Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
filbertway

Coronavirus Thread

By filbertway, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

tom27111

tom27111

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

Volunteering as a marshall at a covid vaccine site tomorrow, be interesting to see how well run the place is and how many turn up.

 

Fair play, mate.

 

Good luck.

 

I've had a test and the Mrs has had two, all at different sites.

 

They seem to be pretty well run from what I've experienced. I did have an issue with my test. The site was closed due to "technical problems", so I had to re-book for the next day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nalis

Nalis

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

I personally think it's great to have a political stance but still have a semblance of balance. I'm absolutely a remainer but the EU have handled this terribly, and anyone who says they haven't are just blinded by some weird 'my team' bias that goes way beyond a personal opinion. I can think Boris Johnson has done very well, commendably, with the vaccine programme but still think he looks and acts like a haunted custard tart and not like him or his government. I don't like kier starmer all that much, either, but would still be a remainer and a Labour voter. Madness. 

This is exactly where I stand too

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nalis

Nalis

Posted
Posted
Just now, ozleicester said:

Perth WA... No community transmission for 10 months.... today, Security guard from COVID Hotel has it.. SLAM..lockdown!! :(

 

Thats unlucky.

 

Relatively easy to trace back any contacts hopefully if its just one case.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, Nod.E said:

Maybe I'm biased, but you wouldn't get this kind of level headed response from those 'on the other side'. 

Acknowledges the virtue of objectivity whilst referring to "the other side". At least you accept the notion of your own subjectivity though, which so many today are incapable of recognising. It's that sort of rhetoric - "the other side" that has driven populist divisions and tribalism on social media and fuels the polarisation which is tearing society apart. 

 

Good post wasn't it?...but then perhaps that was my own subconscious bias? - No matter, where's that like button? Doesn't that typify and embody what we have become though? You don't have to use it, granted, but our world seems to increasingly be about expressing what we either "like' or "dislike" with little, as you say, "level headed" appraisal in between. Politics is a bitter battleground today. Remainers rage against Brexiters and vice versa. Pensioners stand off against millennials; nationalists against immigrants; populists against perceived elites; rural traditionalists against city liberals. Party politics have descended into contempt and dogma - even from within. To his detractors, Corbyn was a dangerous Marxist extremist, to the Corbynistas, his internal critics were traitors to the cause. To many non-Tory voters and MPs, Theresa May’s government was an immoral experiment in austerity whilst to those pro-remain, BoJo threw us all under his Brexit Bus.

 

On seemingly every fundamental issue, the country feels even more fractious than it did during even the turbulent 70s and 80s. There are vociferous and vicious wars over free speech, minority rights, the size of the state, the shape of the economy, social and cultural values, even the truth and selection of relevant political facts and in this post-truth era, the real and the fake. In many other democracies, from the US to Italy to Australia, politics has become just as tribal, fragmented and torn asunder. Bipartisanism is a dirty word and opposing factions no longer seem able to talk to each other, or even to agree on what they might talk about. Anthony Giddens held that in a more fluid, interconnected world, with its linked globalist economies and common environmental crises, we need a politics that was calm and not divisive, a public arena in which controversial issues can be resolved, or at least addressed through dialogue. The advent of the internet and increasing cosmopolitanism should have eroded away the traditional, the tribal and encouraged the more individualistic. Instead we have an increasingly mundane consumerist monoculture but a binary dichotomous thought process superimposed upon it. Not only does this reassure people - often that they are right, but it is a dangerous way of approaching complex issues...look no further than Brexit. 

 

Blair's so called "Third Way", "beyond left and right" and vision of his "classless society" sounded fresh and ambitious, but the consensus politics of the New Labour era was actually a cowardly retreat. The view of the political became extremely narrow trammeled and simplistic and lacking ideological categories, a critique of the economic and social status quo, and defined enemies (aside from Blairs lazy references to “the forces of conservatism”). New Labour’s politics were insubstantial.  Any return to consensus however will take a long time - if at all. Politics and the world has fundamentally changed. The centrists lost their legitimacy because of Iraq and the financial crisis of 2009.

 

In a democracy, different groups compete for economic resources, and cultural and physical space. Therefore, politics breeds and arguably needs incompatible choices and dilemmas for which no objective solution can seemingly ever exist. Such conflicts result only in temporary victories though; then the balance of power between the winner and loser shifts, thanks to the ebb and flow of and tides of populism, the sea change is inevitable - and the conflict starts again. That battleground I referred to? - the front lines facing off are rightwing and leftwing populism. That could usher in a more authoritarian form of neoliberalism and the spread of the Trump-style government by decree and deregulation, or to a new, much more democratic politics. A functional democracy still invites and entertains conflict, but where people can accept the existence of their adversaries, and establish constructive discourse and dialogue is not easy to re-establish - the same can be said for society. We have crossed the Rubicon without knowing it...such is the pace of socio-economic and technological acceleration which has evolved faster than the ethics accompanying it. As I said before on here, the dialectic is dead. 

 

Like @Steve_Guppy_Left_FootI am left of center, staunch remain (because it was the just and right course of action), but nonetheless in many respects a Eurosceptic. I found both the Tories throughout the years and a Labour Party - afflicted by the extremism of the 80s, Blairite banality and recently torn asunder by entryism and conflicting ideology, unelectable and so have tended towards the apolitical. From my observations last week however, many of Tony Benn's original misgivings, doubts and fears concerning European bureaucracy, accountability and undemocratic hegemonic agenda have been shamefully vindicated. 

 

Aside from Donald Trump, only the Eurocrats and leaders in question could, as @Dunge correctly observed, somehow succeed in making Boris Johnson look like the grown-up in the room. 

 

Edited by Line-X
  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lionator

Lionator

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Line-X said:

Acknowledges the virtue of objectivity whilst referring to "the other side". At least you accept the notion of your own subjectivity though, which so many today are incapable of recognising. It's that sort of rhetoric - "the other side" that has driven populist divisions and tribalism on social media and fuels the polarisation which is tearing society apart. 

 

Good post wasn't it?...but then perhaps that was my own subconscious bias? - No matter, where's that like button? Doesn't that typify and embody what we have become though? You don't have to use it, granted, but our world seems to increasingly be about expressing what we either "like' or "dislike" with little, as you say, "balanced" appraisal in between. Politics is a bitter battleground today. Remainers rage against Brexiters and vice versa. Pensioners stand off against millennials; nationalists against immigrants; populists against perceived elites; rural traditionalists against city liberals. Party politics have descended into contempt and dogma - even from within. To his detractors, Corbyn was a dangerous Marxist extremist, to the Corbynistas, his internal critics were traitors to the cause. To many non-Tory voters and MPs, Theresa May’s government was an immoral experiment in austerity whilst to those pro-remain, BoJo threw us all under his Brexit Bus.

 

On seemingly every fundamental issue, the country feels even more fractious than it did during even the turbulent 70s and 80s. There are vociferous and vicious wars over free speech, minority rights, the size of the state, the shape of the economy, social and cultural values, even the truth and selection of relevant political facts and in this post-truth era, the real and the fake. In many other democracies, from the US to Italy to Australia, politics has become just as tribal, fragmented and torn asunder. Bipartisanism is a dirty word and opposing factions no longer seem able to talk to each other, or even to agree on what they might talk about. Anthony Giddens held that in a more fluid, interconnected world, with its linked globalist economies and common environmental crises, we need a politics that was calm and not divisive, a public arena in which controversial issues can be resolved, or at least addressed through dialogue. The advent of the internet and increasing cosmopolitanism should have eroded away the traditional, the tribal and encouraged the more individualistic. Instead we have an increasingly mundane consumerist monoculture but a binary dichotomous thought process. Not only does this reassure people - often that they are right, but it is a dangerous way of approaching complex issues...look no further than Brexit. 

 

Blair's so called "Third Way", "beyond left and right" and vision of his "classless society" sounded fresh and ambitious, but the consensus politics of the New Labour era was actually a cowardly retreat. The view of the political became extremely narrow trammeled and simplistic and lacking ideological categories, a critique of the economic and social status quo, and defined enemies (aside from Blairs lazy references to “the forces of conservatism” – New Labour’s politics were insubstantial.  Any return to consensus however will take a long time - if at all. Politics and the world has fundamentally changed. The centrists lost their legitimacy because of Iraq and the financial crisis of 2009.

 

In a democracy, different groups compete for economic resources, and cultural and physical space. Therefore, politics breeds and arguably needs incompatible choices and dilemmas “for which no objective solution can seemingly ever exist. Such conflicts result only in temporary victories though; then the balance of power between the winner and loser shifts, thanks to the ebb and flow of and tides of populism, the sea change is inevitable - and the conflict starts again. That battleground I referred to? - the front lines facing off are rightwing and leftwing populism. That could usher in a more authoritarian form of neoliberalism and the spread of the Trump-style government by decree and deregulation, or to a new, much more democratic politics. A functional democracy still invites and entertains conflict, but where people can accept the existence of their adversaries, and establish constructive discourse and dialogue is not easy to re-establish - the same can be said for society. We have crossed the Rubicon without knowing it...such is the pace of socio-economic and technoloigical acceleration which has evolved faster than the ethics accompanying it. As I said before on here, the dialectic is dead. 

 

Like @Steve_Guppy_Left_FootI am left of center, staunch remain (because it was the just and right course of action), but nonetheless in many respects a Eurosceptic. I found both the Tories throughout the years and a Labour Party - afflicted by the extremism of the 80s, Blairite banality and recently torn asunder by entryism and conflicting ideology, unelectable and so have tended towards the apolitical. From my observations last week however, many of Tony Benn's original misgivings, doubts and fears concerning European bureaucracy, accountability and undemocratic hegemonic agenda have been shamefully vindicated. 

 

Aside from Donald Trump, only the Eurocrats and leaders in question could, as @Dunge correctly observed, somehow succeed in making Boris Johnson look like the grown-up in the room. 

 

I really like this, being able to critically analyse stuff, especially your own core beliefs is sadly rare in this mess of a society at the minute. You’re either right or you’re wrong, people are horrifically emotionally driven. 
 

Incidentally there’s a new Adam Curtis series coming out soon which should be good. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alf Bentley

Alf Bentley

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, Line-X said:

Acknowledges the virtue of objectivity whilst referring to "the other side". At least you accept the notion of your own subjectivity though, which so many today are incapable of recognising. It's that sort of rhetoric - "the other side" that has driven populist divisions and tribalism on social media and fuels the polarisation which is tearing society apart. 

 

Good post wasn't it?...but then perhaps that was my own subconscious bias? - No matter, where's that like button? Doesn't that typify and embody what we have become though? You don't have to use it, granted, but our world seems to increasingly be about expressing what we either "like' or "dislike" with little, as you say, "balanced" appraisal in between. Politics is a bitter battleground today. Remainers rage against Brexiters and vice versa. Pensioners stand off against millennials; nationalists against immigrants; populists against perceived elites; rural traditionalists against city liberals. Party politics have descended into contempt and dogma - even from within. To his detractors, Corbyn was a dangerous Marxist extremist, to the Corbynistas, his internal critics were traitors to the cause. To many non-Tory voters and MPs, Theresa May’s government was an immoral experiment in austerity whilst to those pro-remain, BoJo threw us all under his Brexit Bus.

 

On seemingly every fundamental issue, the country feels even more fractious than it did during even the turbulent 70s and 80s. There are vociferous and vicious wars over free speech, minority rights, the size of the state, the shape of the economy, social and cultural values, even the truth and selection of relevant political facts and in this post-truth era, the real and the fake. In many other democracies, from the US to Italy to Australia, politics has become just as tribal, fragmented and torn asunder. Bipartisanism is a dirty word and opposing factions no longer seem able to talk to each other, or even to agree on what they might talk about. Anthony Giddens held that in a more fluid, interconnected world, with its linked globalist economies and common environmental crises, we need a politics that was calm and not divisive, a public arena in which controversial issues can be resolved, or at least addressed through dialogue. The advent of the internet and increasing cosmopolitanism should have eroded away the traditional, the tribal and encouraged the more individualistic. Instead we have an increasingly mundane consumerist monoculture but a binary dichotomous thought process. Not only does this reassure people - often that they are right, but it is a dangerous way of approaching complex issues...look no further than Brexit. 

 

Blair's so called "Third Way", "beyond left and right" and vision of his "classless society" sounded fresh and ambitious, but the consensus politics of the New Labour era was actually a cowardly retreat. The view of the political became extremely narrow trammeled and simplistic and lacking ideological categories, a critique of the economic and social status quo, and defined enemies (aside from Blairs lazy references to “the forces of conservatism” – New Labour’s politics were insubstantial.  Any return to consensus however will take a long time - if at all. Politics and the world has fundamentally changed. The centrists lost their legitimacy because of Iraq and the financial crisis of 2009.

 

In a democracy, different groups compete for economic resources, and cultural and physical space. Therefore, politics breeds and arguably needs incompatible choices and dilemmas “for which no objective solution can seemingly ever exist. Such conflicts result only in temporary victories though; then the balance of power between the winner and loser shifts, thanks to the ebb and flow of and tides of populism, the sea change is inevitable - and the conflict starts again. That battleground I referred to? - the front lines facing off are rightwing and leftwing populism. That could usher in a more authoritarian form of neoliberalism and the spread of the Trump-style government by decree and deregulation, or to a new, much more democratic politics. A functional democracy still invites and entertains conflict, but where people can accept the existence of their adversaries, and establish constructive discourse and dialogue is not easy to re-establish - the same can be said for society. We have crossed the Rubicon without knowing it...such is the pace of socio-economic and technoloigical acceleration which has evolved faster than the ethics accompanying it. As I said before on here, the dialectic is dead. 

 

Like @Steve_Guppy_Left_FootI am left of center, staunch remain (because it was the just and right course of action), but nonetheless in many respects a Eurosceptic. I found both the Tories throughout the years and a Labour Party - afflicted by the extremism of the 80s, Blairite banality and recently torn asunder by entryism and conflicting ideology, unelectable and so have tended towards the apolitical. From my observations last week however, many of Tony Benn's original misgivings, doubts and fears concerning European bureaucracy, accountability and undemocratic hegemonic agenda have been shamefully vindicated. 

 

Aside from Donald Trump, only the Eurocrats and leaders in question could, as @Dunge correctly observed, somehow succeed in making Boris Johnson look like the grown-up in the room. 

 

 

:appl:

 

One of the best political posts I've ever seen on Foxes Talk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nod.E

Nod.E

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Line-X said:

Acknowledges the virtue of objectivity whilst referring to "the other side". At least you accept the notion of your own subjectivity though, which so many today are incapable of recognising. It's that sort of rhetoric - "the other side" that has driven populist divisions and tribalism on social media and fuels the polarisation which is tearing society apart. 

 

Good post wasn't it?...but then perhaps that was my own subconscious bias? - No matter, where's that like button? Doesn't that typify and embody what we have become though? You don't have to use it, granted, but our world seems to increasingly be about expressing what we either "like' or "dislike" with little, as you say, "level headed" appraisal in between. Politics is a bitter battleground today. Remainers rage against Brexiters and vice versa. Pensioners stand off against millennials; nationalists against immigrants; populists against perceived elites; rural traditionalists against city liberals. Party politics have descended into contempt and dogma - even from within. To his detractors, Corbyn was a dangerous Marxist extremist, to the Corbynistas, his internal critics were traitors to the cause. To many non-Tory voters and MPs, Theresa May’s government was an immoral experiment in austerity whilst to those pro-remain, BoJo threw us all under his Brexit Bus.

 

On seemingly every fundamental issue, the country feels even more fractious than it did during even the turbulent 70s and 80s. There are vociferous and vicious wars over free speech, minority rights, the size of the state, the shape of the economy, social and cultural values, even the truth and selection of relevant political facts and in this post-truth era, the real and the fake. In many other democracies, from the US to Italy to Australia, politics has become just as tribal, fragmented and torn asunder. Bipartisanism is a dirty word and opposing factions no longer seem able to talk to each other, or even to agree on what they might talk about. Anthony Giddens held that in a more fluid, interconnected world, with its linked globalist economies and common environmental crises, we need a politics that was calm and not divisive, a public arena in which controversial issues can be resolved, or at least addressed through dialogue. The advent of the internet and increasing cosmopolitanism should have eroded away the traditional, the tribal and encouraged the more individualistic. Instead we have an increasingly mundane consumerist monoculture but a binary dichotomous thought process superimposed upon it. Not only does this reassure people - often that they are right, but it is a dangerous way of approaching complex issues...look no further than Brexit. 

 

Blair's so called "Third Way", "beyond left and right" and vision of his "classless society" sounded fresh and ambitious, but the consensus politics of the New Labour era was actually a cowardly retreat. The view of the political became extremely narrow trammeled and simplistic and lacking ideological categories, a critique of the economic and social status quo, and defined enemies (aside from Blairs lazy references to “the forces of conservatism”). New Labour’s politics were insubstantial.  Any return to consensus however will take a long time - if at all. Politics and the world has fundamentally changed. The centrists lost their legitimacy because of Iraq and the financial crisis of 2009.

 

In a democracy, different groups compete for economic resources, and cultural and physical space. Therefore, politics breeds and arguably needs incompatible choices and dilemmas for which no objective solution can seemingly ever exist. Such conflicts result only in temporary victories though; then the balance of power between the winner and loser shifts, thanks to the ebb and flow of and tides of populism, the sea change is inevitable - and the conflict starts again. That battleground I referred to? - the front lines facing off are rightwing and leftwing populism. That could usher in a more authoritarian form of neoliberalism and the spread of the Trump-style government by decree and deregulation, or to a new, much more democratic politics. A functional democracy still invites and entertains conflict, but where people can accept the existence of their adversaries, and establish constructive discourse and dialogue is not easy to re-establish - the same can be said for society. We have crossed the Rubicon without knowing it...such is the pace of socio-economic and technological acceleration which has evolved faster than the ethics accompanying it. As I said before on here, the dialectic is dead. 

 

Like @Steve_Guppy_Left_FootI am left of center, staunch remain (because it was the just and right course of action), but nonetheless in many respects a Eurosceptic. I found both the Tories throughout the years and a Labour Party - afflicted by the extremism of the 80s, Blairite banality and recently torn asunder by entryism and conflicting ideology, unelectable and so have tended towards the apolitical. From my observations last week however, many of Tony Benn's original misgivings, doubts and fears concerning European bureaucracy, accountability and undemocratic hegemonic agenda have been shamefully vindicated. 

 

Aside from Donald Trump, only the Eurocrats and leaders in question could, as @Dunge correctly observed, somehow succeed in making Boris Johnson look like the grown-up in the room. 

 

I put 'the other side' in inverted commas because I knew what I was saying was wrong. I have criticised the use of that language a few times on here. 

 

I don't like the idea of there being sides, that shouldn't be the way it works. I'd be kidding myself to ignore that they do exist, though, and I'm part of the problem.

 

I do not know the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thefox81

Thefox81

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Line-X said:

Acknowledges the virtue of objectivity whilst referring to "the other side". At least you accept the notion of your own subjectivity though, which so many today are incapable of recognising. It's that sort of rhetoric - "the other side" that has driven populist divisions and tribalism on social media and fuels the polarisation which is tearing society apart. 

 

Good post wasn't it?...but then perhaps that was my own subconscious bias? - No matter, where's that like button? Doesn't that typify and embody what we have become though? You don't have to use it, granted, but our world seems to increasingly be about expressing what we either "like' or "dislike" with little, as you say, "level headed" appraisal in between. Politics is a bitter battleground today. Remainers rage against Brexiters and vice versa. Pensioners stand off against millennials; nationalists against immigrants; populists against perceived elites; rural traditionalists against city liberals. Party politics have descended into contempt and dogma - even from within. To his detractors, Corbyn was a dangerous Marxist extremist, to the Corbynistas, his internal critics were traitors to the cause. To many non-Tory voters and MPs, Theresa May’s government was an immoral experiment in austerity whilst to those pro-remain, BoJo threw us all under his Brexit Bus.

 

On seemingly every fundamental issue, the country feels even more fractious than it did during even the turbulent 70s and 80s. There are vociferous and vicious wars over free speech, minority rights, the size of the state, the shape of the economy, social and cultural values, even the truth and selection of relevant political facts and in this post-truth era, the real and the fake. In many other democracies, from the US to Italy to Australia, politics has become just as tribal, fragmented and torn asunder. Bipartisanism is a dirty word and opposing factions no longer seem able to talk to each other, or even to agree on what they might talk about. Anthony Giddens held that in a more fluid, interconnected world, with its linked globalist economies and common environmental crises, we need a politics that was calm and not divisive, a public arena in which controversial issues can be resolved, or at least addressed through dialogue. The advent of the internet and increasing cosmopolitanism should have eroded away the traditional, the tribal and encouraged the more individualistic. Instead we have an increasingly mundane consumerist monoculture but a binary dichotomous thought process superimposed upon it. Not only does this reassure people - often that they are right, but it is a dangerous way of approaching complex issues...look no further than Brexit. 

 

Blair's so called "Third Way", "beyond left and right" and vision of his "classless society" sounded fresh and ambitious, but the consensus politics of the New Labour era was actually a cowardly retreat. The view of the political became extremely narrow trammeled and simplistic and lacking ideological categories, a critique of the economic and social status quo, and defined enemies (aside from Blairs lazy references to “the forces of conservatism”). New Labour’s politics were insubstantial.  Any return to consensus however will take a long time - if at all. Politics and the world has fundamentally changed. The centrists lost their legitimacy because of Iraq and the financial crisis of 2009.

 

In a democracy, different groups compete for economic resources, and cultural and physical space. Therefore, politics breeds and arguably needs incompatible choices and dilemmas for which no objective solution can seemingly ever exist. Such conflicts result only in temporary victories though; then the balance of power between the winner and loser shifts, thanks to the ebb and flow of and tides of populism, the sea change is inevitable - and the conflict starts again. That battleground I referred to? - the front lines facing off are rightwing and leftwing populism. That could usher in a more authoritarian form of neoliberalism and the spread of the Trump-style government by decree and deregulation, or to a new, much more democratic politics. A functional democracy still invites and entertains conflict, but where people can accept the existence of their adversaries, and establish constructive discourse and dialogue is not easy to re-establish - the same can be said for society. We have crossed the Rubicon without knowing it...such is the pace of socio-economic and technological acceleration which has evolved faster than the ethics accompanying it. As I said before on here, the dialectic is dead. 

 

Like @Steve_Guppy_Left_FootI am left of center, staunch remain (because it was the just and right course of action), but nonetheless in many respects a Eurosceptic. I found both the Tories throughout the years and a Labour Party - afflicted by the extremism of the 80s, Blairite banality and recently torn asunder by entryism and conflicting ideology, unelectable and so have tended towards the apolitical. From my observations last week however, many of Tony Benn's original misgivings, doubts and fears concerning European bureaucracy, accountability and undemocratic hegemonic agenda have been shamefully vindicated. 

 

Aside from Donald Trump, only the Eurocrats and leaders in question could, as @Dunge correctly observed, somehow succeed in making Boris Johnson look like the grown-up in the room. 

 

Why cant you run the country. Reading this thread pretty much daily since it all happened. Dont contribute much myself but always gravitate to your posts as they seem factual and very easy to read for simpletons like myself. Keep up with the imformative posts as myself and many others appreciate them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kopfkino

Kopfkino

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 30/01/2021 at 14:02, reynard said:

Abdolute idiot on this.

Edited because I am a moron

 

On 30/01/2021 at 13:14, leicsmac said:

Some positions don't require nuance in their examination, Kopf - ethnic supremacism and destruction of natural environments in a way that endanger human future being a couple of examples that spring to mind. If believing that is somehow applying nuance selectively when one feels it should be applied across the board, then so be it. Additionally, I never claimed to not be a hypocrite on the matter myself when I, like everyone else here, has their biases - but being a hypocrite doesn't mean I'm wrong about the remarkable lack of subtlety in discourse over the past couple of pages of this thread.

 

If you think I'm damning the UK government with faint praise, then so be it too - I stand by that they've gotten more wrong than they've gotten right on this one overall, but I'm not going to say nor infer that they have got nothing right, as is being inferred by some of the commentary on the EU here. 

 

There's times where picking a side is pretty damn obvious and others when it might be better to actually consider the merits and flaws of both sides and accept they have them. This one is the latter, IMO.

 

It’s just your way of straw manning everything you don’t like, it’s your go to. This particular topic, I don’t give a ****, you can call the UK government as useless as you like, just strange to hector everyone else about nuance and not be interested in sticking to it. In fact I don’t give a **** about nuance at all. At least you acknowledge being a hypocrite, fair play. Just wouldn’t go around demanding of others what you won’t do yourself.
 

 

Edited by Kopfkino
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FoxesDeb

FoxesDeb

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

If you cbf to engage in any meaningful manner, give your fingers a rest, do me a favour don’t subject me to having to read your nothingness. Thankfully the ignore button will save me in future.

 

It’s just your way of straw manning everything you don’t like, it’s your go to. This particular topic, I don’t give a ****, you can call the UK government as useless as you like, just strange to hector everyone else about nuance and not be interested in sticking to it. In fact I don’t give a **** about nuance at all. At least you acknowledge being a hypocrite, fair play. Just wouldn’t go around demanding of others what you won’t do yourself.
 

 

I may have read it completely wrong, but I thought @reynardwas calling Macron the idiot, not you

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zear0

Zear0

Posted
Posted (edited)

That vaccine figure was a welcome (refuse to use a pun) thing to see after the performance today.

 

EU can moan about vaccine stocks until the cows come home, but the logistics to get this administered is excellent. Well done to that bald Brigadier. 

Edited by Zear0
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tomassi

Tomassi

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, ozleicester said:

Perth WA... No community transmission for 10 months.... today, Security guard from COVID Hotel has it.. SLAM..lockdown!! :(

 

Stay safe mate. Apparently it's the UK variant and I've heard there's already two other cases (although nothing official yet). I strongly suspect the lockdown will be a lot longer than 5 days.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...