Coronavirus update - NO MORE RESTRICTIONS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

The police said they attended the property, the media added the reason. The Durham police have now stated that they did not visit as a result of a complaint about Cummins' presence, and they did not speak to him and his wife. The actually visited the property at Mr Cummins senior's request to discuss security of the property. It had nothing to do with Cummins or anything connected to lock-down . Another point that bothers me about this is that the Durham Police could have corrected the suggestions regarding the visit immediately but that chose not to. I wonder who made that call?
Yes the Barnard castle visit was correct, the alleged second sighting was the lie. It seems to me that the media don't check too hard when what they hear suits their argument and do if it doesn't. It should have been easily proven that Cummins was in fact in London on the day of the alleged second visit.
Every time the do this kind of thing they just make me doubt the honestly of anything in the media.

---

And that is why you have come to the decision not to read any newspapers (real or online), but you will abstain from abstaining if something you read suits your argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

exactly, he admitted it himself.

in any case the second sighting was not a lie, just someone who jumped onto the bandwagon of the second sighting was making it up.

what is being attempted here is to muddy the waters and exhaust people's capacity for critical reasoning. and it seems like it is working.

---

Well, we are talking about xsnaggle who, to be fair, isn't an atypical critical thinker. Or, even, a thinker of any description.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

And that is why you have come to the decision not to read any newspapers (real or online), but you will abstain from abstaining if something you read suits your argument.

---

:wave:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

Where did you read it?

:wave: for "In the newspapers that I don't read (real or online)"
Supply answer for anything else.

---

I've no idea what xsnaggle reads but the points in his post earlier today that seems to have first fired him up mostly appear to have been themes in recent Daily Mail articles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

Well, we are talking about xsnaggle who, to be fair, isn't an atypical critical thinker. Or, even, a thinker of any description.

---

:wave:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baloo

I've no idea what xsnaggle reads but the points in his post earlier today that seems to have first fired him up mostly appear to have been themes in recent Daily Mail articles.

---

This cannot be possible - he has said on this forum that he doesn't read newspapers (real or online). It would be awful if he was lying, whilst spending a good part of his day attacking someone for lying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

:wave:

---

qed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

qed

---

:wave:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

It had nothing to do with Cummins or anything connected to lock-down .

---

Well, this was the original Durham police statement to the press on the Friday. ‘Officers made contact with the owners of that address who confirmed that the individual in question was present and was self-isolating in part of the house. In line with national policing guidance, officers explained to the family the guidelines around self-isolation and reiterated the appropriate advice around essential travel’.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baloo

Well, this was the original Durham police statement on the Friday. ‘Officers made contact with the owners of that address who confirmed that the individual in question was present and was self-isolating in part of the house. In line with national policing guidance, officers explained to the family the guidelines around self-isolation and reiterated the appropriate advice around essential travel’.

---

Yes I gathered that but now apparently they have said something else. As I have kept saying all these tales and counter tales just make it impossilbe to trust anything you read or hear most of the time In the long run none of them do themselves any favours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Yes I gathered that but now apparently they have said something else. As I have kept saying all these tales and counter tales just make it impossilbe to trust anything you read or hear most of the time In the long run none of them do themselves any favours.

---

You seemed to believe the “counter tales” easily enough

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

The police said they attended the property, the media added the reason. The Durham police have now stated that they did not visit as a result of a complaint about Cummins' presence, and they did not speak to him and his wife. The actually visited the property at Mr Cummins senior's request to discuss security of the property. It had nothing to do with Cummins or anything connected to lock-down . Another point that bothers me about this is that the Durham Police could have corrected the suggestions regarding the visit immediately but that chose not to. I wonder who made that call?
Yes the Barnard castle visit was correct, the alleged second sighting was the lie. It seems to me that the media don't check too hard when what they hear suits their argument and do if it doesn't. It should have been easily proven that Cummins was in fact in London on the day of the alleged second visit.
Every time the do this kind of thing they just make me doubt the honestly of anything in the media.

---

I'm 90% sure you've got that wrong. I don't remember them saying that they visited for a start but they said that they spoke about self-isolation or words to that effect. The media printed what the police gave them. It was in quotes at the time - I'm sure of it.

If you're wrong, maybe you've been taken in by the spin :hehe:

Edit: Just seen Baloo's post. You were massively wrong. The media didn't spin that story at all, they printed what the police said and the police later retracted it/changed their story. That's the police's fault, not the media.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Yes I gathered that but now apparently they have said something else. As I have kept saying all these tales and counter tales just make it impossilbe to trust anything you read or hear most of the time In the long run none of them do themselves any favours.

---

At the risk of you showing yourself to be a complete arsehole with an emoticon, but maybe you could provide a link so that we could read these "tales and counter tales"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

I'm 90% you've got that wrong. I don't remember them saying that they visited for a start but they said thay they spoke about self-isolation or words to that effect. The media printed what the police gave them. It was in quotes at the time - I'm sure of it.

If you're wrong, maybe you've been taken in by the spin :hehe:

---

:hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

I'm 90% you've got that wrong. I don't remember them saying that they visited for a start but they said thay they spoke about self-isolation or words to that effect. The media printed what the police gave them. It was in quotes at the time - I'm sure of it.

If you're wrong, maybe you've been taken in by the spin :hehe:

---

Maybe I have, but media being what it is we will never know which is which probably.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

At the risk of you showing yourself to be a complete arsehole with an emoticon, but maybe you could provide a link so that we could read these "tales and counter tales"?

---

:wave:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Yes I gathered that but now apparently they have said something else. As I have kept saying all these tales and counter tales just make it impossilbe to trust anything you read or hear most of the time In the long run none of them do themselves any favours.

---

and there we have it - exactly what the purpose of that disingenuous article was

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Maybe I have, but media being what it is we will never know which is which probably.

---

In your opinion, which has been formed from abstaining from reading the media, except when it proves a point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

and there we have it - exactly what the purpose of that disingenuous article was

---

BINGO!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

and there we have it - exactly what the purpose of that disingenuous article was

---

Yep all very disingenuous and unfortunately lots of people will fall for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Yes I gathered that but now apparently they have said something else. As I have kept saying all these tales and counter tales just make it impossilbe to trust anything you read or hear most of the time In the long run none of them do themselves any favours.

---

The follow-up police statements did seem to shift the emphasis, particularly the final one that arrived just in the nick of time for Cummings' press conference. But it wasn't very helpful that Cummings said the police hadn't spoken to his family considering they'd released an initial statement like that. And a bit too easy to just blame the media for subsequent confusion arising over these apparent inconsistencies.

Gents please don't protest too much. In Answer to Croesy's post after my original post (Page 94) on the subject I agreed with him that it changed nothing and that it just led one to doubt everything the media say whatever side they might be on.
I question everything in all this shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Gents please don't protest too much. In Answer to Croesy's post after my original post (Page 94) on the subject I agreed with him that it changed nothing and that it just led one to doubt everything the media say whatever side they might be on.
I question everything in all this shit.

---

:wave:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baloo

The follow-up police statements did seem to shift the emphasis, particularly the final one that arrived just in the nick of time for Cummings' press conference. But it wasn't very helpful that Cummings said the police hadn't spoken to his family considering they'd released an initial statement like that. And a bit too easy to just blame the media for subsequent confusion arising over these apparent inconsistencies.

---

Well again I think the phrase "My family" is probably spin in itself. Cummins can say he meant his wife and son rather than his extended family and claim later he didn't know his father had spoken to them. Stretching it but not impossible. These people are trained to wriggle.
I know a person who is a top executive in an International company and she said the first thing she learned was how to not answer questions. Politicians and their ilk probably did the same course. :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

:wave:

---

:wave:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

I question everything in all this shit.

---

Well, tbh that post from you this morning was just like a mini-compendium or recent articles from the Daily Mail and if you happen to read that rag I would definitely recommend questioning everything before regurgitating it on here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baloo

Well, tbh that post from you this morning was just like a mini-compendium or recent articles from the Daily Mail and if you happen to read that rag I would definitely recommend questioning everything before regurgitating it on here.

---

I don't read the mail or the guardian or any of them as a rule. What I read was on the scrolling stories on my google news on my phone which I scrolled though this morning. I only look at the head lines then open. Half of the stories are gossip about the royals and I scroll right past them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

I don't read the mail or the guardian or any of them as a rule. What I read was on the scrolling stories on my google news on my phone which I scrolled though this morning. I only look at the head lines then open. Half of the stories are gossip about the royals and I scroll right past them.

---

I'm pretty sure that's how the majority of us access the news media these days. Just because you don't read a certain newspaper, it doesn't mean you don't read articles from it. I try to avoid The Mail like the plague, yet it's sometimes the only place to read a particular story - which means that I, on occasions, read the Daily f**king Mail.

Google news just takes the headlines from those papers doesn’t it?

It’s always better to read the full story than just a headline too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

I'm pretty sure that's how the majority of us access the news media these days. Just because you don't read a certain newspaper, it doesn't mean you don't read articles from it. I try to avoid The Mail like the plague, yet it's sometimes the only place to read a particular story - which means that I, on occasions, read the Daily f**king Mail.

---

When someone asked me where I'd got the info I went back on my phone to find the source but they'd changed the stories and I couldn't find it. Murphy's law!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

When someone asked me where I'd got the info I went back on my phone to find the source but they'd changed the stories and I couldn't find it. Murphy's law!

---

If it's regarding the stories you were discussing today - The Mail and The Sun were reporting everything that you said :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

If it's regarding the stories you were discussing today - The Mail and The Sun were reporting everything that you said :thumbup:

---

That thought did cross my mind when the responses started flooding in. :hehe: But then you wouldn't expect them to be in the Observer or the guardian would you, they tend to spin the other way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

That thought did cross my mind when the responses started flooding in. :hehe: But then you wouldn't expect them to be in the Observer or the guardian would you, they tend to spin the other way.

---

The observer is the guardian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

The observer is the guardian.

---

The observer is the sunday version and sunday papers tend to be more catch-up on the whole week and interviews with people who think they're important than actual news of the previous 24 hours. More like a weekly magazine, Obeserver Times Telegraph all the same kind of thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

That thought did cross my mind when the responses started flooding in. :hehe: But then you wouldn't expect them to be in the Observer or the guardian would you, they tend to spin the other way.

---

And that's why you're being summoned before the Spanish Inquisition... you questioned everything that was in the Guardian/Mirror stories but have popped on here today after reading The Mail or The Sun and said you believe what you have read in it.

Please, please, please don't say you didn't sat that... It's 25 past 12 and I can't be arsed to find the quote right now :hehe:_

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

And that's why you're being summoned before the Spanish Inquisition... you questioned everything that was in the Guardian/Mirror stories but have popped on here today after reading The Mail or The Sun and said you believe what you have read in it.

Please, please, please don't say you didn't sat that... It's 25 past 12 and I can't be arsed to find the quote right now :hehe:_

---

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

---

I do think you need to hone your 'question everything' mantra a bit tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baloo

I do think you need to hone your 'question everything' mantra a bit tbh.

---

I do tend to question everything. Who are you really? :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

The police said they attended the property, the media added the reason. The Durham police have now stated that they did not visit as a result of a complaint about Cummins' presence, and they did not speak to him and his wife. The actually visited the property at Mr Cummins senior's request to discuss security of the property. It had nothing to do with Cummins or anything connected to lock-down . Another point that bothers me about this is that the Durham Police could have corrected the suggestions regarding the visit immediately but that chose not to. I wonder who made that call?
Yes the Barnard castle visit was correct, the alleged second sighting was the lie. It seems to me that the media don't check too hard when what they hear suits their argument and do if it doesn't. It should have been easily proven that Cummins was in fact in London on the day of the alleged second visit.
Every time the do this kind of thing they just make me doubt the honestly of anything in the media.

---

The journalist who broke the story was interviewed on the guardian In Focus podcast last week. He talks about the timeline and what they did to verify before publishing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

The journalist who broke the story was interviewed on the guardian In Focus podcast last week. He talks about the timeline and what they did to verify before publishing.

---

You're a bit late to the party aren't you?
I wouldn't have heard it then would I? I've never listened to a podcast by anyone about anything in my life! :shrug: