Cummings and Goings

Just thought I’d start a thread!

Just thought I’d start a thread!

Why?

And why not? In case anyone had any views to share!

Do you?

Do you?

Yes: it might be better if the Recent Posts page were not to be polluted with yet more divisive UK politics that has no bearing on RISC OS. I’m aware this is “Aldershot”, but it still clogs up “Recent Posts” and makes the forum unusable. Ta.

The thread title came from a (presumably inadvertent) observation by an opposing conservative MP on the news this afternoon.

Personally, I think the PM’s use of the word “instinct” will be his downfall over this issue. He could do with a new advisor!

I’m aware this is “Aldershot”

Good!

Perhaps if you don’t want your feed polluted by such posts you might refine your filtering!

Perhaps if you don’t want your feed polluted by such posts you might refine your filtering!

Go on, then: how does one “filter” the Recent Posts page?

I wouldn’t know – I use the RSS feed.

But I have no doubt that you have the expertise to devise a solution.

Aldershot, thanks to Rick, is what it is.

If you don’t like it intruding on your life – well, that’s your problem, not mine!

Program a solution – that’s what computers are for!

Go on, then: how does one “filter” the Recent Posts page?

Perhaps using skill and judgement?

Aldershot, thanks to Rick, is what it is.

Hey, don’t drag me into this. I didn’t vote for those twats.

Program a solution – that’s what computers are for!

I’m sorry, I wasn’t aware that NetSurf exposed hooks to allow content to be filtered and modified between the fetch and the render. You know, like Firefox (Ghostery, NoScript, etc).
Or are you suggesting that one should write a replacement browser or (possibly easier) a filtering proxy?

Better just to accept that there’s one rule for us and another for them and the number of ministers trotted out over the weekend to “justify” why an influential unelected person can do what he wants is more than ample proof of this. But, as I said at the top, I didn’t vote for those w….rs.

Lest we are accussed of double standards then why don’t we call for the sacking and fining of the 20 odd photographers/journalists that broke the 2m social distancing rule and without face masks and what about the other four politicians, of other political parties, who broke rules as well and or then again lets not do trial by social media and lets not be part of the hang em high brigade and see what this is all about and it is politics pure and simple with a bit of pay back from a few people who have scores to settle.

If there is an investigation by the police, which looks possible given a concerned member of the public has made a complaint, and he broke the rules then fine him as per the rules put in place by the Act but if he lied about any of this then I agree a far more serious case and he should then face bigger consequences.

Yes, it is interesting that lying to Parliament (that is making a statement that you know to be untrue, rather than simply using careful, vague or misleading language to avoid making an inaccurate statement) is regarded, within politics, as a far more serious offence than just breaking the law. However a politician lying to the public is hardly of any interest to anyone. I think the ‘Yes Minister’ quote is “Press statements are not given under oath”.

I’m sorry, I wasn’t aware that NetSurf exposed hooks to allow content to be filtered and modified between the fetch and the render.

I think John is just throwing a dead cat out there, Cummings style, to reduce the likelihood of people noticing that he told a new member to get lost on Saturday¹, while they were asking for help with some boot problems on a RiscPC. It was RISC OS Six, but the message was still somewhat different to “If you don’t like it intruding on your life – well, that’s your problem, not mine!”² which is apparently what we’re supposed to do when it’s something that John wishes to post about.

I suppose John could always “program a solution” to avoid him having to read the discussion about the RiscPC – I mean, “that’s what computers are for!”

Lest we are accussed of double standards then why don’t we call for the sacking and fining of the […] other four politicians, of other political parties, who broke rules as well.

Tell that to Niall Ferguson and Catherine Calderwood… It’s the “do as I say, not as I do” aspect, and the fact that it now isn’t hard to find people who are breaking lockdown on the basis that “if it’s good enough for Cummings…”. Second wave, here we come.

¹ https://www.riscosopen.org/forum/forums/11/topics/15318?page=1#posts-102629

² https://www.riscosopen.org/forum/forums/12/topics/15320?page=1#posts-102686

Tell that to Niall Ferguson and Catherine Calderwood

Well different circumstances one had other things on there mind and the other just went to their 2nd home for a jolly.

Now if in this case it was proven it was not for “childcare” then the I agree do the same as the other two who didn’t follow the rules.

As to “if it is good enough for cummings” then all I can say is you will always have people who look at any excuse and you only have to look at the beaches and tourist spots last week to know that.

If he has broken the law then as I said let that take it’s course and if he has lied to cover up things then he deserves what he gets then.

Now if in this case it was proven it was not for “childcare” then the I agree do the same as the other two who didn’t follow the rules.

The problem is that “childcare” isn’t listed as a “reasonable excuse” for leaving the home in the legislation (aside from the sense of schools/childcare providers in part 6.2.i.i), and the population as a whole were being told clearly that this wasn’t a valid thing to be doing at exactly the time that the first trip was made.

Oh, and the fact that they took at least one person with symptoms from London to the North East at exactly the time that the government were supposedly trying to contain the outbreak in the capital until ICU infrastructure was in place in the regions to cope.

As I said if he has broken the law then enforce the penalties that are in that actual act of law.

Also has everyone who broke the rules been fined by the police or given a talking too.

I agree there is a fine line on things and his position adds to the complexity but do we really want to end up where the media and particularly social media is judge, jury and delivers sentancing because I know I wouldn’t want to live in a world like that as we will be back to the baying mobs at public pilloring and executions.

Also on the child welfare element then if the government have lied to us about it then they deserve everything that comes about from that.

Right then.
Got a mug of tea and a Bluetooth keyboard. Let’s do this.
<fx: cracks fingers>

Lest we are accussed of double standards then why don’t we call for the sacking and fining of the 20 odd photographers/journalists that broke the 2m social distancing rule and without face masks

Sounds like something I’d expect to see given as “justification” in the Daily Mail.

Let’s try a naff analogy (my specialty):

If the armed forces go into a building and shoot everybody inside, they may get commended, decorated as heroes.
If you or I went into a building and shot everybody inside, we’d be called murderers and would likely spend the rest of our days in a little cell (with or without padding).

What it comes down to is context.

By all means, if there’s a reporter in your face, too damn close, and not wearing a face mask, then report that person. Make a formal complaint. To the police? To their employer? I would fully support both.

However attempting to justify what Cummings apparently did with the twattish behaviour of some reporters is a complete straw man. They (the reporters) were in the wrong but that has no relevance on Cummings.

What it ultimately comes down to is this:

• We have an unelected person
• who is seemingly unaccountable
• enjoying a position of privilege as advisor and friend of the man who runs the country
• sufficient privilege that the Whips were out over the weekend trying to garner support for Cummings (but appear to have done a swift u-turn)
• which means that the man leading the country is more than willing to support a friend breaking the rules that he himself put in place, rules that he expects the citizens to follow (with some police forces using monetary fines to ensure compliance).

Actually, allow me to repeat that last point, this time in bold and slightly condensed: the Prime Minister believes in one rule for his friend and another for normal people.

This is what it comes down to, and this is why it is important. Reporters being asses is a problem, but the reporters don’t make the rules. Johnson does. Rules that have affected, well, damn near everybody. Families are split apart. They can’t go to see relatives. If the relatives are old, they can’t even hug them. Hell, there are numerous stories of people not going to the funerals of close relations because of the rules.
Rules that clearly don’t apply to the PM’s friend.

Throw into the mix that, according to reports I’ve read in three different online papers (so not just The Guardian), Cummings’ wife was apparently showing symptoms of the virus. Was she positive? Did she stop for a toilet break? You know, that’s all it needs to infect others. Why d’you think huge swathes of civilisation has shut down over these past few months?

That is why this issue is important.

Personally, myself, I am of the opinion now (thinking about it while at work) that both of them should go. Cummings and Johnson. Cummings for carelessly doing what the plebs can’t, and Johnson for showing the degree of error of judgement that brings to doubt his ability to coherently run the country.
And I don’t say this as somebody hoping for an election to get in a more pro-EU party. That’s not how it works in the UK. Barring something extraordinary, there’s at least another four and a half years of Tory mismananagement to look forward to. They’d probably elect Gove or, god help us, Patel.

and what about the other four politicians, of other political parties, who broke rules as well

Well, half of them have had the integrity to apologise and resign.

and or then again lets not do trial by social media and lets not be part of the hang em high brigade

Certainly. I look forward to the proper police investigation (not that I don’t believe it will be a whitewash); but the damage has been done. The leadership of the country supports its close friends ignoring the rules that normal people get punished for breaking.

and see what this is all about and it is politics pure and simple

Of course it’s politics. We’re talking about politicians. There’s no way on earth it isn’t going to be politicised.

with a bit of pay back from a few people who have scores to settle.

I’m sure there’s an element of that as well. However, strip away the politics and the noise, we still have three burning questions:

1. Did he or did he not?
2. Did he travel with an infected person?
3. Did the PM attempt to whip MPs to support a person flaunting the rules?

The answer to all three appears to be YES, so there is a story here… even if it’s that Johnson is his own worst enemy…

Also has everyone who broke the rules been fined by the police or given a talking too.

Everybody who broke the rules? No.
Everybody who got caught breaking the rules? Probably, yes.

Some police forces hand out fines. Some are kinder. Around here (I know this is France, but we’ve been in the same situation), les Flics seem to have actually gone out of their way to not make enemies. Coming out of the supermarket (a few weeks back), I was stopped and asked for ID, paperwork, and so on. I said the paperwork was in the car, so they let me go get it. I could have driven off, they’d probably never really know. I want back, and they stopped a woman, looked to be Turkish or something like that, and it was her second time being caught without paperwork. Instead of fining her the €135, they gave her one of the forms and told her the newsagent/tabacco shop in town can run off as many copies as she may need. They took her name and ID card details and told her next time it’ll be a fine.

Some law enforcement isn’t a sadistic arse about the rules. But that doesn’t mean it’s okay to break them. I’d imagine everybody who got caught did indeed get either a fine or some sort of warning.

but do we really want to end up where the media and particularly social media is judge, jury and delivers sentancing

The other extreme is the one the government was hoping for – “move along, nothing to see here”. Neither is right, but at least making some noise shows that there are limits to the government’s disregard for the ordinary citizens.
I mean, look how quickly – after detailled explanations of why it wasn’t possible – they pulled a handbrake turn on the frankly offensive idea of having foreign NHS workers pay for NHS treatment.

that as we will be back to the baying mobs at public pilloring and executions.

Didn’t UKIP disband now that Brexit is a thing?

Okay, that’s my lot. My mug is now empty.

Let’s try a naff analogy (my specialty):

If the armed forces go into a building and shoot everybody inside, they may get commended, decorated as heroes.
If you or I went into a building and shot everybody inside, we’d be called murderers and would likely spend the rest of our days in a little cell (with or without padding).

You are right a naff one as the former depends on the context of that action and who was in the building and if it was lawful to do it to save life or achieve an objective.

Then again it depends on who’s dodgy dossier you have justified it on :-)

And as to the Daily Fail then it was most likely 20 of their journalists.

the Prime Minister believes in one rule for his friend and another for normal people.

Doesn’t matter what he thinks if Cummings broke the law then he should be fined as per the law but as I said not everyone who has flouted lockdown has been fined as a lot in the UK have been given “Advice” and it is only if you ignore that or are a txxx and argue back that you are likely to get more. I think the UK Police by and large have done a good job given the situation and most have acted well.

Equally if we are all for everyone being treated the same then if Cummings broke the rules he should get exactly the same as everyone else so either advice or a fine. Can’t have it both ways.

Throw into the mix that, according to reports I’ve read in three different online papers (so not just The Guardian)

There is your issue you actually read someones slant on it but you redeemed yourself with this :-)

Certainly. I look forward to the proper police investigation

So if there is a complaint in , which is most likely, then lets see what comes out of it and if he has lied then he deserves everything.

They pulled a handbrake turn on the frankly offensive idea of having foreign NHS workers pay for NHS treatment.

And frankly that was more damaging than this as it shows the Nasty party element are still there.

Didn’t UKIP disband now that Brexit is a thing?

No they bought a motor boat and sent Farage out in to the English channel. Now where is my drill?

Interesting browsing the Daily Mail website given that they’re pro-Tory and pro-Johnson. If they are laying into Cummings…….

Equally if we are all for everyone being treated the same then if Cummings broke the rules he should get exactly the same as everyone else so either advice or a fine.

That’s a ridiculous statement.

Do you think a judge breaking the law is treated the same as everyone else? Of course not, they would lose their job straight away.

He is the person setting the rules for everyone, if he then breaks them he must be removed from being in a position to ever set the rules again.

Lest we are accussed of double standards then why don’t we call for the sacking and fining of the 20 odd photographers/journalists that broke the 2m social distancing rule and without face masks

• Perhaps because rules are different for them.
• Perhaps they’ll be sacked.

In France, the rule of 100km, for example, does not apply to doctors, policemen… and journalists.
So If I want to travel to the other side of the country, I can, and I will not break any rule.

That’s not double standard… just different rules.
How could a policeman catch someone, if he do not have the right to drive damn fast?

The real questions are:

• What are the rules for politicians?
• Who decide for these rules?

Lest we are accussed of double standards then why don’t we call for the sacking and fining of the 20 odd photographers/journalists […] without face masks

Since this was edited after I replied last time…

Face masks are not a legal requirement, at least in England.

Do you think a judge breaking the law is treated the same as everyone else? Of course not, they would lose their job straight away.

So the premise is that someone breaking the rules that has a set punishment should have other consequences or not depending on their standing and depending on what we as a society deem is the punishment and based on our predujuices and opinions.

Same law , same official punishments but different expectations.

The original statement “One rule for us and one rule for them” was based on the premise that someone actually broke the law and was being treated different and that wasn’t fair but you are now argueing that it should be the case we are treated differently no matter what the actual law states.

Like anything else in society we take something and corrupt it based on our beliefs, social boundaries and moral compass.

I am not condoning what Cummings did or didn’t do but just trying to highlight on one hand we expect the law to be applied evenly then we corrupt that when it suits us based on our own lens on life.

It is the same corruption of the law that treats someone differently if they say smoke a certain drug and happen to be a middle class couple as that is a right on thing to do but someone from a social housing estate is classed as a blot on society and needs to be locked up for life.

Since this was edited after I replied last time…

Whole text is “double standards then why don’t we call for the sacking and fining of the 20 odd photographers/journalists that broke the 2m social distancing rule and without face masks”

The the post was the same other than for a few minutes after where I changed and corrected spelling mistakes etc as I find the forum difficult to read until it is posted.

I suppose I ought to state it is advice to be 2m apart and that the Police do tend to explain that advice and only get “heavy” if you kick back at least in the incidents I am aware of.

Perhaps we could move the Wakefield (which has been postponed / cancelled due to Covid) show to Durham or Barnard Castle this year?

Excellent idea I think I know someone who can give directions and even state where we can use “Public” toilets if the Castle ones are still closed.

Then again isn’t there a law against doing that and “outraging the public” :-)