O/T Disgrace Cummings

[WanChaiMiller]

'Broke a trust' is slightly more impressive than 'he might have had an accident that required the attendance of the emergency services', but the fact remains that his actions posed neglible risk to anyone. If you want a lynching then fair enough, but count me out of the posse.

Anyone who decides to abandon social distancing as a consequence of his 'example' was quite clearly looking for an excuse to do so.

I hope youre not implying I made the quote 'he might have had a accident'. Not sure why you'te linking it to me?

[Exiletyke]

I hope youre not implying I made the quote 'he might have had a accident'. Not sure why you'te linking it to me?

Lynching???
Rather extreme terminology don't you think?
What more than 70% of the british public want is integrity which they most certainly haven't seen
If as you say there may be people looking for an excuse to use their interpretation of the rules he sure as hell has provided one

[KerrAvon]

I hope youre not implying I made the quote 'he might have had a accident'. Not sure why you'te linking it to me?

No you didn't. I was comparing your point to that of my learned friend, raging.

[WanChaiMiller]

Lynching???
Rather extreme terminology don't you think?
What more than 70% of the british public want is integrity which they most certainly haven't seen
If as you say there may be people looking for an excuse to use their interpretation of the rules he sure as hell has provided one

Exactly.

[WanChaiMiller]

No you didn't. I was comparing your point to that of my learned friend, raging.

Is it not the case each member of the public made a deal with Gov to stick to the regulations?

[KerrAvon]

It isn't about one journey though is it - it's about us collectively. I think that one of the points of the 'don't make unnecessary journeys' was to avoid the danger of breakdowns/accidents and necessity of assistance and therefore endangering others. I'm not sure you're getting the grasp of the importance of 'collective responsibility' which is the point made by the senior scientific advisor I linked to yesterday. That's the whole point of that.

However, as I've said repeatedly, that journey up North isn't the problem many have issues with. It's the journey to the castle, the blatant lie behind it, and the blatant lies from the Government in the press conference last Friday ("he stayed at the farm for 2 weeks and made no journeys").

It's about two journeys that collectively posed minimal risk to the public. Should he have made them? Certainly not the second. Is it worth the politically motivated feeding frenzy? Not in my opinion. There are people dieing and this is what we want to talk about?

Pathetic.

As for dishonesty, as I pointed out earlier, I think it is now endemic in British politics. Remember how you slavishly adopted the 'evolving' excuses put out by Corbyn's team as they tried to excuse his support for an anti-Semitic mural? I do.

[ragingpup]

It's about two journeys that collectively posed minimal risk to the public. Should he have made them? Certainly not the second. Is it worth the politically motivated feeding frenzy? Not in my opinion. There are people dieing and this is what we want to talk about?

Pathetic.

As for dishonesty, as I pointed out earlier, I think it is now endemic in British politics. Remember how you slavishly adopted the 'evolving' excuses put out by Corbyn's team as they tried to excuse his support for an anti-Semitic mural? I do.

You're really struggling with the grasp of collective responsibility aren't you? If we all feel that it is ok to make car journeys along the same lines (avoidable journeys, dubious but forgivable with one journey, but unforgivable with the other), then we have lots and lots of car journeys all over the place. As the scientist I linked to about Cummings behaviour said, he thought only of the 'I', not about the 'we'. And in doing so, according to this scientist, it puts more lives at risk as people respond to their leaders. You might not think so, but I think I'll defer to the scientist government advisor. Pity Cummings didn't.

Shame you think that these decisions by Cummings and the decision by our Government to collectively lie to us, is trivial and pathetic. But many think that it is unacceptable, the majority of the public indicating that this is so - out of interest, why do you think that they are so angry?

[KerrAvon]

You're really struggling with the grasp of collective responsibility aren't you? If we all feel that it is ok to make car journeys along the same lines (avoidable journeys, dubious but forgivable with one journey, but unforgivable with the other), then we have lots and lots of car journeys all over the place. As the scientist I linked to about Cummings behaviour said, he thought only of the 'I', not about the 'we'. And in doing so, according to this scientist, it puts more lives at risk as people respond to their leaders. You might not think so, but I think I'll defer to the scientist government advisor. Pity Cummings didn't.

Shame you think that these decisions by Cummings and the decision by our Government to collectively lie to us, is trivial and pathetic. But many think that it is unacceptable, the majority of the public indicating that this is so - out of interest, why do you think that they are so angry?

I have no difficulty with the concept of collective responsibility and - of more relevance to your point and presumably what you actually mean - the need for collective action. I simply don't accept that what Cummings did posed any significant risk and do not think it warrants the hysterical politically motivated response that it has.

You are clinging to your government adviser, but why not think for yourself?

John will be wincing at your straw-manning. I don't think it trivial for politicians to lie. I'm not the party man who has happily spread and 'interpreted' party propaganda, am I, raging?

[Exiletyke]

I have no difficulty with the concept of collective responsibility and - of more relevance to your point and presumably what you actually mean - the need for collective action. I simply don't accept that what Cummings did posed any significant risk and do not think it warrants the hysterical politically motivated response that it has.

You are clinging to your government adviser, but why not think for yourself?

John will be wincing at your straw-manning. I don't think it trivial for politicians to lie. I'm not the party man who has happily spread and 'interpreted' party propaganda, am I, raging?

I thought that after a nights sleep you might have returned with a more considered view
Strange that you introduce John into the argument
I wonder why
Anyway why not give us your views on what this lawyer thinks about Cummings witness statement

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0tWyhkoP5c

[ragingpup]

I have no difficulty with the concept of collective responsibility and - of more relevance to your point and presumably what you actually mean - the need for collective action. I simply don't accept that what Cummings did posed any significant risk and do not think it warrants the hysterical politically motivated response that it has.

You are clinging to your government adviser, but why not think for yourself?

John will be wincing at your straw-manning. I don't think it trivial for politicians to lie. I'm not the party man who has happily spread and 'interpreted' party propaganda, am I, raging?

If all of the angry response from the public is so politically motivated, why does it include anger from so many people from non Labour and even non political pursuasion. Even my Mum is pissed off, several non political friends are commenting on Facebook and to each other on social media. I've not known a response like it. Why is that do you think?