Coworker Mad At Me For Keeping A Selfie...
Business & Finance1 min ago
Why Is He Complaining?Shouldn't He Know Better?
Answers
Wilson said "Whoever took the picture didn't approach me or say anything to me which I suppose would have been the proper way to behave." *** Inserts rolling on floor, crying with laughter emoji *** Durrr. There's a Coronavirus outbreak hitchhiking itself around the world. You're not wearing a mask and you're on the Tube - people DO NOT speak to strangers on...
07:35 Fri 25th Sep 2020
Whole mask thing is a waste of time, as I have said many times before and for the reasons others have already posted.
The MP is correct though. We need 'The House' in on all these laws and diktats otherwise it is not different to the Stasi. Something else I have said on hewre many times so I am glad MP's are taking the fight to Herr Johnson.
The MP is correct though. We need 'The House' in on all these laws and diktats otherwise it is not different to the Stasi. Something else I have said on hewre many times so I am glad MP's are taking the fight to Herr Johnson.
“ You are of course entitled to have a view, but it doesn’t have to be of your intergluteal cleft.”
The latest needless piece of crudeness from this source has, I’m willing to bet inadvertently, reminded some of us a previous time Sammy W was “caught on camera” sunbathing in the nuddie in his garden.
So he’s been the victim of the pound shop paparazzi before
The latest needless piece of crudeness from this source has, I’m willing to bet inadvertently, reminded some of us a previous time Sammy W was “caught on camera” sunbathing in the nuddie in his garden.
So he’s been the victim of the pound shop paparazzi before
//Wearing a mask generally doesn’t harm you. So why not just do it where and when required.//
Your statement is not correct. The WHO published advice on the use of face coverings by the general public. One of their concerns was the risk of self-contamination by wearers who had not been properly trained and disciplined in their use (i.e. almost everybody). In many circumstances that risk outweighs the benefit to others that wearing a face covering or mask provides. I've posted links to that guidance on here more than once and am not going to hunt round for it again but it is not correct to say that wearing a mask generally doesn't harm you.
Yes, Sammy Wilson should have worn a face covering. But he is correct when he mentions the stasi-like atmosphere that is beginning to creep in here in the UK. Hitler began the brainwashing of the German people by encouraging them to report to the authorities anybody who was critical of the Third Reich. That attitude was clearly carried over to East Germany after the war. When all this nonsense ends your neighbours will still be your neighbours - the same people who you might like to borrow a cup of sugar from or water your greenhouse whilst you're away.
Also, it is clear that "mission creep" is now evident with many of the regulations. Face coverings began in shops, spread to public transport, Transport for London gold-plated it by passing a by-law insisting on coverings on their railway stations - even those in the open air; now you must wear one if you get up to go to the toilet in a pub or restaurant. How long before coverings are required as soon as you set foot outside your front door? Pubs and restaurants must now close at 10pm. How long before you cannot be on the streets after that time without a "reasonable excuse"?
It is time that the government's strategy and in particular its imposition of (often ridiculous) restrictions were brought back to Parliament. These are not trivial infringements on the population's liberties we are talking about. In parts of the UK (and no doubt everywhere soon) it is illegal to invite somebody into your house. It is illegal to "gather" in numbers more than six, meaning huge difficulties for even small families who may want a get-together involving children and grandchildren (unless, ridiculously, they line up outside the house and operate a "one in one out" system).
The implications of these restrictions are enormous and six months ago people would have gasped at the notion that such proposals were even being considered. Now "it's for the good of everybody" that a couple cannot invite all four of their parents to their house to celebrate one of their children's birthdays. Well it's not very good for them.
Your statement is not correct. The WHO published advice on the use of face coverings by the general public. One of their concerns was the risk of self-contamination by wearers who had not been properly trained and disciplined in their use (i.e. almost everybody). In many circumstances that risk outweighs the benefit to others that wearing a face covering or mask provides. I've posted links to that guidance on here more than once and am not going to hunt round for it again but it is not correct to say that wearing a mask generally doesn't harm you.
Yes, Sammy Wilson should have worn a face covering. But he is correct when he mentions the stasi-like atmosphere that is beginning to creep in here in the UK. Hitler began the brainwashing of the German people by encouraging them to report to the authorities anybody who was critical of the Third Reich. That attitude was clearly carried over to East Germany after the war. When all this nonsense ends your neighbours will still be your neighbours - the same people who you might like to borrow a cup of sugar from or water your greenhouse whilst you're away.
Also, it is clear that "mission creep" is now evident with many of the regulations. Face coverings began in shops, spread to public transport, Transport for London gold-plated it by passing a by-law insisting on coverings on their railway stations - even those in the open air; now you must wear one if you get up to go to the toilet in a pub or restaurant. How long before coverings are required as soon as you set foot outside your front door? Pubs and restaurants must now close at 10pm. How long before you cannot be on the streets after that time without a "reasonable excuse"?
It is time that the government's strategy and in particular its imposition of (often ridiculous) restrictions were brought back to Parliament. These are not trivial infringements on the population's liberties we are talking about. In parts of the UK (and no doubt everywhere soon) it is illegal to invite somebody into your house. It is illegal to "gather" in numbers more than six, meaning huge difficulties for even small families who may want a get-together involving children and grandchildren (unless, ridiculously, they line up outside the house and operate a "one in one out" system).
The implications of these restrictions are enormous and six months ago people would have gasped at the notion that such proposals were even being considered. Now "it's for the good of everybody" that a couple cannot invite all four of their parents to their house to celebrate one of their children's birthdays. Well it's not very good for them.
Your hands are one of your best tools, but they can also be you're worst enemy. There's only one operation your need to concentrate on, and when I first started school even way back in the 1950 it was taught in school, ( wash you're hands) and I mean wash them don't just swill them. We have boat loads of cleaning products on the market? you just need a bar of soap, as per the 1950s, its the education that has fallen down, even in adults. I have had not one person in the last 7 months cough or sneeze by me.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.