Chit Chat
This is what happens when people working in a certain organisation are elevated to a rather false and hollow untouchable status. 'BAME', Labour, working for the NHS and taking cheap shots at a Tory minister, that will definitely get the lefties on tw@tter absolutely jizzing.
That is what I refer to
May 5, 2020 -- 5:02PM, ----you-have-to-laugh--- wrote:
Really? Are you suggesting she slipped in a question he was not expecting that caused his rude reply
Oh no it was definitely planned by Labour, like I said she was reading from a script.
Cider will be on his case....
Is the Mother Polish ?? Or Father ??
More chance of winning the Lottery than Polish and Pakistan Wedding
I lived in tooting for years I must know her Dad
It was a peculiar response. In the Commons, Rosena Allin-Khan of Labour had just asked Matt Hancock about the Government’s handling of the crisis. Its strategy on testing, she said, had been “non-existent. Community testing was scrapped, mass testing was slow to roll out, and testing figures are now being manipulated.” Would the Health Secretary accept that, in the view of many frontline workers, a lack of testing had cost some patients their lives?
A reasonable enough question, calmly delivered. Yet Mr Hancock could scarcely hide his indignation. If he’d been a cat, he’d have arched his back, and the fur on his tail would have fluffed up in self-defence.
What she’d said, he sniffed, was “not true”. The Government had been “entirely transparent” about testing figures. And in his view, she would “do well” to learn from her boss, Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary – and...
A response from the communist Guardian ?
No, it comes from The Telegrpah
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/05/05/matt-hancock-facing-test-life-today-commons-snapped/
sage say more testing would have saved live,s
sage says lockdown was to late
doris says carry on handshaking
Fergie breaks guidelines
and ridiculed handjob goes out everyday and defends them,and their going to, on a day of their choosing throw him under a bus,
May 5, 2020 -- 9:12PM, Angoose wrote:
Tend to agree, but he'd appear even more human if he was to accept the possibility that the government just might have taken a wrong step or two.
You're just looking at one variable of this whole crisis, which is a very simplistic one to consider, granted. I've repeated it so many times, but it doesn't sink in with some. The overall detriment can't be measured simply by looking at the number of deaths testing covid 19 positive. We won't know the total damage for years.
May 5, 2020 -- 9:31PM, Cider wrote:
May 5, 2020 -- 8:12PM, Angoose wrote:Tend to agree, but he'd appear even more human if he was to accept the possibility that the government just might have taken a wrong step or two.You're just looking at one variable of this whole crisis, which is a very simplistic one to consider, granted. I've repeated it so many times, but it doesn't sink in with some. The overall detriment can't be measured simply by looking at the number of deaths testing covid 19 positive. We won't know the total damage for years.
No, I was responding to an exchange of views on Matt Hancock.
May 5, 2020 -- 9:34PM, Angoose wrote:
May 5, 2020 -- 8:31PM, Cider wrote:May 5, 2020 -- 8:12PM, Angoose wrote:Tend to agree, but he'd appear even more human if he was to accept the possibility that the government just might have taken a wrong step or two.You're just looking at one variable of this whole crisis, which is a very simplistic one to consider, granted. I've repeated it so many times, but it doesn't sink in with some. The overall detriment can't be measured simply by looking at the number of deaths testing covid 19 positive. We won't know the total damage for years.No, I was responding to an exchange of views on Matt Hancock.
So what is the wrong step you feel he should accept?
with millions doing the same its up for debate if the economy would have carried on,if it had no one can doubt it would have been worse for longer ,deaths wise
May 5, 2020 -- 9:35PM, Cider wrote:
May 5, 2020 -- 8:34PM, Angoose wrote:May 5, 2020 -- 8:31PM, Cider wrote:May 5, 2020 -- 8:12PM, Angoose wrote:Tend to agree, but he'd appear even more human if he was to accept the possibility that the government just might have taken a wrong step or two.You're just looking at one variable of this whole crisis, which is a very simplistic one to consider, granted. I've repeated it so many times, but it doesn't sink in with some. The overall detriment can't be measured simply by looking at the number of deaths testing covid 19 positive. We won't know the total damage for years.No, I was responding to an exchange of views on Matt Hancock.So what is the wrong step you feel he should accept?
He doesn't even need to be specific, just generalise that mistakes may have been made.
Nicola Sturgeon doesn't find it so difficult to do, neither does Emmanuel Macron.
After all, the only person who has never made a wrong decision is the person who has never taken a decision.
May 5, 2020 -- 9:40PM, Angoose wrote:
May 5, 2020 -- 8:35PM, Cider wrote:May 5, 2020 -- 8:34PM, Angoose wrote:May 5, 2020 -- 8:31PM, Cider wrote:May 5, 2020 -- 8:12PM, Angoose wrote:Tend to agree, but he'd appear even more human if he was to accept the possibility that the government just might have taken a wrong step or two.You're just looking at one variable of this whole crisis, which is a very simplistic one to consider, granted. I've repeated it so many times, but it doesn't sink in with some. The overall detriment can't be measured simply by looking at the number of deaths testing covid 19 positive. We won't know the total damage for years.No, I was responding to an exchange of views on Matt Hancock.So what is the wrong step you feel he should accept?He doesn't even need to be specific, just generalise that mistakes may have been made.Nicola Sturgeon doesn't find it so difficult to do, neither does Emmanuel Macron.After all, the only person who has never made a wrong decision is the person who has never taken a decision.
The way politics works, in this country anyway they can't really concede they took a wrong step, even if they think they did privately. However I don't see that Matt Hancock has done anything glaring that he needs to concede was wrong. Some people are desperate to hand out blame, I don't know if it makes them feel better or if there are other underlying reasons. In my view we've just got to accept that the covid 19 pandemic is pretty sh1t and just deal with it the best we can.
May 5, 2020 -- 9:47PM, Cider wrote:
May 5, 2020 -- 8:40PM, Angoose wrote:May 5, 2020 -- 8:35PM, Cider wrote:May 5, 2020 -- 8:34PM, Angoose wrote:May 5, 2020 -- 8:31PM, Cider wrote:May 5, 2020 -- 8:12PM, Angoose wrote:Tend to agree, but he'd appear even more human if he was to accept the possibility that the government just might have taken a wrong step or two.You're just looking at one variable of this whole crisis, which is a very simplistic one to consider, granted. I've repeated it so many times, but it doesn't sink in with some. The overall detriment can't be measured simply by looking at the number of deaths testing covid 19 positive. We won't know the total damage for years.No, I was responding to an exchange of views on Matt Hancock.So what is the wrong step you feel he should accept?He doesn't even need to be specific, just generalise that mistakes may have been made.Nicola Sturgeon doesn't find it so difficult to do, neither does Emmanuel Macron.After all, the only person who has never made a wrong decision is the person who has never taken a decision.The way politics works, in this country anyway they can't really concede they took a wrong step, even if they think they did privately. However I don't see that Matt Hancock has done anything glaring that he needs to concede was wrong. Some people are desperate to hand out blame, I don't know if it makes them feel better or if there are other underlying reasons. In my view we've just got to accept that the covid 19 pandemic is pretty sh1t and just deal with it the best we can.
Is Nicola Sturgeon not a politician ?
And these are not normal times.
May 5, 2020 -- 9:51PM, Angoose wrote:
And if you really believe that Hancock is faultless in all of this, then I'd politely suggest that you take some time to ponder why that might be.
I don't see that Matt Hancock has done anything glaring that he needs to concede was wrong
this is complete nonsense, we gave up on contact tracing at exactly the point we should have been expanding it. test, trace and isolate that is what the experts were saying we should be doing ages ago. the disease is now ceded all over the country so making this process harder to achieve now.
In light of your "some people are desperate to hand out blame, I don't know if it makes them feel better or if there are other underlying reasons" comment, is this a case of it being ok for you to be critical but not for others ?
May 5, 2020 -- 9:59PM, Cider wrote:
they abandoned contact tracing as the horse had bolted. It took over a month to get to the levels that would have been needed, and that's just testing, track and trace is still being compiled now.
Do you think at that time it would have been reasonable to imagine that, if not appropriate now, test, track and trace may be needed at a near future point in time ?
May 5, 2020 -- 10:01PM, Angoose wrote:
Cider, you were very quick to jump on Rosena Allin-Khan today, so much so that you started this thread about her.In light of your "some people are desperate to hand out blame, I don't know if it makes them feel better or if there are other underlying reasons" comment, is this a case of it being ok for you to be critical but not for others ?
Rosena irritates me but most of my annoyance came from the people in msm and social media supporting her.
May 5, 2020 -- 10:03PM, Angoose wrote:
May 5, 2020 -- 8:59PM, Cider wrote:they abandoned contact tracing as the horse had bolted. It took over a month to get to the levels that would have been needed, and that's just testing, track and trace is still being compiled now.Do you think at that time it would have been reasonable to imagine that, if not appropriate now, test, track and trace may be needed at a near future point in time ?
That's what they've been doing since isn't it? Some forumites are trying to portray it like it was a casual option, the reality is that they had zero choice.
But Hancock can't bring himself to say it.
May 5, 2020 -- 10:08PM, Angoose wrote:
First we had Grant Schapps say it at the weekend, and now we've had Jenny Harries say today that more aggressive early testing would have saved lives.But Hancock can't bring himself to say it.
That's not a mistake though is it. I'm certainly not denying that if we had Germany levels of testing on tap all through, there would be less victims. I don't think anyone is.
Or you can find one example of where he did make such a statement.
Was declining offers from independent labs to perform tests the right thing to do or could that be construed as a mistake ?
May 5, 2020 -- 10:11PM, jollyswagman wrote:
why was the game up?
They said the tests they did have needed to be prioritised for patients. And that they were getting positives where they couldn't trace the source, ie it had already broken out into the communuty.
May 5, 2020 -- 10:19PM, Angoose wrote:
If you want I'll go and find plenty of examples of where he has done precisely the opposite.Or you can find one example of where he did make such a statement.Was declining offers from independent labs to perform tests the right thing to do or could that be construed as a mistake ?
I don't memorise the daily briefings or all of Matt Hancock's interviews. If the second part is true I presume that was down to PHE/NHS bureaucracy. I know PPE has had similar challenges.
I gave you an easy out and you declined it.
Your subsequent posts have subsequently served to reinforce my opinion i.e. that you will blindly defend any specific point offered
hancock independently sets his own 100,000 testing target and takes press conference to gloat in his ridiculous 122,00 number
sunday gove stands there and has to say they only did 75,000 tests
tues raab stands there saying they only did 80 odd thousand tests
in between on Monday hancock had no shame in linking his tests to the lower reporting of dead people on a weekend,without mentioning whether his testing target had failed when going through numbers, it was left to jvt some 15 mins later when going through graphs to inform us hancock,s target had failed, nobody, least of all someone as ridiculed as hancock has been for years,can be that vane,thin skinned that you couldn't even bring yourself to read out your testing number,s,
its like trying to defend a reputation even your nearest and dearest no you,ve never had or ever likely to have
Priti Patel marks their answers...
May 5, 2020 -- 10:37PM, Angoose wrote:
Cider, in responding to your question "So what is the wrong step you feel he should accept?", I deliberately took a soft generalist approach with my response as it was my opinion that you'd blindly defend any specific point I offered up.I gave you an easy out and you declined it.Your subsequent posts have subsequently served to reinforce my opinion i.e. that you will blindly defend any specific point offered
I don't know if you've read all my posts on here Angoose, however there has been two major mistakes (where there were clear choices and alternative options) through this whole crisis. I've already posted about them on the forum. One is that the advice not to travel was far too late, allowing people to go on holiday when it was patently going to be a nightmare to get them back. A huge clanger imv. The other one was Khan moving to bank holiday service on the underground, London being the UK hotspot but tens of thoudands of key workers being forced to squeeze into cramped carriages, directly due to him. A total bonehead decision that will have cost lives. Neither of these are Hancock's responsibility. If you come up with a glaring error he has made, that's rational I'd be more than happy to concur.
Rosena Chantelle Allin-Khan was born in Tooting.[3][4] Her Polish mother had been a singer in the Polish girl group Filipinki, who met her father, originally from Pakistan, while the band was on tour in London.[5]
The couple separated after having two children, and Allin-Khan's mother worked three jobs to support her and her brother.[5]
She was educated at Trinity St Mary School.[6]
She studied medical biochemistry at Brunel University, funding her education through a series of part-time jobs.[5] She went on to study medicine at Lucy Cavendish College, Cambridge, funded by scholarships.
She is an amateur boxer, training at Balham Boxing Club, where she is the team doctor.[5]
twang goes some more knicker elastic
After qualifying as a doctor, Allin-Khan worked at the Royal London and Homerton Hospitals.[7] She went on to complete a Master's degree in public health.[8] Following this, she spent many years working as a humanitarian aid doctor.[9]
Prior to her election to the House of Commons, she worked as a junior doctor in the accident and emergency department at St George's Hospital in Tooting.[6][7] Allin-Khan continues to work occasional shifts at St George's Hospital alongside her political career.[10]
May 6, 2020 -- 11:28AM, The Leopard wrote:
This woman is a Saint !After qualifying as a doctor, Allin-Khan worked at the Royal London and Homerton Hospitals.[7] She went on to complete a Master's degree in public health.[8] Following this, she spent many years working as a humanitarian aid doctor.[9]Prior to her election to the House of Commons, she worked as a junior doctor in the accident and emergency department at St George's Hospital in Tooting.[6][7] Allin-Khan continues to work occasional shifts at St George's Hospital alongside her political career.[10]
Ah, but racists like cider start this thread because she has the wrong colour of skin for him.
Cider you case was lost and your motivation highlighted by your OP
You have illustrated just what you are and who you are and everybody on here knows it.
Good day.
I subsequently recalled that very same thing happening in April, with a similarly thinly veiled point scoring attempt within a question to the very same Matt Hancock, only from Barry Sheerman this time.
.https://youtu.be/QI4jQWDgLFI?t=1488
Barry Sheerman is evidently male pale stale and northern, so identities that are not so popular on twatter and the like.
Please do point me in the direction of the equivalent 'outrage' of the vocal loonie left types and the subsequent BBC discussions and appearances afterwards on the topic on that occasion. If the outrage about Rosena was nothing to do with her identities, and just about her question and Matt Hancock's response, there must be?
