"Currants Bw..."

[Ollie the Optimist]

There are several flaws in the times article.

The first being that the PM does not chair every Cobra meeting.

Secondly, it was announced on march 2nd that Boris would be chairing the cobra that day and it was the 6th meeting. Hardly an exclusive now when they told the media two months ago!

[Niall_Quinn]

There are several flaws in the times article.

The first being that the PM does not chair every Cobra meeting.

Secondly, it was announced on march 2nd that Boris would be chairing the cobra that day and it was the 6th meeting. Hardly an exclusive now when they told the media two months ago!

Several? The whole thing is an exercise in omission and jaundiced perspective. These people need to finally accept we have left the EU. But they just can't seem to do it.

[Mac76]

There certainly will be, and it will be one of the most important events in our nation's history. For once, the politicians will be pitched against the deep seated, permanent government as opposed to in lock-step. It will be a rare opportunity to reveal the nature and full extent of those unelected individuals and corporate entities that control so much with so little scrutiny. Whether the temporary political class has the wherewithal to lift the rock on this common enemy is questionable, but they'll be forced to try, if only to do what they do best - cover their arses.

oh dear, another poor deluded soul who believes in the Sir Humphrey myth - i thought i'd explained that to you - i'm afraid that idiots like Johnson and Gove really do run (if you can call the choaos over which they preside 'running') the country - that's the really scary thing - i'd actually be much calmer if i thought there were shadowy figures with clipboards and trilbies preventing these useless nutters from doing the damage they do

[Mac76]

Several? The whole thing is an exercise in omission and jaundiced perspective. These people need to finally accept we have left the EU. But they just can't seem to do it.

read it again - it's the Times, owned by leave-supporting Murdoch

[Niall_Quinn]

read it again - it's the Times, owned by leave-supporting Murdoch

Get out of it. It's dripping with salty tears about Brexit and spends half it's time targeting the personal behaviour of Johnson who is hated by the remoaners. They start it out as a legal pleading and then disintegrate into remoaning and personal attacks, while carefully apologising for the real culprits at every opportunity. This would be laughed out of a court and sanctions could well be levied against the pseudo-lawyers bringing this nonsense.

The argument is so ill conceived it defeats itself in several key places and opens itself up to actually highlight the parties it tries to conceal. Case in point, the delivery of supplies to China. There's a huge story behind that which in turn leads to the next huge story, and so on. No lawyer would build a motorway through his own argument like that, literally providing a straight route to drive the whole case elsewhere at high speed.

A real legal argument would focus on the facts as they stand, and the harm or damages arising from those facts. Plus it would deliver a motivation to explain why those facts came about.

This is just a silly whinge about Brexit and Johnson, disguised in a highbrow and solemn manner than might be impressive for those who use the Times as a fashion accessory. But in normal times it'd be fun to hear the sniggers from lawyers on the train as the read through that nonsense.

[Niall_Quinn]

oh dear, another poor deluded soul who believes in the Sir Humphrey myth - i thought i'd explained that to you - i'm afraid that idiots like Johnson and Gove really do run (if you can call the choaos over which they preside 'running') the country - that's the really scary thing - i'd actually be much calmer if i thought there were shadowy figures with clipboards and trilbies preventing these useless nutters from doing the damage they do

I have always found it futile trying to explain the self evident realities of political theatre to those who are heavily invested in the tribal nature of it. Blue, Red, my side, your side, good, evil, moral, immoral, lies, truth, etc, etc. Obvious playacting for the purpose of causing division. But many people are fundamentally invested in it, to their cores. It's a lifelong affliction for many. They infect their children with the same and generations pass. Even when their tribe reverses every belief it ever claimed to hold inviolable, they about-turn and invest themselves wholeheartedly in the new gospel.

Gove and Johnson are in charge. Sure they are. That's what is says in the job descriptions and that's how it will be until, suddenly, somebody else is in charge of a system that never changes and always benefits a minority over the majority (which must be an unbroken streak of coincidence I suppose).

[Ollie the Optimist]

read it again - it's the Times, owned by leave-supporting Murdoch

Didn’t the Sunday times back remain? or was it the Times backed remain and ST went brexit. Either way, one of them certainly backed remain.

[Letters]

This deserved a reply. Now don't shout but I'm only going to reply to a couple of points because some things I either don't have much to say about or don't want to go down those rabbit holes

IoT. Do some reading. IoT is far, far more than smart fridges. It's an interconnected, global system that integrates every other system into a framework that literally allows your every action and interaction to be tracked and analysed. China has already deployed a basic version of this dystopia. Read up on it and figure out for yourself why it's such a terrible thing. Just read. Particularly look for how initially benign technologies have been monopolised and subverted. Blockchain is the best example.

My stance on this has always been that I don't care. I don't care if there's CCTV everywhere. I don't care if "they" are looking at my emails or my web browsing history. If they are then they're probably a bit bored because I'm not doing anything particularly interesting.
I actually don't think they are doing these things. I mean, no-one is sitting there checking what I'm up to. Sure there are probably face recognition algorithms which can tell where I've been, there are definitely algorithms looking for patterns or keywords.
I guess the reason I'm not that bothered about this is that, so far, I don't really feel it's affected my freedoms or my day to day life.
Sure, it means I'm getting targeted adverts but I don't see that as particular sinister. The companies are trying to sell me things I'm interested in. If I am interested then I'll buy their products. The company gets my money, I get something I want. No-one loses.

There is obviously a danger here. An authoritarian government could use all that data to severely restrict our freedoms. So I get the concern.
Personally though, I don't find it likely. People have been wringing their hands for decades about this sort of thing. And their fears have never materialised.
You might disagree, but it hasn't affected my day to day life. Even now with the "lockdown". I'm sure "they" could use tracking information from people's phones to see if I'm going out more than once a day and issue automatic fines if I do - given that I'm not a key worker, and "they" also know that.
I don't think "they" are doing anything like that. They could, they have all the data they need to do it, but they aren't.
If you object to the very fact that they could then fair enough, I guess. If it's the principle you object to then fine. But personally I can't get worked up about it simply because it's never affected my life and I don't believe it will. I may be wrong of course, but that's how I see it.

You are laser focused on Trump. A man with almost no influence beyond the mainstream hullabaloo. He's a dancing puppet.

I disagree. I mean, I'm a bit focused on him simply because he's so high profile and vocal. And I basically disagree with everything he says.
But I don't agree he has no influence. I never understand this argument that the president is just a figurehead.
I mean, I'm not saying he's running the whole show single-handed. Of course he isn't.
But there's no doubt about his influence. Billions were approved for his infernal wall, he's made decisions about the Covid-19 situation.
He's obviously not the sole decision maker but he's not just announcing things which others have decided either.
His fingerprints are all over a lot of the decisions being made in the US right now.

[Mac76]

Didn’t the Sunday times back remain? or was it the Times backed remain and ST went brexit. Either way, one of them certainly backed remain.

Well given you've presented precise killer facts in such an effective manner, who am i to argue

[Ollie the Optimist]

Well given you've presented precise killer facts in such an effective manner, who am i to argue

I got it wrong, the times backed remain not the Sunday times. https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b0a4f99adc6525

So just because Murdoch owns the paper, doesn’t make it a brexit supporting one.


Interestingly, i didnt realise the Mail On Sunday backed remain!