- Joined
- 9 May 2020
- Messages
- 7,393
- Reaction score
- 136
- Country
If your specifics are questionable and evidentially false, then your general points are invalid.Another Numbnuts (him. Again) who cannot quite grasp the point being made
If your specifics are questionable and evidentially false, then your general points are invalid.Another Numbnuts (him. Again) who cannot quite grasp the point being made
If your specifics are questionable and evidentially false, then your general points are invalid.
It might be you.Another Numbnuts (him. Again) who cannot quite grasp the point being made
Complaining about the CQC when it's not their job to monitor something is like complaining about a plumber not checking an electricians work. They might notice a problem but it's not their job to.Blimey u plagerising again
Point being what that vaginal. Mesh scandal that left woman with severe medical long term issues
Granted Himagain its a Woman's problem so true to form u don't give a **it
Than u get it Minion aka Numbnuts
Oh it was not mentioned
Oh dear wasn't it **** en*
Complaining about the CQC when it's not their job to monitor something is like complaining about a plumber not checking an electricians work. They might notice a problem but it's not their job to.
I see, so we want to make the CQC bigger and add more responsibility to it then.Well it should be numb ****
Hence why there should be change
Obviously u think different and tbh transam gives not a jot what u or the other numb nut thinks
I made a valid post and a valid point
I see, so we want to make the CQC bigger and add more responsibility to it then.
You want to add work to them. So yes.Do we?
You want to add work to them. So yes.
It might be you.
A plumbers' soliloquy on the finer points of commissioning care - a train wreck.
Its the Dunning-Kruger effect in spades - somehow all problems no matter how complex and nuanced can be solved with simple solutions and explanations.