Don't do as I do, do as I say.

[Heisenberg]

I can see nothing in that article that mentions London or 'lockdown london'. I've read it several times now. Can you point it out to me please?

I mentioned Durham because other in this thread mentioned it, no other reason.

No one who responded to my post has referred to another article that I may not have or should have read. Not one! They merely comment on my post and assume knowledge for God knows what reason and reply to things that aren't there because that's what suits their argument.
I never made any presumption and I never mentioned anyone travelling anywhere whether alone or with anyone else. If I did please show me where?

Yes I was talking about one particular article, you got that bit right, so why has everyone insisted on berating me for things that are not in it and to which I never referred?

Personally I don't give a toss what he may or may not have done, it doesn't and won't affect my life, but I never defended him anywhere. Again if I have please show me. I actually said something to the effect of "whatever the circumstances what he did was probably not very clever, but again everyone, you included choose to disregard that because it doesn't suit your argument.

I never made any claim or assertion so how can I have been "Massively wrong"? By the way, is massively wrong somehow worse than wrong?

"After the uncertainty of the bug itself, we emerged from quarantine into the almost comical uncertainty of London lockdown. Everything and its opposite seems true. People are frightened and they’re calm; it’s spring and it’s not. Standing in line’s a pain in the ass and the most fun you’ll have all day."

It's the 10th paragraph of the article.

You didn't just mention Durham, xsnaggle... I said that they live in London in my post and you responded that they "also have a house in Durham." That's a pretty firm statement to make and it turned out to be false, so why say it and then pretend that you didn't?

In regards to: "I never made any presumption and I never mentioned anyone travelling anywhere whether alone or with anyone else. If I did please show me where? "

You really think that you never made a presumption or mention travelling?

How about this?:

"Correct me if I'm wrong but the way the article read to me as that Mrs Cummings and son were already in Durham and he drove there to be with them. She says, 'would have to come home' like my Mrs used to say 'when are you coming home' when I worked away.
He drove to Durham to care for her I understood, which most men would tend to do for their wife.
Whether that was right or wrong is another matter."

There's at least two presumptions and a mention of who was travelling where in that post alone. You presumed that his wife was already in Durham. You presumed that Cummings drove there to care for her.

The reason that article was brought up in the first place was because it was already out in the public knowledge (if you had bothered to read any of the other articles/news stories) that they had actually driven up there together and the reason that people were "berating you" is because you were pointlessly trying to work out what Mrs Cummings meant in her article when the news had already confirmed that your presumptions were wrong.

I'm sorry if you didn't recognise why the discussions with you in this thread have gone this way... But trying to make out that you didn't say the things that you've said isn't going to help the discussion, is it?

[xsnaggle]

[QUOTE=Heisenberg;5079235]"After the uncertainty of the bug itself, we emerged from quarantine into the almost comical uncertainty of London lockdown. Everything and its opposite seems true. People are frightened and they’re calm; it’s spring and it’s not. Standing in line’s a pain in the ass and the most fun you’ll have all day."

It's the 10th paragraph of the article.

You didn't just mention Durham, xsnaggle... I said that they live in London in my post and you responded that they "also have a house in Durham." That's a pretty firm statement to make and it turned out to be false, so why say it and then pretend that you didn't?

In regards to: "I never made any presumption and I never mentioned anyone travelling anywhere whether alone or with anyone else. If I did please show me where? "

You really think that you never made a presumption or mention travelling?

How about this?:

"Correct me if I'm wrong but the way the article read to me as that Mrs Cummings and son were already in Durham and he drove there to be with them. She says, 'would have to come home' like my Mrs used to say 'when are you coming home' when I worked away.
He drove to Durham to care for her I understood, which most men would tend to do for their wife.
Whether that was right or wrong is another matter."

There's at least two presumptions and a mention of who was travelling where in that post alone. You presumed that his wife was already in Durham. You presumed that Cummings drove there to care for her.

The reason that article was brought up in the first place was because it was already out in the public knowledge (if you had bothered to read any of the other articles/news stories) that they had actually driven up there together and the reason that people were "berating you" is because you were pointlessly trying to work out what Mrs Cummings meant in her article when the news had already confirmed that your presumptions were wrong.

I'm sorry if you didn't recognise why the discussions with you in this thread have gone this way... But trying to make out that you didn't say the things that you've said isn't going to help the discussion, is it?[/QUOTE

I never made any assertion about them travelling together or alone. I read one article where she said he would come home. i related that to what my wife used to say. I didn't read other articles and never referred to other articles, only to the one in the post I responded to. Everyone started on about information they assumed I should know but I was only referring to that article, and it is all I have referred to. There could be a million articles out there, i haven't read any of them and am not interested in them.
I had no knowledge of them driving together and wasn't really interested, As I said, whatever the circumstances it was dumb. My problem is that a lot of people are trying to use it to "Accuse" me of defending him, although I didn't. And why defending someone should be action to cause an 'accusation' is beyond me. Could it be political? But ! don't want to go there either.

If I "had bothered" are you suggesting that I should read what I'm told to read.
My post was about 1 post, nothing more. All the rest has been about everything else. Its just indignation for the sake of it. Its bollox.