMT
|
|