Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[Soul Requiem]

First topic message reminder :

The far left is often dependent on where an individual themselves is on the political spectrum, for example Owen Jones may be seen as far left to someone who is centre right but to a centrist will be seen as merely left wing, personally have him down as part of the hard left.

I have him as left wing. Though is hard left not the same as far left because I dont have him as far left. I get tge views based on your own spectrum though. Which is why I hare labour supporters calling Starmer and others right wing.  Left of centre is not right wing.

I would say that hard left is within the standard left wing myself, thinking of someone like Tony Benn being hard left as opposed to Ed Milliband who was soft left, will say however that is possibly closer to far left than it is the centre.

[super_realist]

OK realist, you think that in certain areas people without symptoms aren't being tested.  Thats fine with me.

Nope, I didn't say that either. I said that the official line is that only those who have symptoms are eligible for a test.
I didn't say anything about if people are being tested with no symptoms. I said there was no instruction for them to be tested, perhaps blame such people for your colleague being directed to Cardiff.

[JAS]

I believe it is. My niece wasn't feeling well, went to the doctors and got a test there and then. Results within 36 hours.  

Well that’s good if that is the case

Why bring business profits into it? That's got nothing to do with it. Try criticising something without a lefty slant on it for a change.

I could be mistaken here but aren’t we in the Test track & Trace mess EXACTLY because government ministers brought business profits into it by taking an opportunity to line the pockets of their mates by procuring immature track & trace systems whose main objective was to harvest data rather than protect public health? something even the morally bankrupt tax avoiding Apple & google balked at. There nothing lefty about being able to spot lies, subterfuge, deception and cover up.

[super_realist]

No, that's just your inference.

[beninho]

If soneone in Bolton or somewhere else, has a knock on the door and are advised to take a test, is that not an instruction?

I've read and heard that is what has happened in certain places.

Obviously you don't believe that this is or has happened.

[beninho]

Realist doesn't like test track and trace, he thinks people are not advised to be tested.

[super_realist]

If soneone in Bolton or somewhere else, has a knock on the door and are advised to take a test, is that not an instruction?

I've read and heard that is what has happened in certain places.

Obviously you don't believe that this is or has happened.

That isn't happening though. Advice is not an instruction. If I advise you to cut your hair, it's not an instruction.

I have never aimed it hasn't happened. I have been clear that the official line is only to be tested when you show symptoms.

It's funny that you have "read and heard" of this "advice" being dished out, but can't give a citation.

[super_realist]

Realist doesn't like test track and trace, he thinks people are not advised to be tested.

You are incredibly dishonest.
I am fine with test and trace, but there is no point in starting a test and trace procedure using a person with no symptoms and therefore who doesn't require a test.

A person is eligible for a test when they have symptoms. If said test is positive, test and trace is rolled out.

I don't see the point in testing people with no symptoms and therefore clogging up test centres and using up tests required by genuine cases

[Soul Requiem]

If soneone in Bolton or somewhere else, has a knock on the door and are advised to take a test, is that not an instruction?

I've read and heard that is what has happened in certain places.

Obviously you don't believe that this is or has happened.

If they have been in contact with someone who has tested positive.

[JAS]

No, that's just your inference.

Doesn’t really take much googling to flesh out inference

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/contact-tracing-app-isle-of-wight-trial

I could did deeper but hey if your head is more comfortable buried in the sand maybe best to keep it there.

[beninho]

If soneone in Bolton or somewhere else, has a knock on the door and are advised to take a test, is that not an instruction?

I've read and heard that is what has happened in certain places.

Obviously you don't believe that this is or has happened.

If they have been in contact with someone who has tested positive.

I get that.

[super_realist]

No, that's just your inference.

Doesn’t really take much googling to flesh out inference

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/contact-tracing-app-isle-of-wight-trial

I could did deeper but  hey if your head is more comfortable buried in the sand maybe best to keep it there.

What's your point caller?
We know that test didn't go well, but that doesn't mean it was instigated to "line their friends pockets"
Dozens of other countries also messed up this.

[beninho]

If soneone in Bolton or somewhere else, has a knock on the door and are advised to take a test, is that not an instruction?

I've read and heard that is what has happened in certain places.

Obviously you don't believe that this is or has happened.

That isn't happening though. Advice is not an instruction. If I advise you to cut your hair, it's not an instruction.

I have never aimed it hasn't happened. I have been clear that the official line is only to be tested when you show symptoms.

It's funny that you have "read and heard" of this "advice" being dished out, but can't give a citation.

Why are you het up on the word instruction? All that's been said is advise.

[super_realist]

If soneone in Bolton or somewhere else, has a knock on the door and are advised to take a test, is that not an instruction?

I've read and heard that is what has happened in certain places.

Obviously you don't believe that this is or has happened.

That isn't happening though. Advice is not an instruction. If I advise you to cut your hair, it's not an instruction.

I have never aimed it hasn't happened. I have been clear that the official line is only to be tested when you show symptoms.

It's funny that you have "read and heard" of this "advice" being dished out, but can't give a citation.

Why are you het up on the word instruction? All that's been said is advise.

You claimed that people with no symptoms have been advised/instructed to have tests. That's not true.
The only people who have a test with no symptoms are those who may have been in contact with someone who has tested positive.

It is not the case that people in areas of high infection are being asked/advised/instructed to have a test unless they have been in contact with a covid + person.
Why do you find this so hard to follow?

[beninho]

Realist doesn't like test track and trace, he thinks people are not advised to be tested.

You are incredibly dishonest.
I am fine with test and trace, but there is no point in starting a test and trace procedure using a person with no symptoms and therefore who doesn't require a test.

A person is eligible for a test when they have symptoms. If said test is positive, test and trace is rolled out.

I don't see the point in testing people with no symptoms and therefore clogging up  test centres and using up tests required by genuine cases

Still struggling on this one. As said, if been in contact with soneone who has tested positive, then surey you test someone regardless of symptoms? Especially considering the asymptomatic cases.

[beninho]

If soneone in Bolton or somewhere else, has a knock on the door and are advised to take a test, is that not an instruction?

I've read and heard that is what has happened in certain places.

Obviously you don't believe that this is or has happened.

That isn't happening though. Advice is not an instruction. If I advise you to cut your hair, it's not an instruction.

I have never aimed it hasn't happened. I have been clear that the official line is only to be tested when you show symptoms.

It's funny that you have "read and heard" of this "advice" being dished out, but can't give a citation.

Why are you het up on the word instruction? All that's been said is advise.

You claimed that people with no symptoms have been advised/instructed to have tests. That's not true.
The only people who have a test with no symptoms are those who may have been in contact with someone who has tested positive.

It is not the case that people in areas of high infection are being asked/advised/instructed to have a test.

I said, i have read about people being advised to test, you then talked about instructions. You have just made up your own argument.

[super_realist]

Realist doesn't like test track and trace, he thinks people are not advised to be tested.

You are incredibly dishonest.
I am fine with test and trace, but there is no point in starting a test and trace procedure using a person with no symptoms and therefore who doesn't require a test.

A person is eligible for a test when they have symptoms. If said test is positive, test and trace is rolled out.

I don't see the point in testing people with no symptoms and therefore clogging up  test centres and using up tests required by genuine cases

Still struggling on this one. As said, if been in contact with soneone who has tested positive, then surey you test someone regardless of symptoms? Especially considering the asymptomatic cases.

I'm fine with that, but you suggested that people with no symptoms were requested to take a test. You said nothing about contact with a positive person.
Testing someone with contact with a positive person has always been the case.

Please look closer at what I wrote. "there is no point STARTING a test and trace procedure using a person with no symptoms"

[beninho]

If soneone in Bolton or somewhere else, has a knock on the door and are advised to take a test, is that not an instruction?

I've read and heard that is what has happened in certain places.

Obviously you don't believe that this is or has happened.

That isn't happening though. Advice is not an instruction. If I advise you to cut your hair, it's not an instruction.

I have never aimed it hasn't happened. I have been clear that the official line is only to be tested when you show symptoms.

It's funny that you have "read and heard" of this "advice" being dished out, but can't give a citation.

Why are you het up on the word instruction? All that's been said is advise.

You claimed that people with no symptoms have been advised/instructed to have tests. That's not true.
The only people who have a test with no symptoms are those who may have been in contact with someone who has tested positive.

It is not the case that people in areas of high infection are being asked/advised/instructed to have a test unless they have been in contact with a covid + person.
Why do you find this so hard to follow?

There we go breakthrough. You got it.

But what about my sister, no symptoms but advised to take a test?
Or myself and people I work with, no symptoms but getting tested.

How you twisting that argument?

[super_realist]

If soneone in Bolton or somewhere else, has a knock on the door and are advised to take a test, is that not an instruction?

I've read and heard that is what has happened in certain places.

Obviously you don't believe that this is or has happened.

That isn't happening though. Advice is not an instruction. If I advise you to cut your hair, it's not an instruction.

I have never aimed it hasn't happened. I have been clear that the official line is only to be tested when you show symptoms.

It's funny that you have "read and heard" of this "advice" being dished out, but can't give a citation.

Why are you het up on the word instruction? All that's been said is advise.

You claimed that people with no symptoms have been advised/instructed to have tests. That's not true.
The only people who have a test with no symptoms are those who may have been in contact with someone who has tested positive.

It is not the case that people in areas of high infection are being asked/advised/instructed to have a test unless they have been in contact with a covid + person.
Why do you find this so hard to follow?

There we go breakthrough. You got it.

But what about my sister, no symptoms but advised to take a test?
Or myself and people I work with, no symptoms but getting tested.

How you twisting that argument?

Advised by whom?
Show me any official line where people who have not been in contact with a positive person are being told to take a test?
If your company or whatever is paying for a test, I've no problem, but it's not policy to give tests to anyone who fancies it.

[beninho]

Realist doesn't like test track and trace, he thinks people are not advised to be tested.

You are incredibly dishonest.
I am fine with test and trace, but there is no point in starting a test and trace procedure using a person with no symptoms and therefore who doesn't require a test.

A person is eligible for a test when they have symptoms. If said test is positive, test and trace is rolled out.

I don't see the point in testing people with no symptoms and therefore clogging up  test centres and using up tests required by genuine cases

Still struggling on this one. As said, if been in contact with soneone who has tested positive, then surey you test someone regardless of symptoms? Especially considering the asymptomatic cases.

I'm fine with that, but you suggested that people with no symptoms were requested to take a test. You said nothing about contact with a positive person.
Testing someone with contact with a positive person has always been the case.

Please look closer at what I wrote. "there is no point STARTING a test and trace procedure using a person with no symptoms"

Didn't really suggest anything, you just read it hiw you wanted to and argued what you wanted to. All I said was what I'd read. The rest was down to you.

[Soul Requiem]

No, what happened Ben is you conveniently failed to disclose pertinent information yet again.

[super_realist]

Realist doesn't like test track and trace, he thinks people are not advised to be tested.

You are incredibly dishonest.
I am fine with test and trace, but there is no point in starting a test and trace procedure using a person with no symptoms and therefore who doesn't require a test.

A person is eligible for a test when they have symptoms. If said test is positive, test and trace is rolled out.

I don't see the point in testing people with no symptoms and therefore clogging up  test centres and using up tests required by genuine cases

Still struggling on this one. As said, if been in contact with soneone who has tested positive, then surey you test someone regardless of symptoms? Especially considering the asymptomatic cases.

I'm fine with that, but you suggested that people with no symptoms were requested to take a test. You said nothing about contact with a positive person.
Testing someone with contact with a positive person has always been the case.

Please look closer at what I wrote. "there is no point STARTING a test and trace procedure using a person with no symptoms"

Didn't really suggest anything, you just read it hiw you wanted to and argued what you wanted to. All I said was what I'd read. The rest was down to you.

What you'd "read" but can't provide a link to. How convenient.

[beninho]

If soneone in Bolton or somewhere else, has a knock on the door and are advised to take a test, is that not an instruction?

I've read and heard that is what has happened in certain places.

Obviously you don't believe that this is or has happened.

That isn't happening though. Advice is not an instruction. If I advise you to cut your hair, it's not an instruction.

I have never aimed it hasn't happened. I have been clear that the official line is only to be tested when you show symptoms.

It's funny that you have "read and heard" of this "advice" being dished out, but can't give a citation.

Why are you het up on the word instruction? All that's been said is advise.

You claimed that people with no symptoms have been advised/instructed to have tests. That's not true.
The only people who have a test with no symptoms are those who may have been in contact with someone who has tested positive.

It is not the case that people in areas of high infection are being asked/advised/instructed to have a test unless they have been in contact with a covid + person.
Why do you find this so hard to follow?

There we go breakthrough. You got it.

But what about my sister, no symptoms but advised to take a test?
Or myself and people I work with, no symptoms but getting tested.

How you twisting that argument?

Advised by whom?
Show me any official line where people who have not been in contact with a positive person are being told to take a test?
If your company or whatever is paying for a test, I've no problem, but it's not policy to give tests to anyone who fancies it.

My sister is told by her cancer doctors that she needs to be tested before her monthly treatment. This is regardless of symptoms.

We are advised or told to be tested due to the critical nature of work and being ftontlibe facing with vulnerable adults.

Does this all go against your views?

[beninho]

Realist doesn't like test track and trace, he thinks people are not advised to be tested.

You are incredibly dishonest.
I am fine with test and trace, but there is no point in starting a test and trace procedure using a person with no symptoms and therefore who doesn't require a test.

A person is eligible for a test when they have symptoms. If said test is positive, test and trace is rolled out.

I don't see the point in testing people with no symptoms and therefore clogging up  test centres and using up tests required by genuine cases

Still struggling on this one. As said, if been in contact with soneone who has tested positive, then surey you test someone regardless of symptoms? Especially considering the asymptomatic cases.

I'm fine with that, but you suggested that people with no symptoms were requested to take a test. You said nothing about contact with a positive person.
Testing someone with contact with a positive person has always been the case.

Please look closer at what I wrote. "there is no point STARTING a test and trace procedure using a person with no symptoms"

Didn't really suggest anything, you just read it hiw you wanted to and argued what you wanted to. All I said was what I'd read. The rest was down to you.

What you'd "read" but can't provide a link to. How convenient.

Yep, you got me. I made it all up.

[super_realist]

If soneone in Bolton or somewhere else, has a knock on the door and are advised to take a test, is that not an instruction?

I've read and heard that is what has happened in certain places.

Obviously you don't believe that this is or has happened.

That isn't happening though. Advice is not an instruction. If I advise you to cut your hair, it's not an instruction.

I have never aimed it hasn't happened. I have been clear that the official line is only to be tested when you show symptoms.

It's funny that you have "read and heard" of this "advice" being dished out, but can't give a citation.

Why are you het up on the word instruction? All that's been said is advise.

You claimed that people with no symptoms have been advised/instructed to have tests. That's not true.
The only people who have a test with no symptoms are those who may have been in contact with someone who has tested positive.

It is not the case that people in areas of high infection are being asked/advised/instructed to have a test unless they have been in contact with a covid + person.
Why do you find this so hard to follow?

There we go breakthrough. You got it.

But what about my sister, no symptoms but advised to take a test?
Or myself and people I work with, no symptoms but getting tested.

How you twisting that argument?

Advised by whom?
Show me any official line where people who have not been in contact with a positive person are being told to take a test?
If your company or whatever is paying for a test, I've no problem, but it's not policy to give tests to anyone who fancies it.

My sister is told by her cancer doctors that she needs to be tested before her monthly treatment.  This is regardless of symptoms.

We are advised or told to be tested due to the critical nature of work and being ftontlibe facing with vulnerable adults.

Does this all go against your views?

She's VULNERABLE. Jesus christ. I'd expect her to have a test done. What I don't expect is any old person in whatever area they live in with a high covid rate to be given a test just because they want one, which is what you said was happening but couldnt provide evidence for.

[beninho]

So, you do accept that people are advised to take tests ?

Again, I never said people were taking tests because they wanted one. Well, i don't think I did.

[super_realist]

So, you do accept that people are advised to take tests ?

Again, I never said people were taking tests because they wanted one. Well, i don't think I did.

I've never said there aren't. I thought you were bright enough to see we were talking about the general population, not this at risk like your sister.

However you have still failed to show that there is an official line where normal people with no contact with a positive person are being advised to have a test.

[beninho]

So, you do accept that people are advised to take tests ?

Again, I never said people were taking tests because they wanted one. Well, i don't think I did.

I've never said there aren't. I thought you were bright enough to see we were talking about the general population, not this at risk like your sister.

However you have still failed to show that there is an official line where normal people with no contact with a positive person are being advised to have a test.

Don't think thats something I've argued, is it?

[super_realist]

So, you do accept that people are advised to take tests ?

Again, I never said people were taking tests because they wanted one. Well, i don't think I did.

I've never said there aren't. I thought you were bright enough to see we were talking about the general population, not this at risk like your sister.

However you have still failed to show that there is an official line where normal people with no contact with a positive person are being advised to have a test.

Don't think thats something I've argued, is it?

You did

[b] The system needs to be in place for everyone. I saw something about people in areas of local outbreaks being advised to take tests regardless of symptoms.

To me that says that you thought that people were being advised to take a test simply because they were in an area with a local outbreak. You should have been clear if it was people who were vulnerable, were front line workers or were in contact with someone who has had a positive test.

[McLaren]

Garrick Club faces legal battle over 'gentleman-only policy'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54062903


Quite funny that she is having a pop at a place like that.

[super_realist]

Garrick Club faces legal battle over 'gentleman-only policy'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54062903


Quite funny that she is having a pop at a place like that.

Who would want to join a male only club?

[Soul Requiem]

Garrick Club faces legal battle over 'gentleman-only policy'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54062903


Quite funny that she is having a pop at a place like that.

What an utter idiot, does she have nothing better to do?

[JuliusHMarx]

Garrick Club faces legal battle over 'gentleman-only policy'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54062903


Quite funny that she is having a pop at a place like that.

What an utter idiot, does she have nothing better to do?

Yeah, she could be posting on here!

[McLaren]

Garrick Club faces legal battle over 'gentleman-only policy'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54062903


Quite funny that she is having a pop at a place like that.

Who would want to join a male only club?

I assume she is just making a point and partly taking the pish out of them. I would certainly take some joy if she manages to blow a hole in their sad little club.

[Soul Requiem]

Garrick Club faces legal battle over 'gentleman-only policy'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54062903


Quite funny that she is having a pop at a place like that.

What an utter idiot, does she have nothing better to do?

Yeah, she could be posting on here!

Killer wit as always Richie.

[super_realist]

Garrick Club faces legal battle over 'gentleman-only policy'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54062903


Quite funny that she is having a pop at a place like that.

Who would want to join a male only club?

I assume she is just making a point and partly taking the pish out of them. I would certainly take some joy if she manages to blow a hole in their sad little club.

I actually meant why would a man want to join a male only club?

[McLaren]

Super

No idea, I guess you have to be the sort of wannker that wants to join one to understand it.

[super_realist]

Super

No idea, I guess you have to be the sort of Meat trombone soloist that wants to join one to understand it.

Or gay

[JAS]

Garrick Club faces legal battle over 'gentleman-only policy'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54062903


Quite funny that she is having a pop at a place like that.

Who would want to join a male only club?

I assume she is just making a point and partly taking the pish out of them. I would certainly take some joy if she manages to blow a hole in their sad little club.

I honestly couldn’t give 2 flying f’s whether she’s successful or not, smacks of self promoting attention seeking. If she wins is she really going to frequent the place on a semi regular basis? If not why bother?....other than for the reason already mentioned.

[super_realist]

Garrick Club faces legal battle over 'gentleman-only policy'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54062903


Quite funny that she is having a pop at a place like that.

Who would want to join a male only club?

I assume she is just making a point and partly taking the pish out of them. I would certainly take some joy if she manages to blow a hole in their sad little club.

I honestly couldn’t give 2 flying f’s whether she’s successful or not, smacks of self promoting attention seeking. If she wins is she really going to frequent the place on a semi regular basis? If not why bother?....other than for the reason already mentioned.

Very true Jas. Why did she have to publisicse it? Too many people just do stuff these days for the sake of social media and their own exposure.

[JAS]

Garrick Club faces legal battle over 'gentleman-only policy'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54062903


Quite funny that she is having a pop at a place like that.

Who would want to join a male only club?

I assume she is just making a point and partly taking the pish out of them. I would certainly take some joy if she manages to blow a hole in their sad little club.

I honestly couldn’t give 2 flying f’s whether she’s successful or not, smacks of self promoting attention seeking. If she wins is she really going to frequent the place on a semi regular basis? If not why bother?....other than for the reason already mentioned.

Very true Jas. Why did she have to publisicse it? Too many people just do stuff these days for the sake of social media and their own exposure.

Exactly....and also in case you may not have noticed, not even a hint of a lefty stance on this one. :-p
I do believe this is the kind of territory where the left does tend to shoot itself in the foot by trying to align itself with this superfluous nonsense. The left is supposed to exist to fight for the basics for ordinary working people but all too often it jumps on the the “we must have equality” bandwagon.

[super_realist]

Don't forget all the woke nonsense that the left seems to jump on and clamour for.

The worst thing though I find is that portion of the left typified by the likes of Owen Jones, Dawn Butler etc for example who if you don't agree with them on everything then it makes you a bigot, racist, islamophobe, homophope, anti-trans etc. That's the left I really dislike because they are the least tolerant people around, but can't see the irony.
Normal left of center I have no problem with at all.

[beninho]

Woke! Gotta love a person who uses woke. Its up there with remoaner.

[beninho]

Don't forget all the woke nonsense that the left seems to jump on and clamour for.

The worst thing though I find is that portion of the left typified by the likes of Owen Jones, Dawn Butler etc for example who if you don't agree with them on everything then it makes you a bigot, racist, islamophobe, homophope, anti-trans etc. That's the left I really dislike because they are the least tolerant people around, but can't see the irony.
Normal left of center I have no problem with at all.

We know you don't like these people.  You thought they were the same as the edl.

Tge problem is, if you look at the social media abuse they get its generally from racists, isoamaphobe anti trans right wing nut jobs.

[super_realist]

I corrected that when I explained that I hadn't meant to say that there were "as bad". I thought you'd be good enough to accept that, but apparently not.

How do you know that the people they are getting abuse from are racists, anti islam or anti trans? Maybe they just disagree with them?

I'm sure they do get a broad range of abuse, just as people from every political arm do. For example left wing nuts attack the right. Just look at how XR blocked Newspapers the other day because they don't like the view and opinion they have and believe no one else should be able to hear it. Great fans of free speech aren't they? I heard their spokesman absolutely embarrass himself and his Doomsday Cult on radio yesterday. I was cringing for the guy and it's not often I feel sympathy for such planks but he was seriously out of his depth like Russel Brand on a TV programme for over 18's

[beninho]

Good enough to accept it?

What do you think this is, not a nameless faceless Internet forum?

[beninho]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/coronavirus-uk-china-death-peter-attwood-b421030.html%3famp

I've said it before, when i was rough as sh£t in December. This shows its been aroubd longer then we thought.

[McLaren]

“we must have equality” bandwagon.

If the left isn't about equality, what is it about?

[super_realist]

That's the problem Mac, not even they know what they're about.

[super_realist]

This plan to test 10 million people a day is even more laughable than Corbyn's ridiculous plan to plant 1 billion trees a year.
Do the government not know what logistics are? Who is advising these morons?

[beninho]

10m tests, thats a lot of money for serco.

Though I'd rather them looking at something like this over the telling people to get back in the offices.

[Sponsored content]