Weston Super Saint

Not sure why people are getting so upset that a minority are refusing to have a jab. Presumably those that are upset about it are planning to have their own jab when they are eligible / have already had it. If so, what the fuck are you worried about? You will have been vaccinated and therefore protected. What difference will it make to you if someone else has their vaccine or not? Surely they only pose a risk to themselves if they refuse... Give it a couple of weeks after I've had mine and I won't give a shiny shit who sits near me on a plane or train as I know my risk will be diminished to the point of being barely more than a heavy cold.

You're kidding right? Is someone who has refused the jab, more, or less likely than a kid to pass on the virus if they are infected? There is no difference if neither of them have a vaccination passport. That flight to Malaga will be out of reach to both...

Employment requirements are very different to shopping / leisure requirements! What about kids, they aren't currently planned to be vaccinated, so won't be eligible for a vaccination passport. How are they any different to someone who has refused the jab?

Turn it on it's head - what right do private companies have to demand you meet certain criteria before they take your money? Would this open a can of worms, first there's an insistence on having had a covid jab, then an insistence that you've had an MMR, flu jab, tetanus booster etc etc.

Thank goodness they've finally come to their senses! No more misogyny from Hasbro. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56200811

Hoping it will stay dry this weekend so I can test out the new summer bike now that it is built 😁

Isn't it more accurate to say that social media is more of a problem when it comes to racism than football - given your statement regarding incidents and tolerance at football being low? Granted, football is the catalyst in this instance, however, SM is the conduit that allows the racism to flourish. Edit : just seen your later post with the same conclusion

Nobody has asked the most important question yet. What colour will the vaccine passports be?

Jesus wept! You asked (hopefully you'll remember this bit) : I then wrote a number of sentences outlining what had actually happened and that he didn't, in fact, hand a large contract to one of his mates - at that point I asked how has Hancock acted unlawfully there. I then pointed out that you appear to have confused that with the actual court case which had absolutely nothing to do with him or anyone else handing out contracts, but everything to do with not reporting what was handed out in the prescribed time limit. As Benji has already pointed out, this is NOT criminal law. So far, all the court has done is pass a judgement that a law has not been adhered to, but has acknowledged that the information that was required to be published, has been published, albeit later than it should have been. You may be struggling with the concept of law but unless it is a criminal case even a Managing Director wouldn't end up in court unless someone takes out a civil suit against them - usually this will happen in order for the injured party to receive recompense for the wrong doing. In this case, the 'civil litigation' was started by the Good Law Project. The case has been heard and the judge has stated that the law wasn't followed to the letter, but that he also understood the reason for the delay. That's it, end of case, end of judicial review, slap on the wrist for the Health Department. No-one is going to be hung, drawn and quartered.

Step 3 - apparently allows for 10,000 at Wembley. Even they should be able to muster up 5,000 to fill their allocation

I've never disagreed that the department he is in charge of acted unlawfully. I've disagreed with the accusation you made about how the law was broken, but not that it was. In fact I even said this in my first post :

Ah, I see, so you are combining two seperate events and coming up with your own answers. The Department of Health / Government was judged to have broken the law by failing to publish contract awards within 30 days, not because Matt Hancock 'handed a contract to his mate'. https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-governments-failure-to-publish-covid-contracts-details-was-unlawful-high-court-rules-12222826 Although as the Senior Minister, Matt Hancock will have accountability for that error. Still, why let the truth get in the way of a bit of mud slinging eh? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/26/matt-hancock-former-neighbour-won-covid-test-kit-contract-after-whatsapp-message You have managed to get one thing right though. Hinpack is indeed the subject of an investigation by the MHRA, although it would be way too early to draw any conclusions yet.... https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/matt-hancock-alex-bourne-nhs-covid-probe-test-tubes-b920674.html

I don't think he 'handed the contract to one of his mates'. From what I've read, the person in question sent him a whatsapp, Hancock then pointed him in the direction of the website that every company was freely able to submit their details on. I seem to recall a TV advert asking business owners to do just that. Not sure what the 'no experience' is meant to mean. The guy owns a packaging firm that was making plastic packaging for caterers. They changed their processes and now make plastic medical vials (used in covid testing) and plastic funnels, it doesn't seem like advanced rocketry. How has Hancock acted unlawfully there - or are you getting that mixed up with the fact that his department did not produce the required 'transparency' paperwork within the timescale but were about 2 weeks late, focussing on other things as a priotity during a global pandemic? If it's the latter, then he's banged to rights and should be serving 20 years at least for such an heinous crime!

I wouldn't worry too much. They will only 'all' be back for a couple of days. As soon as a kid in a year group tests positive, they'll send the whole year out for two weeks like they did the last time. Not sure what the reasoning will be this time though. Last time it was to protect the grand parents, but they've all been jabbed now...

Were they not able to ask for better insulation?

Class is not a requirement in order to consider that vulgar

Depends on your definition of 'class'. Dubai is predominantly 'new' money. Those that enjoy Dubai the most want to see the latest gadgets, supercars, yachts etc. To them, that is what they consider to be 'class'.

To be fair, that wasn't the claim. It is being reported by more than one news outlet. Case closed.

haha, you absolute cretin. You never fail to disappoint. First you claim that it was only reported as a 'super' variant in the Mail. Now your claiming he couldn't possibly have read it in either of the papers I linked to - there are more, I just couldn't be arsed to copy and paste! This seems to be very much like your 'principles', ever changing to suit your current whim! You're all over the place, can you make your mind up, which argument you're going with?

That's the spirit, double down! UNFold times TW News

good old timmy, always gets it wrong! Also reported in : AA.com Helsinki Times Daily Sabah Standard ExpressYorkshire Evening Post I could go on, but you get the point (timmy won't).

It's fascinating that we always hear about these new variants when people start demanding an end to lockdown - or previously to convince everyone that the lockdown was needed.

Outrageous

I feel I must throw myself upon the apology altar as it appears that I have also missed out the 'I' community. Hopefully these flags will make up for my temporary lapse. Reeboted Pride Trans Pride Intersex Pride Bisexual Pride Pansexual pride Nonbinary Pride Asexual Pride Genderfluid Pride Agender Pride Genderqueer Pride Lesbian Pride Original Pride

Let's hope you don't get offered the AZ vaccine then https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-6522913/Almost-1-5-biggest-firms-paid-year-5-got-handout-taxman.html I assume all you post only gets delivered by couriers that you have thoroughly vetted as well