But it's not a 'lie' is it? His uncle was on the ship that was destroyed by an Argentine missile. How the missile exploded is irrelevant. It was a missile and I imagine the enemy believed that it would detonate on impact. The fact that it didn't, but was then accidentally detonated on board is tragic, but doesn't influence the basic facts. I'd be more concerned that it now looks like the twat and his government are now seemingly pursuing a Tory approach to the EU - despite every economic report indicating that Labour will not be able to turn the economy around unless there is a significant realignment of the post-Brexit relationship.
It is a lie, because his uncle was not on a ship destroyed by an Argentine torpedo - or missile, for that matter. It was destroyed by rank incompetence by a couple of British squaddies several hours after the Argentine jet was within firing range of the ship And this also does not take a way from Starmer's habit of using members of his own family to give credence to when he lies, most obviously when trying to claim he has a working class background either by omitting basic facts about his factory-owning father or claiming he had a working class upbringing in a leafy Surrey suburb. The frequency of and how casually he does lie makes him look like nothing more than the randy Honey Monster with a better barber, and that's before you get to his policies which confirms it
Of course it was the direct cause of the sinking. Your repeated claims of incompetence by the bomb team appear baseless, too. Failure does not imply incompetence. Your takes on this matter sound like a Daily Mail article, frankly.
When a bomb disposal team fail to diffuse a bomb three times, then on the fourth they detonate the thing, that makes it abundantly clear that incompetence was the cause - especially when you consider that they attempted to diffuse the bomb when the crew were still onboard Which only further makes Starmer's comment utter bollocks: at the time of the bomb's detonation the crew were assembled at the very front or very back of the ship entirely because the captain ordered the crew to be at the extremities of the ship when the bomb disposal team were working, so you'd think Starmer's uncle would remember something like being stood at one end of a ship or another before hearing a large explosion from exactly where the bomb disposal team happened to be while not a single member of the ship's entire crew saw any evidence of a torpedo in the water
Mate...you've got this one badly wrong. The bomb was liable to go off at any time so it wasn't proven incompetence that it actually did. You can't just evacuate a ship with lethal weapons on board while you deal with the bomb. And while Starmer clearly misspoke when he referred to torpedoes it was probably quite traumatising to learn that your uncle's ship was attacked by six enemy aircraft, two of which hit with bombs of which one subsequently exploded.
I have not got this wrong For one thing the bomb was not liable to go off "at any time", because if it was the captain would have ordered an evacuation after the Royal Engineers failed to detonate the bomb remotely - but he didn't, instead he sailed Antelope into sheltered waters to allow the Royal Engineers to board which makes it clear that the threat was not immediate It is not unfair to suggest the Royal Engineers were incompetent, because not only did they fail to diffuse the bomb remotely on three occasions but when they were on site they did the exact opposite of what they were supposed to do by sinking the ship and putting the crew's lives in danger. The only explanation for this is incompetence, not just because they had the bomb working exactly as expected but also because they began tinkering with before an effective evacuation plan could be put in place And no, do not try that "mis-speak" bullshit. An example of Starmer "mis-speaking" is asking the assembled members of the Fabian Society at the party conference to return the sausages as if they were in any position to do anything other than call Green voters "Tory enablers" while their guy enacts one Tory policy after another. No, what Starmer did in Commons was lie, because he misrepresented the facts just like liars always do, because unless his uncle was on the Lusitania there's no chance of him saying he was on a ship that was torpedoed
While the House of Lords still exists it needs Ministers in it and Labour peers to get legislation through.
The sign suggests that the first four hours are free. Why is this an issue and how is it Streeting's fault?
Two very simple questions 1.) Who is the Health Secretary? 2.) Kings College Hospital has some of the worst waiting times in the country, so how many people who need a wheelchair during a hospital visit are fine to get up and walk around after 3 hours and 59 minutes? And that's before the mandatory donation tacked on to their usage
I avoided mentioning who owns it for an obvious reason Their list of clients will likely explain why... please log in to view this image
1) You do know that the NHS is responsible for decisions like these through local trusts. The SoS is not in a position to manage details like this. 2) at our local hospital wheelchairs are free so no-one bothers to return them to the entry points so they are hard to find. This seems like a sensible solution to that problem...the Trust says that it refunds charges if stays overrun.
1.) Wheelshare are clients for four NHS trusts as per their own website (and also posted above) which makes your claim that it was down to individual trusts more than a little shaky 2.) People lacking courtesy is not a reason to charge for something that has been free for decades, not least because if somebody has a broken leg the last thing they want is to be asked for their credit card details if they don't want to be hopping around a hospital for their stay, especially for a trust with reported waiting times of up to twelve hours. What this is actually going to do is create a logjam with people weighing up whether or not they want to pay (for something that I'll remind you is free in numerous NHS trusts) and that's before the usual variables that could make the system an unworkable mess such as a power cut, broken WiFi, a wonky system update etc etc etc which are all issues that could be avoided by doing nothing at all as the system seems to work fine even with the occasional uncourteous dickhead who leaves the wheelchair wherever
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/00919176 Have a look at the people section. Quite a few honourables bashing about in there! Seems like they're all related to Laurence Olivier, somewhat bizarrely. Not sure what he's got to do with wheelchairs.
Nick one? Typical Scouser. I was browsing the Amazon fake sale the other day and there were wheelchairs being promoted in that. Perhaps this is why? I think they were a little over £100, which sounded fairly reasonable. No idea on quality, of course.
