The Right Honourable Matt Hancock MP
Discussion
Wills2 said:
Whilst I’m in no way defending MH or any of the decision makers in this whole episode, it COULD be argued that this interaction is just a rougher ‘street’ version of some SAGE meeting minutes!My own view of Politicians (vast majority of them,) is that they are ‘of a type’ and cannot help themselves - ‘good day to bury bad news’ etc.
It doesn’t surprise me one bit (unfortunately,) that all of the messages are showing a superficiality where you just now there’s an undercurrent of:
A) How can I gain from this
B) Can I get one over XXX (rival) with this
C) what’s the best way to spin this so I don’t lose face
Etc
Slaav said:
Whilst I’m in no way defending MH or any of the decision makers in this whole episode, it COULD be argued that this interaction is just a rougher ‘street’ version of some SAGE meeting minutes!
My own view of Politicians (vast majority of them,) is that they are ‘of a type’ and cannot help themselves - ‘good day to bury bad news’ etc.
It doesn’t surprise me one bit (unfortunately,) that all of the messages are showing a superficiality where you just now there’s an undercurrent of:
A) How can I gain from this
B) Can I get one over XXX (rival) with this
C) what’s the best way to spin this so I don’t lose face
Etc
Yup, but politics is essentually a popularity contest so it's hardly surprising they want to spin / bury everything to help themselves. My own view of Politicians (vast majority of them,) is that they are ‘of a type’ and cannot help themselves - ‘good day to bury bad news’ etc.
It doesn’t surprise me one bit (unfortunately,) that all of the messages are showing a superficiality where you just now there’s an undercurrent of:
A) How can I gain from this
B) Can I get one over XXX (rival) with this
C) what’s the best way to spin this so I don’t lose face
Etc
I think it's fascinating in a way that you don't often see. We've had D-Notices, etc for a long time, but you seldom get first hand accounts of people discussing the best way to spin/promote/repress something, even though they must be at it all the time.
Are there minutes of the meetings with Churchill / Atlee vs Halifax in the same room arguing about the possibility of asking the Italian Facists to help broker peace or what to tell the press about the loss of Prince of Wales & Repulse?
Are there minutes of the meetings with Churchill / Atlee vs Halifax in the same room arguing about the possibility of asking the Italian Facists to help broker peace or what to tell the press about the loss of Prince of Wales & Repulse?
Slaav said:
It doesn’t surprise me one bit (unfortunately,) that all of the messages are showing a superficiality where you just now there’s an undercurrent of:
A) How can I gain from this
B) Can I get one over XXX (rival) with this
C) what’s the best way to spin this so I don’t lose face
Etc
What you have said here, and I agree, perfectly demonstrates that it wasn't about the virus and was all about justifying their actions when they inevitably will come under scrutiny.A) How can I gain from this
B) Can I get one over XXX (rival) with this
C) what’s the best way to spin this so I don’t lose face
Etc
glazbagun said:
I think it's fascinating in a way that you don't often see. We've had D-Notices, etc for a long time, but you seldom get first hand accounts of people discussing the best way to spin/promote/repress something, even though they must be at it all the time.
Are there minutes of the meetings with Churchill / Atlee vs Halifax in the same room arguing about the possibility of asking the Italian Facists to help broker peace or what to tell the press about the loss of Prince of Wales & Repulse?
Are there minutes of the meetings with Churchill / Atlee vs Halifax in the same room arguing about the possibility of asking the Italian Facists to help broker peace or what to tell the press about the loss of Prince of Wales & Repulse?
Exactly. The unintended consequences of this is that the conversation will move away from the digital world to more secure and water tight forms of medium.WhatsApp as a communicating medium hasn’t come out of this well in my view. Ok, there’s end to end encryption and all that, but the actual messages live on long after the intended recipients have long forgotten about it and the problem with them is once they’re out, the author of the texts are bang to rights. Once you hit the send button, what you say can be used against you in a court of law, the press or whether, so don’t!
This type of communication, human communication and gossip, will just take another form, or these individuals will be a lot more careful what they share digitally.
Those trying to defend MH are really choosing an odd hill to die on!
To say that he was doing his best is showing their gullibility. MH had Covid at the beginning of April so he would have personal experience of just how 'bad' the virus was to a healthy man in his forties. That he was back on the podium in front of the TV cameras after, what was at the time a mandatory 7 day isolation, not looking in any discomfort demonstrates just how mild the virus really was to the vast majority of people.
When you look at the decisions made and his WhatsApp messages after this, there is no way it can be argued that the decisions he was making were anything other than political and to manipulate the situation to further his career.
To say that he was doing his best is showing their gullibility. MH had Covid at the beginning of April so he would have personal experience of just how 'bad' the virus was to a healthy man in his forties. That he was back on the podium in front of the TV cameras after, what was at the time a mandatory 7 day isolation, not looking in any discomfort demonstrates just how mild the virus really was to the vast majority of people.
When you look at the decisions made and his WhatsApp messages after this, there is no way it can be argued that the decisions he was making were anything other than political and to manipulate the situation to further his career.
maz8062 said:
Miserablegit said:
maz8062 said:
Yes, but these people are human like you and I. They gossip, moan, b
h, poke fun etc. WhatsApp, text messages, and email sometimes lulls fools into a false sense of security. They don’t realise that once you hit send on these things you lose control of how said information is and will be used by the unscrupulous.
Hancock was foolish in sending the information over to Isabel, but then she was writing a book for him, had signed an NDA and likely assured him that his secrets and all of the messages would be safe with her. But he’d lost control of the info and for that he is naive at best a fool more likely.
Now, my view is that it is time to let all of this go and try and understand that we were in unprecedented times, and BJ, Whitty, Matt and others were doing their best to keep us safe. There’s a vindictive mood out there, some folk looking for someone to blame, to be vindicated in their views about whether Covid existed or not and whether they’d have done something different under the circumstances.
Matt did his best. Until he was caught necking that woman he was being touted as the next PM of this country, but animalistic instincts got in the way and now he’s where he is. Should people continue to flog the man, berate him, hate on him? In my view no, because healing only starts when we can accept the past and move on.
If we accept Hancock is an utter h, poke fun etc. WhatsApp, text messages, and email sometimes lulls fools into a false sense of security. They don’t realise that once you hit send on these things you lose control of how said information is and will be used by the unscrupulous.Hancock was foolish in sending the information over to Isabel, but then she was writing a book for him, had signed an NDA and likely assured him that his secrets and all of the messages would be safe with her. But he’d lost control of the info and for that he is naive at best a fool more likely.
Now, my view is that it is time to let all of this go and try and understand that we were in unprecedented times, and BJ, Whitty, Matt and others were doing their best to keep us safe. There’s a vindictive mood out there, some folk looking for someone to blame, to be vindicated in their views about whether Covid existed or not and whether they’d have done something different under the circumstances.
Matt did his best. Until he was caught necking that woman he was being touted as the next PM of this country, but animalistic instincts got in the way and now he’s where he is. Should people continue to flog the man, berate him, hate on him? In my view no, because healing only starts when we can accept the past and move on.
then I can accept he was doing his best.His best, however, falls so far below the capabilities needed for the position he was in.
There were hundreds of fixed penalty notices issued at Downing Street. MH didn’t get one, yet he is held responsible for everything anti-lockdown. It doesn’t make sense to me and comes across as a witch hunt, kicking a man while he’s down, flogging a dead horse. Is it right?
It’s a common human trait to look for a scape goat, to find someone to blame for what has happened in the past. MH is the person that folk like to hate on - in my view because he was caught in that clinch with his current girl friend. People want to believe that the lockdown was unnecessary and was part of a govt attempt to control the population for nefarious reasons - they believe that the response to Covid was OTT and MH snogging his gf rather than social distancing was proof of that.
MH was seen as the person delivering bad news. Telling people that they couldn’t see loved ones or attend funerals or to see their elderly mum. He is seen by some as the person responsible for care home deaths, PPE wastage etc. To some he is even worse than Putin.
My view is that his intentions were good, delivery perhaps not, but he was being guided and had to make the calls, not alone though.
Mugs like you are the reason these kind of politicians continue to be elected into power.
Agreed. I’ve just gone back over the emails I sent to my local MP in September 2020 expressing my exasperation over their handling of this from my perspective of what I’d witnessed and known about since late 2019 it was utter lunacy the draconian measures they were imposing. I got in reply some utter nonsense copy and paste job about the rule of six. I’m quite angry now that I was absolutely spot on nearly 3 years ago and saw all of this as it was, and I would love to write back to my MP and demand an apology of sorts, but I just don’t feel I’d get it and I also have so little regard for anyone in the political sphere now I just don’t want to waste my time.
maz8062 said:
glazbagun said:
I think it's fascinating in a way that you don't often see. We've had D-Notices, etc for a long time, but you seldom get first hand accounts of people discussing the best way to spin/promote/repress something, even though they must be at it all the time.
Are there minutes of the meetings with Churchill / Atlee vs Halifax in the same room arguing about the possibility of asking the Italian Facists to help broker peace or what to tell the press about the loss of Prince of Wales & Repulse?
Are there minutes of the meetings with Churchill / Atlee vs Halifax in the same room arguing about the possibility of asking the Italian Facists to help broker peace or what to tell the press about the loss of Prince of Wales & Repulse?
Exactly. The unintended consequences of this is that the conversation will move away from the digital world to more secure and water tight forms of medium.WhatsApp as a communicating medium hasn’t come out of this well in my view. Ok, there’s end to end encryption and all that, but the actual messages live on long after the intended recipients have long forgotten about it and the problem with them is once they’re out, the author of the texts are bang to rights. Once you hit the send button, what you say can be used against you in a court of law, the press or whether, so don’t!
This type of communication, human communication and gossip, will just take another form, or these individuals will be a lot more careful what they share digitally.
Let’s not forget that the reason Oakeshott had access to this smorgasbord of insight into the pathetic priorities driving this utter discreditable character is that he gave her the full set of data to allow for the writing of his self justifying pandemic diaries.
If he had concerns he could have at the very least either not given that access or known what he was turning over.
He is shot to pieces for his own admissions and certainly from what I’ve seen so far the only people who come out of this looking bad is Hancock and his set of frankly sycophantic lackeys and Simon Case. Most of the others from Johnson down (Sunak, the scientists, Stevens etc) look at the very least as though they were trying to do the right things.
Hancock on the other hand looks like a right cock.
Ridgemont said:
ColdoRS said:
I cannot believe what I'm reading.
Mugs like you are the reason these kind of politicians continue to be elected into power.
I am not sure whether maz actually may be Hancock in disguise.Mugs like you are the reason these kind of politicians continue to be elected into power.
I can see why anyone with an ounce of intelligence stated to view the general public with a sense of contempt. E.g. Let them have what they want (lockdowns, restrictions etc) but why should I join in with this nonsense.
It was almost inevitable the government would become hypocritical in that scenario.
Ridgemont said:
He is shot to pieces for his own admissions and certainly from what I’ve seen so far the only people who come out of this looking bad is Hancock and his set of frankly sycophantic lackeys and Simon Case. Most of the others from Johnson down (Sunak, the scientists, Stevens etc) look at the very least as though they were trying to do the right things.
Hancock on the other hand looks like a right cock.
That might be due to the messages being primarily Hancock's. I think if one has access and published Johnson/Cummings/Gove or even Whitty/Vallance's messages, it might be a bit less flattering. Ok for the latter 2, it's unlikely that their private conversations would be as self serving and vainglorious as Hancock but for the rest.....hmmm ..I suspect Hancock would be in good company.Hancock on the other hand looks like a right cock.
Grumps. said:
I still can’t see anything particularly damning, especially as most of the content was known about even during those times.
It also seems to me that all the messages appear to be written by the same person, particularly the posting styles of the messages.
I’m going to regret engaging here, but you’re saying early 2020 we were fully aware as a public that our own government did lockdowns purely to gain popularity for when the vaccine arrived to set us free, just so they could look good?It also seems to me that all the messages appear to be written by the same person, particularly the posting styles of the messages.
jameswills said:
Grumps. said:
I still can’t see anything particularly damning, especially as most of the content was known about even during those times.
It also seems to me that all the messages appear to be written by the same person, particularly the posting styles of the messages.
I’m going to regret engaging here, but you’re saying early 2020 we were fully aware as a public that our own government did lockdowns purely to gain popularity for when the vaccine arrived to set us free, just so they could look good?It also seems to me that all the messages appear to be written by the same person, particularly the posting styles of the messages.
It is clear that he (and case) thought they were in a ‘war’ to use their choice of words chosen multiple times.
They weren’t. A public health emergency is not that. But to then use it for personal advancement (‘l look great!’ ‘Swift and decisive’) stinks to High hell.
This is quite funny.... Hancock looks to have found a rather pompous lawyer to try and threaten Oakeshott for breaking their NDA. The lawyer was then invited onto GB News to give his view on whether Hancock might have a case. But as part of the intro, and to put the lawyer's perspective into some context, the presenter introduced the guest as having being asked to act on behalf of Hancock.
At which point the lawyer has a mini-melt down, saying how unprofessional it was that this information had been divulged to the viewers. He went onto make some spurious comparison suggested there was a comparison between a lawyer leaking breaking an NDA to leak personal details during a marital breakdown with the Hancock leaks about his handling of the covid pandemic.
Then after several minutes of the lawyer basically ranting and telling the presenter he was asking the "wrong questions" their producer found the lawyer's original email when he specifically requested it was mentioned he was acting on behalf on Hancock... doh!
https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1632475157695455...
At which point the lawyer has a mini-melt down, saying how unprofessional it was that this information had been divulged to the viewers. He went onto make some spurious comparison suggested there was a comparison between a lawyer leaking breaking an NDA to leak personal details during a marital breakdown with the Hancock leaks about his handling of the covid pandemic.
Then after several minutes of the lawyer basically ranting and telling the presenter he was asking the "wrong questions" their producer found the lawyer's original email when he specifically requested it was mentioned he was acting on behalf on Hancock... doh!
https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1632475157695455...
EddieSteadyGo said:
This is quite funny.... Hancock looks to have found a rather pompous lawyer to try and threaten Oakeshott for breaking their NDA. The lawyer was then invited onto GB News to give his view on whether Hancock might have a case. But as part of the intro, and to put the lawyer's perspective into some context, the presenter introduced the guest as having being asked to act on behalf of Hancock.
At which point the lawyer has a mini-melt down, saying how unprofessional it was that this information had been divulged to the viewers. He went onto make some spurious comparison suggested there was a comparison between a lawyer leaking breaking an NDA to leak personal details during a marital breakdown with the Hancock leaks about his handling of the covid pandemic.
Then after several minutes of the lawyer basically ranting and telling the presenter he was asking the "wrong questions" their producer found the lawyer's original email when he specifically requested it was mentioned he was acting on behalf on Hancock... doh!
https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1632475157695455...
What an idiot. Who cares, this is information we all have a right to know, in fact we should demand to know as it affected all our lives. It should be of public discourse by our constitutional right. At which point the lawyer has a mini-melt down, saying how unprofessional it was that this information had been divulged to the viewers. He went onto make some spurious comparison suggested there was a comparison between a lawyer leaking breaking an NDA to leak personal details during a marital breakdown with the Hancock leaks about his handling of the covid pandemic.
Then after several minutes of the lawyer basically ranting and telling the presenter he was asking the "wrong questions" their producer found the lawyer's original email when he specifically requested it was mentioned he was acting on behalf on Hancock... doh!
https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1632475157695455...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff