Numbnuts Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 2 hours ago, Dr. Grumpy said: What if he knows things that Cannan won't want to be public knowledge? I think its likely he does as do many others. Cannan has a few skeletons in the cupboard that he def wont want to come out. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wavey Davey Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 4 hours ago, Dr. Grumpy said: What if he knows things that Cannan won't want to be public knowledge? I’d say the chances of Ashford knowing something that Cannan doesn’t want public is fairly remote. And in fact if that was the case they would have taken this opportunity to totally discredit him as they have other people so that every-time he opens his mouth he has no credibility. But they haven’t. They are allowing him to discredit himself in his own unique way. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 18 minutes ago, Wavey Davey said: I’d say the chances of Ashford knowing something that Cannan doesn’t want public is fairly remote. And in fact if that was the case they would have taken this opportunity to totally discredit him as they have other people so that every-time he opens his mouth he has no credibility. But they haven’t. They are allowing him to discredit himself in his own unique way. I think your wrong and for sure anything of a personal nature nobody would want out there. Hypothetically of course ! . 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wavey Davey Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 11 minutes ago, Numbnuts said: I think your wrong and for sure anything of a personal nature nobody would want out there. I though everyone knew about that? It’s hardly not out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Ship Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 (edited) 5 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: I presume this is just them publishing online part of the coverage they had in the paper last week when the Decision came out. But there were so many astounding revelations in that document that it doesn't do any harm to emphasise them and put this up for posterity. The problem I have with that link is that the article has what I would describe as a misleading (whether inadvertant or through simple laziness) title - "Ranson case will get second hearing". When I read that my immediate thought was: "Oh! Hang on - is the DHSC actually appealing the tribunal's decision?" Of course they aren't. (Or at least not yet). On reading the article I realised they were simply repeating old news from last week that the tribunal would be carrying out a separate investigation into the conduct of the DHSC and Mrs Magson in respect of disclosure. I think that describing that investigation as a second hearing in the Ranson case (ie the suggestion that the case might be heard again) is inaccurate and misleading. Edited May 19, 2022 by Ghost Ship 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b4mbi Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 2 hours ago, Numbnuts said: Cannan has a few skeletons in the cupboard that he def wont want to come out. The 1924 hide and seek champion ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrGarrison Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 27 minutes ago, Wavey Davey said: I though everyone knew about that? It’s hardly not out there. Orchestral manoeuvres in the West? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 Ugandan Polka? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Wavey Davey said: I though everyone knew about that? It’s hardly not out there. It depends what 'that' is. Theres possibly , just might be , more than one or two 'thats' just might not be out there ! . Edited May 19, 2022 by Numbnuts 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Grumpy Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 3 minutes ago, Numbnuts said: It depends what 'that' is. Theres possibly , just might be , more than one or two 'thats' just might not be out there ! . If I knew one of those 'thats' (hypothetically of course) could I become minister one day? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Grumpy Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 I see a vacancy on the board. Any takers? @rachomics? @John Wright? Anyone else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 From tonight's Manx Independent Letters Page. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 12 minutes ago, Dr. Grumpy said: If I knew one of those 'thats' (hypothetically of course) could I become minister one day? If you did , of course hypothetically , you might be able to do whatever your dream was ! . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forestboy Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 6 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: From tonight's Manx Independent Letters Page. What a damming indictment. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted May 19, 2022 Share Posted May 19, 2022 7 minutes ago, forestboy said: What a damming indictment. Quite. What is worrying is that these problems seem to have been there for a very, very long time but no action has been taken to address them. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.