By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 23:33 - Apr 19 by Ewan_Oozami
More people voted non-Tory, non-Brexit parties at the last election, the FPTP system gave Boris his seat majority.
People keep saying if you don't like it, vote for a different party - well I do, all the time, but being in a super-safe Tory seat it means smeg all...
By a modest margin- and ignoring those that didnt vote. You are right.
"Most people" is therefore wrong, though. Most people either voted tory or didnt vote.
The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
(Sir Terry Pratchett)
That's a really strange Government response. Certainly addresses some of the points but does it in a manner more akin to an argument on Twitter than what I'd expect for an official piece from a Government department.
Annoyingly they don't go into much of the detail about things that are really important with regards to pandemic planning and really focus in on the whole COBR(A) stuff which is a bit of a side show. For example the pandemic planning being bumped off constantly before this all kicked off isn't mentioned.
They do mention they had planned "legislative proposals", and whilst that's all good, they don't then refute the specific claim that Cygnus highlighted a lack of ventilators and PPE. If that is true then it's not like this is some hindsight scenario where we couldn't have possibly known they would have been needed.
I did find this bit funny in a sad way: Claim - By the time the Prime Minister chaired a COBR meeting on March 2 ‘the virus had sneaked into our airports, our trains, our workplaces and our homes. Britain was on course for one of the worst infections of the most insidious virus to have hit the world in a century.'
Response - This virus has hit countries across the world. It is ridiculous to suggest that coronavirus only reached the UK because the Health Secretary and not the PM chaired a COBR meeting.
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 22:11 - Apr 19 by Lord_Lucan
Yes, yes you did suggest that and all I did was even up what you were suggesting, for every Ferrari there is an O'Brien, overall it's well balanced. As I said, I listen to it all the time every day, all you did is Wiki it.
Quite frankly I don't give a sh1t anyway, reasoned debate on here went out a long time ago, all you are left with is a consolidation of confirmation bias, last night you had posters calling Stokie Blue a liar, this place really beggars belief sometimes .
Go back and read it again. Stating they've got a large chunk of listeners receptive to a pro-Boris message isn't the same thing at all. I'm well aware who O'Brien is, I follow him on twitter.
You're constantly doing the thing you're moaning about. Snapping at posts by anyone who seems young enough for you to feel comfortable berating and seeing some imagined offence that isn't there.
I'm not sure how listening to it changes the fact that's clearly their business model. I suppose if I was being really specific I could have said they have both sides on to get the same pro Boris lot enraged too, but didn't think I'd need to pre-empt this again.
Nothing from GB's post suggests this guy isn't doing exactly what I said above and taking a defensive stance of BJ, at as recently as I bothered to scroll back through his twitter.
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 07:33 - Apr 20 by Mullet
Go back and read it again. Stating they've got a large chunk of listeners receptive to a pro-Boris message isn't the same thing at all. I'm well aware who O'Brien is, I follow him on twitter.
You're constantly doing the thing you're moaning about. Snapping at posts by anyone who seems young enough for you to feel comfortable berating and seeing some imagined offence that isn't there.
I'm not sure how listening to it changes the fact that's clearly their business model. I suppose if I was being really specific I could have said they have both sides on to get the same pro Boris lot enraged too, but didn't think I'd need to pre-empt this again.
Nothing from GB's post suggests this guy isn't doing exactly what I said above and taking a defensive stance of BJ, at as recently as I bothered to scroll back through his twitter.
You clearly do care, because you keep doing it.
He’s far from a Boris Johnson apologist. Or in any way sympathetic to the Tories.
The example you give to suggest that he is was him having a go at a union leader for saying that he’d throw a party if Johnson dies of Covid-19, whilst the PM was in ICU.
Anyone with a shred of decency would be appalled by that statement. It doesn’t make them sympathetic to or an apologist for Boris Johnson.
What Maajid does I’d take each issue on its merits without political bias. That may confuse people with confirmation bias.
It would be helpful if you would at least address the points Maajid Nawaz makes rather than attack him as being biased based on one tweet you e read.
The example you give to suggest that he is was him having a go at a union leader for saying that he’d throw a party if Johnson dies of Covid-19, whilst the PM was in ICU.
Anyone with a shred of decency would be appalled by that statement. It doesn’t make them sympathetic to or an apologist for Boris Johnson.
What Maajid does I’d take each issue on its merits without political bias. That may confuse people with confirmation bias.
It would be helpful if you would at least address the points Maajid Nawaz makes rather than attack him as being biased based on one tweet you e read.
[Post edited 20 Apr 2020 8:01]
I read his whole wall as far as I could be bothered to scroll and cited a handful of tweets, I'm talking about what I could see and what you've presented. If you insist he's not then fair enough, but the balance of evidence this week suggests differently and is very different to how Lucan and yourself are trying to paint it.
Maybe he is far happier to take artistic direction on his content? Your video is from October 2018 after all. Gove got in line behind Boris in a far shorter timespan did he not?
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 08:00 - Apr 20 by Mullet
I read his whole wall as far as I could be bothered to scroll and cited a handful of tweets, I'm talking about what I could see and what you've presented. If you insist he's not then fair enough, but the balance of evidence this week suggests differently and is very different to how Lucan and yourself are trying to paint it.
Maybe he is far happier to take artistic direction on his content? Your video is from October 2018 after all. Gove got in line behind Boris in a far shorter timespan did he not?
The video is from 2018 but the first link is from less than a year ago.
I still can’t anyone to address the content rather then the presenter. Nor can I get anyone to answer the following questions.
Do those who are criticising the government's handling of this crisis want Ministers to follow the advice of their experts at a time of national crisis, or do they not?
If Johnson had announced that the country was being placed under the most draconian lock-down in peacetime against the advice of his senior science and medical advisers, would they have happily accepted that or would they have been on here crying that we are "sleepwalking into fascism" and that the "Brexiteers don't listen to experts"?
The devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are responsible for health policy in their countries. Why do they follow the same strategy?
The right of reply.... on 07:30 - Apr 20 by DanTheMan
That's a really strange Government response. Certainly addresses some of the points but does it in a manner more akin to an argument on Twitter than what I'd expect for an official piece from a Government department.
Annoyingly they don't go into much of the detail about things that are really important with regards to pandemic planning and really focus in on the whole COBR(A) stuff which is a bit of a side show. For example the pandemic planning being bumped off constantly before this all kicked off isn't mentioned.
They do mention they had planned "legislative proposals", and whilst that's all good, they don't then refute the specific claim that Cygnus highlighted a lack of ventilators and PPE. If that is true then it's not like this is some hindsight scenario where we couldn't have possibly known they would have been needed.
I did find this bit funny in a sad way: Claim - By the time the Prime Minister chaired a COBR meeting on March 2 ‘the virus had sneaked into our airports, our trains, our workplaces and our homes. Britain was on course for one of the worst infections of the most insidious virus to have hit the world in a century.'
Response - This virus has hit countries across the world. It is ridiculous to suggest that coronavirus only reached the UK because the Health Secretary and not the PM chaired a COBR meeting.
That's an interesting rebuttal...
It reads almost like Matt Hancock wrote it himself.
To add to the other points made. It points out that ministers chaired COBRA meetings. E.g. referring to the H1N1 time. It doesn’t make the case that COBRa meetings during that time were exclusively chaired, or if it was the PM at the time that initiated and started out chairing the meetings.
Of course the interesting thing is that Gove has stated, that no Governments have been perfect, and mistakes have been made, and there will be time for the lessons learnt.
In other words he has conceded they have made mistakes.
Be funny if those mistakes will be not responding to the 2016 recommendations, and being too slow to re-act, and applying too much weight to behavioural sciences or economic factors.
Maybe if that happens people giving Callis such a hard time will act appropriately.
I see certain posters are stating things about the timing of lock down, and how people will re-act to a lockdown, as a fact. Although a poster showed a letter from behaviour scientists concerned about this term “behavioural fatigue”
Science is about proposing a model of working, testing, and then using that to predict outcomes.
The U.K. and other western countries have never been in a lockdown. There is no expertise or experience on mass lockdown.
There is science, expertise and experience on how viruses spread.
Still nice to hear Boris Johnson is now keen on a deliberately cautious approach.
0
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 08:08 - Apr 20 with 841 views
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 21:27 - Apr 19 by Lord_Lucan
You are completely wrong Mullet, the only thing London based in it is that the building it is in London, it has long since been a London based show when it comes to contributors and listeners.
I listen to LBC every day and have done for years, I listen to most programs, even Steve Allens 4am slot.
Forget about Farage for a minute, Farage is on 5 hours a week, Ken Livingstone also used to be a regular and Sadiq Khan is indeed a current regular guest host.
After Ferrari you have James O Brien, James OBrien is the most extreme member of the LBC line up and has the 10am - 1pm hotspot. James O Brien is more left than any other presenter I have ever listened to - and I used to listen to Galloway. I listen to James O Brien most days
After O Brien you have Sheila Fogarty who is a massive Boris basher and of all people after that you have Eddie Mair, hardly shock jocks.
Try listening to it some time.
Amused at the ridiculous downvotes on this one- to a post which is essentially factual.
I dont listen to LBC, but I do sometimes watch some of the clips. O Brien is good. Majid is excellent- and prepared to address difficult stuff in a measured rational way. It was a great shame he did not succeed in getting elected as a libdem MP a few years ago.
The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
(Sir Terry Pratchett)
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 08:06 - Apr 20 by GlasgowBlue
The video is from 2018 but the first link is from less than a year ago.
I still can’t anyone to address the content rather then the presenter. Nor can I get anyone to answer the following questions.
Do those who are criticising the government's handling of this crisis want Ministers to follow the advice of their experts at a time of national crisis, or do they not?
If Johnson had announced that the country was being placed under the most draconian lock-down in peacetime against the advice of his senior science and medical advisers, would they have happily accepted that or would they have been on here crying that we are "sleepwalking into fascism" and that the "Brexiteers don't listen to experts"?
The devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are responsible for health policy in their countries. Why do they follow the same strategy?
I addressed the content directly, you're now suggesting that this isn't his view because he's previously slated Boris, so how reliable is he? Given what his job is etc. it's not exactly compelling that he can be trusted any more than Piers Morgan or Eamonn Holmes at the minute.
Personally I want Boris working hard, checking up on his ministers, communicating better and doing the job he connived to get rather than just indulging himself with the title.
Even if you can accept him missing so many meetings (which in itself is terrible PR and shows consistency with his prior lack of ability and contempt for doing his job properly) the fact he seems not to have got Raab, Patel et al. under control and on message is terribly worrying.
None of his response, from his change of direction over herd immunity to dithering over several key decisions refutes peoples worst fears at a time when we are all scared. Even if you meet the article and this one presented from LBC halfway it doesn't make this government look competent or responsible.
Even the "experts" argument after their famous contempt for experts as well as NHS staff doesn't wash. It's more shifting blame and culpability in the end.
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 08:12 - Apr 20 by Mullet
I addressed the content directly, you're now suggesting that this isn't his view because he's previously slated Boris, so how reliable is he? Given what his job is etc. it's not exactly compelling that he can be trusted any more than Piers Morgan or Eamonn Holmes at the minute.
Personally I want Boris working hard, checking up on his ministers, communicating better and doing the job he connived to get rather than just indulging himself with the title.
Even if you can accept him missing so many meetings (which in itself is terrible PR and shows consistency with his prior lack of ability and contempt for doing his job properly) the fact he seems not to have got Raab, Patel et al. under control and on message is terribly worrying.
None of his response, from his change of direction over herd immunity to dithering over several key decisions refutes peoples worst fears at a time when we are all scared. Even if you meet the article and this one presented from LBC halfway it doesn't make this government look competent or responsible.
Even the "experts" argument after their famous contempt for experts as well as NHS staff doesn't wash. It's more shifting blame and culpability in the end.
I don’t understand your first sentence. Are you suggesting that because somebody has previously attacked a Johnson when he believed he was acting badly it negates his right to defend Johnson against what he believes are unwarranted attacks?
I don’t like Boris Johnson as a politician. I’ve attacked him over his racist remarks and his self promotion. That doesn’t mean I have to attack him over everything, even if it’s contrary to the facts.
Maajid has a poor view of Johnson. He thinks the Times article is shoddy. The two aren’t mutually exclusive.
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 08:17 - Apr 20 by GlasgowBlue
I don’t understand your first sentence. Are you suggesting that because somebody has previously attacked a Johnson when he believed he was acting badly it negates his right to defend Johnson against what he believes are unwarranted attacks?
I don’t like Boris Johnson as a politician. I’ve attacked him over his racist remarks and his self promotion. That doesn’t mean I have to attack him over everything, even if it’s contrary to the facts.
Maajid has a poor view of Johnson. He thinks the Times article is shoddy. The two aren’t mutually exclusive.
Not at all, I'm saying that you are criticising for me not knowing he had slated Johnson 2 years ago but are presenting it the day after. That's not fair or reasonable.
If anything I've only gone off exactly what you put up and been open to your later clarification. What more do you want someone to do? It still presents a PM who is inept, crippled by his own desire to be a household name and heaped in adoration.
Likewise, it doesn't mean those of us criticising him consistently are doing it over every little thing. The Times article may go way too far, but to repeat myself this rebuttal does nothing to redeem Johnson at all and show he is the Chuchillian strongman he fantasises about being.
Again, if he's going to delegate responsibility he should not be doing it to people like Patel, Hancock and incredibly junior ministers who can't even do an interview without losing their cool. The fact Johnson isn't the overarching voice and face of this government now we're in the sh1t says it all.
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 08:11 - Apr 20 by sparks
Amused at the ridiculous downvotes on this one- to a post which is essentially factual.
I dont listen to LBC, but I do sometimes watch some of the clips. O Brien is good. Majid is excellent- and prepared to address difficult stuff in a measured rational way. It was a great shame he did not succeed in getting elected as a libdem MP a few years ago.
Downvotes must be from young people as according to Mullet they must be young enough for me to feel comfortable berating.
It is well known is it not that I carry around detailed analysis of posters ages and never dare argue with anyone older than me. I can't comment on the rest of his rebuttal as I actually don't understand it.
As for LBC, this is why I like it, I can listen to Ferrari and then O Brien who are polar opposites. It serves no good to only read and listen to what you want to. With the information overload available now even I could find something online that agreed with me - which is quite worrying because my politics are all over the place. It's easy to find what you want and then engage in gang mentality.
“Hello, I'm your MP. Actually I'm not. I'm your candidate. Gosh.”
Boris Johnson canvassing in Henley, 2005.
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 08:24 - Apr 20 by Mullet
Not at all, I'm saying that you are criticising for me not knowing he had slated Johnson 2 years ago but are presenting it the day after. That's not fair or reasonable.
If anything I've only gone off exactly what you put up and been open to your later clarification. What more do you want someone to do? It still presents a PM who is inept, crippled by his own desire to be a household name and heaped in adoration.
Likewise, it doesn't mean those of us criticising him consistently are doing it over every little thing. The Times article may go way too far, but to repeat myself this rebuttal does nothing to redeem Johnson at all and show he is the Chuchillian strongman he fantasises about being.
Again, if he's going to delegate responsibility he should not be doing it to people like Patel, Hancock and incredibly junior ministers who can't even do an interview without losing their cool. The fact Johnson isn't the overarching voice and face of this government now we're in the sh1t says it all.
I’m not criticising you. I’m making you aware that Maajid Nawaz is not a Boris Johnson apologist. And presented three links to demonstrate that.
That enables you to read Maajid’s takedown of the Sunday Times article in a more non partisan way.
I dint disagree with your description if Boris Johnson or the Tory government. I think the Tory front bench is severely lacking in talent, due in no small part to a Johnson alienating 50 “one nation Tories” like Rory Stewart, David Gauke, Ken Clarke et al in the run up to the 2019 general election.
I also take no issue with legitimate critics of the government’s handling of the crisis. I include yiu in that. But the Sunday Times story isn’t legitimate critics. It’s a hatchet job which is part of a greater fractional war that’s going on between sections of the “Tory press”.;Hence the unusual step of the government outing out an official rebuttal in such a combative manner.
My view since day I’ve is that so long as the government continues to be acting on the advice if their senior advisers then they get my support.
Hence the questions I posed earlier that remain unanswered, despite being posted four or five times.
Do those who are criticising the government's handling of this crisis want Ministers to follow the advice of their experts at a time of national crisis, or do they not?
If Johnson had announced that the country was being placed under the most draconian lock-down in peacetime against the advice of his senior science and medical advisers, would they have happily accepted that or would they have been on here crying that we are "sleepwalking into fascism" and that the "Brexiteers don't listen to experts"?
The devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are responsible for health policy in their countries. Why do they follow the same strategy?
Why are the likes of a Nicola Sturgeon not standing up and demanding that Scotland foes alone?
And with that I must bow out fir the day. It’s far too nice to be in here. Have a good days mullers.
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 08:40 - Apr 20 by GlasgowBlue
I’m not criticising you. I’m making you aware that Maajid Nawaz is not a Boris Johnson apologist. And presented three links to demonstrate that.
That enables you to read Maajid’s takedown of the Sunday Times article in a more non partisan way.
I dint disagree with your description if Boris Johnson or the Tory government. I think the Tory front bench is severely lacking in talent, due in no small part to a Johnson alienating 50 “one nation Tories” like Rory Stewart, David Gauke, Ken Clarke et al in the run up to the 2019 general election.
I also take no issue with legitimate critics of the government’s handling of the crisis. I include yiu in that. But the Sunday Times story isn’t legitimate critics. It’s a hatchet job which is part of a greater fractional war that’s going on between sections of the “Tory press”.;Hence the unusual step of the government outing out an official rebuttal in such a combative manner.
My view since day I’ve is that so long as the government continues to be acting on the advice if their senior advisers then they get my support.
Hence the questions I posed earlier that remain unanswered, despite being posted four or five times.
Do those who are criticising the government's handling of this crisis want Ministers to follow the advice of their experts at a time of national crisis, or do they not?
If Johnson had announced that the country was being placed under the most draconian lock-down in peacetime against the advice of his senior science and medical advisers, would they have happily accepted that or would they have been on here crying that we are "sleepwalking into fascism" and that the "Brexiteers don't listen to experts"?
The devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are responsible for health policy in their countries. Why do they follow the same strategy?
Why are the likes of a Nicola Sturgeon not standing up and demanding that Scotland foes alone?
And with that I must bow out fir the day. It’s far too nice to be in here. Have a good days mullers.
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 19:37 - Apr 19 by GlasgowBlue
So the PM is being criticised for "skipping" 5 COBRA meetings, despite it being the norm for Secretary of States to chair them
and during this period the PM met with both the CMO and CSA twice a week to be briefed on their latest scientific and medical advice.
Majjid sums it up perfectly here
He takes the Times story apart here..
"Read the article dispassionately. It makes it clear that the scientists who were advising a different course were dissenting voices. Theirs was not the formal advice presented by the science committees (SAGE & NERVTAG). Government followed the official committee advice throughout"
"Read the minutes of meetings the article refers to. It’s not really up for debate. The article confuses (or deliberately mixes up) the dissenting scientists’ advice from the formal, official science committees’ advice. The article is just full of blunders"
"Instead, this appears (transparently so) as more of the same: a Murdoch vs Barclay Brothers media war over whether to back Johnson or Gove going forward (typical media oligarch squabbling over who should be leader, in the middle of the worst global emergency of our lifetimes)."
So a question for those criticising the government's handling of this crisis. Do you want Ministers to follow the advice of their experts at a time of national crisis, or do you not?
And it wasn't just the ministers of the UK government, or as Callis likes to call them, the Tories. The devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland too. They’re responsible for health policy in their countries. Thye have been in the loop from day one and they followed and continue to follow the same strategy. Not one of Labour or SNP devolved governments has gone rogue on this. If you watched the press conferences up here Sturgeon is getting the same stick from journos that the UK spokespeople are getting. It would be easier for Nicola just to blame Boris.
And another question. If Johnson announced the country was being placed under the most draconian lock-down in peacetime against the advice of his senior science and medical advisers, who would have been the first person on here crying that we are "sleepwalking into fascism" and that the "Brexiteers don't listen to experts"?
The lockdown was always coming. They made this clear at the very first press conference. They said the lockdown had to be perfectly timed. Not too early so that the country didn't get fatique (anyone crying out for an exit strategy after just three weeks) but times to keep the curve below NHS capacity while expanding it. Which is exactly what has happened.
This isn't to say that those criticising the government's strategy are wrong or right. We may not know who was truly correct for decades, or ever. But the government had to follow the advice given.
[Post edited 19 Apr 2020 19:42]
Re COBR, the Chair can be any of The Prime Minister, Home Secretary or another senior Minister. I'd have thought the PM would be expected in the time of a pandemic, and in fairness to BJ he has been chairing them since coronavirus was declared a pandemic by the WHO. It's rather annoying this has been jumped on, as the greater point was the inactivity during the early stages when the warning signs were there and being ignored (or at least not acted on). But we are where we are.
The devolved governments don't hold much weight in the process though. They're not going to go rogue as the expectation on them is to follow suit so there is a single UK path, to avoid confusion. Hence the joint legislation. We've been explicitly told this here by the First Minister. That doesn't mean that what's happening has the support of the devolved governments. I can only speak from the perspective of Wales, but there has been considerable frustration here that the UK govt wouldn't agree to stricter lockdown controls, for example. They also got a slap over the knuckles from Westminster when announcing they were extending the lockdown in Wales without westminster's approval.
The Welsh FM is facing similar criticism in the press, especially around missing test targets. The difference is that he's taken responsibility for those failings, apologised and clearly outlined changes they are putting in place to try and streamline things. We seem to have grown ups in Wales and Scotland at least.
Nawaz's piece isn't a dismantling, rather an opinion. It's a long winded predictable defence of the Government's 'follow the science' strapline (when it's apparent that's a massive over-simplification of what was happening), with a dash of hindsight is wonderful thrown in (ignoring the foresight at the time). But other people have picked up on this. The only thing I've got to add is that I don't like the phrase "dissenting scientists". It's shows he doesn't understand science and it's a sinister ploy to play scientists off against each other. These "dissenting scientists" were actually the canaries in the mine.
To be honest mate, I only posted it..... on 08:11 - Apr 20 by giant_stow
After a little skim, im not sure thats as powerful as you seem to think it is.
I thought that too.
And I also found it odd a government document was being bandied around as cold, hard fact from the same folk who last week said a report from Labour was damage mitigation and pointing fingers at everyone but themselves.
Phil needs to seriously get us all in self-awareness classes soon.
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 09:12 - Apr 20 by Swansea_Blue
Re COBR, the Chair can be any of The Prime Minister, Home Secretary or another senior Minister. I'd have thought the PM would be expected in the time of a pandemic, and in fairness to BJ he has been chairing them since coronavirus was declared a pandemic by the WHO. It's rather annoying this has been jumped on, as the greater point was the inactivity during the early stages when the warning signs were there and being ignored (or at least not acted on). But we are where we are.
The devolved governments don't hold much weight in the process though. They're not going to go rogue as the expectation on them is to follow suit so there is a single UK path, to avoid confusion. Hence the joint legislation. We've been explicitly told this here by the First Minister. That doesn't mean that what's happening has the support of the devolved governments. I can only speak from the perspective of Wales, but there has been considerable frustration here that the UK govt wouldn't agree to stricter lockdown controls, for example. They also got a slap over the knuckles from Westminster when announcing they were extending the lockdown in Wales without westminster's approval.
The Welsh FM is facing similar criticism in the press, especially around missing test targets. The difference is that he's taken responsibility for those failings, apologised and clearly outlined changes they are putting in place to try and streamline things. We seem to have grown ups in Wales and Scotland at least.
Nawaz's piece isn't a dismantling, rather an opinion. It's a long winded predictable defence of the Government's 'follow the science' strapline (when it's apparent that's a massive over-simplification of what was happening), with a dash of hindsight is wonderful thrown in (ignoring the foresight at the time). But other people have picked up on this. The only thing I've got to add is that I don't like the phrase "dissenting scientists". It's shows he doesn't understand science and it's a sinister ploy to play scientists off against each other. These "dissenting scientists" were actually the canaries in the mine.
Nawaz is, as someone aptly said on Twitter, "a gob on a stick".
He also hops from 14th of January when there was still doubt over human-to-human transmission to the 2nd of March. But the WHO updated that there was evidence of human-to-human transmission within a week of that Jan 14th statement. So we have 5 weeks when the risk was (or at least should have been) known and would only strengthen as the cases started emerging outside of China.
It takes foresight but if a pandemic is one of our greatest national threats then seems a little bizarre that the early signs of a possible pandemic (and our capacity to deal with it) weren't taken more seriously earlier. It's not as if the Wuhan outbreak is repeated on a monthly or even yearly basis. In fact, this is only the 4th novel coronavirus to emerge this century. I'm guessing this time the risk assessment compared it rather too closely to SARS and MERS and thought it would only really affect Asia and the Middle East again.
Pronouns: He/Him
1
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 09:51 - Apr 20 with 604 views
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 09:35 - Apr 20 by Darth_Koont
Nawaz is, as someone aptly said on Twitter, "a gob on a stick".
He also hops from 14th of January when there was still doubt over human-to-human transmission to the 2nd of March. But the WHO updated that there was evidence of human-to-human transmission within a week of that Jan 14th statement. So we have 5 weeks when the risk was (or at least should have been) known and would only strengthen as the cases started emerging outside of China.
It takes foresight but if a pandemic is one of our greatest national threats then seems a little bizarre that the early signs of a possible pandemic (and our capacity to deal with it) weren't taken more seriously earlier. It's not as if the Wuhan outbreak is repeated on a monthly or even yearly basis. In fact, this is only the 4th novel coronavirus to emerge this century. I'm guessing this time the risk assessment compared it rather too closely to SARS and MERS and thought it would only really affect Asia and the Middle East again.
It's almost as if one assumed a competent government should have been more prepared because it's their job to account for these things. Like, you know, the world works in almost every regard in relation to assigned responsibility.
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 08:06 - Apr 20 by GlasgowBlue
The video is from 2018 but the first link is from less than a year ago.
I still can’t anyone to address the content rather then the presenter. Nor can I get anyone to answer the following questions.
Do those who are criticising the government's handling of this crisis want Ministers to follow the advice of their experts at a time of national crisis, or do they not?
If Johnson had announced that the country was being placed under the most draconian lock-down in peacetime against the advice of his senior science and medical advisers, would they have happily accepted that or would they have been on here crying that we are "sleepwalking into fascism" and that the "Brexiteers don't listen to experts"?
The devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are responsible for health policy in their countries. Why do they follow the same strategy?
Do you ever sit back, 5 weeks into this, and ask yourself "even the most central posters are starting to have some radical views on this and the news keeps getting worse, maybe I should rethink my whole angle on this?" Because it's starting to get desperate from you.
A radio host with a history of saying things to get clicks (because that's what LBC is) and a government press release that reads more like a TWTD post from yourself with a few denial statements plus a serious lack of evidence to support that denial.
As Ullea said, I don't think it was the bomb shell you hoped for.
Came out last night the propaganda wheel is still in full flow with impressive soundbites that never quite match reality. You should be outraged really and the longer you dig your heels in as this drags out the weirder you're coming across.
For someone who was so keen to talk about the brainwashed Corbyn cult and supposedly abandoned their party in 2017, you are quite an unpaid Yes Man for them.
The Times with another explosive scoop.... on 09:35 - Apr 20 by Darth_Koont
Nawaz is, as someone aptly said on Twitter, "a gob on a stick".
He also hops from 14th of January when there was still doubt over human-to-human transmission to the 2nd of March. But the WHO updated that there was evidence of human-to-human transmission within a week of that Jan 14th statement. So we have 5 weeks when the risk was (or at least should have been) known and would only strengthen as the cases started emerging outside of China.
It takes foresight but if a pandemic is one of our greatest national threats then seems a little bizarre that the early signs of a possible pandemic (and our capacity to deal with it) weren't taken more seriously earlier. It's not as if the Wuhan outbreak is repeated on a monthly or even yearly basis. In fact, this is only the 4th novel coronavirus to emerge this century. I'm guessing this time the risk assessment compared it rather too closely to SARS and MERS and thought it would only really affect Asia and the Middle East again.
I agree with your last point in particular.
I think the whole of The West assumed it would stay in The Far East, I think we all did to be honest.
Early February I was in Birmingham with an Italian and a Chinese supplier, they had both flown in together from Nuremberg where they had both been attending a trade show and they came to visit me at our show in Brum. I just looked back, this was 10th February.
Even then we were not thinking about a European problem, Li, the Chinese guy couldn't get back to China as flights were blocked China end and he had to go back to Italy with our Italian friend. Over dinner we were taking the p1ss over his situation.
The fact that unlike SARS etc it has decided to trouble us in The West it is also a fact that The Far East can handle this sort of thing like second nature.
“Hello, I'm your MP. Actually I'm not. I'm your candidate. Gosh.”
Boris Johnson canvassing in Henley, 2005.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
