Agree Watford you are a top fella but don't be sarcastic to posters who spend their time writing something even if you think it's crap otherwise we get back to zzzzzz and . By the way, Turkish was spot on with regards to the care homes. When all this is done I want you to meet a friend of mine who has first-hand experience in this area. sit down and listen to what he has to say and I think you will be shocked mate.
I am only going to comment on this ...and I am off to read the Sunday Times article first Ellers this is NOT fake news this is a technical correction of fact. The BBC first reported the guy as being the head of an NHS Trust (a figure head) and then the found out and recorrect the factthat the guy was part of the PPE procurement force that deals with a number of NHS Trusts (actually someone who could do something for a number of different Trusts). I am MUCH MORE shocked that part of the procurment team is asking for the number than a request from a boss. Please stop trying to score brownie points and actually use your brain and think about what you are writing please.
yes, I am. You were clever to choose the countries you did, however, you mad a couple of mistakes which I will correct for you. Nice response about the fake news.
I really cant figure you out Ellers. My only conclusion is that you are a WUM. I have no other possible explanation.
My dad would always say. 'If you don't speak they don't know'. As I said Watford, I will wait for the inquest/inquiry because now is far too soon. You are judging someone before the case has started. It doesn't work like that. Wait for all the evidence. The BBC story should tell you that?
For those who point out that most care homes are run for profit by private owners and that the government shouldn't be blamed for lack of PPE in them. Would you support the government taking this sector into public control, under the NHS umbrella (i.e. effectively nationalised)?
I probably did make some mistakes. Focus on the ones that are good comparators. It’s very poor dialectic to reject an argument because of an issue with 10% of it.
The government did not deliberately lie, their statement was based on facts given to them by the various regional NHS trusts and hospital management, this is how it works, I ask you a question you give me an answer, I then repeat your answer to somebody who asked me that same question, and that answer turns out to be incorrect, now you tell me who ****ing lied, me or you or both of us. It’s that simple mate people go on facts they are given by others.
You really should have used other countries to compare. Ellers would have given you a few to choose from. Silly boy
Are we still waiting for Ellers comeback or has he forgotten I’m on ignore do can Sb or someone ask the question again ?
In that case the government could never be blamed for anything, because for every disaster they can blame poor information given to them, and you would support them in this. I blame the government, which has the accountability, you blame the NHS. Fine. Perhaps they didn’t deliberately lie, or perceive what they did to be lying, they just said what they wanted to be true, because it made them popular. Just like they have on ventilators and tests. Net effect is the same though, the public has been misled.
The BBC story that was very slightly wrong and just happens to have got right wing sources frothing about fake news the day the PM is in the firing line. You’re conflating different issues. I’m referring specifically to this inside scoop you claim to have that proved the ST’s story is false. That’s a big claim to make and expect people to just take your word for it.
