Jump to content

Coronavirus Mega-Thread.


numnuts
 Share

Message added by Grumpy Owl,

This topic is for all general discussion regarding the current COVID-19 pandemic. There are of course numerous other related topics for discussing specific aspects of this pandemic in more detail. And there are other parts of this forum for more 'off-topic' discussions.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

Absolutely correct....The government doesn't have us under house arrest, we are doing it to ourselves!

Same as the mask bollocks.

If everyone pulled their gimp muzzles off and went where and when they liked to see who they wanted to and said stick your needle up your arse what could be done?

Nothing.

Alas.........so, so many sheep and so few free thinkers.

 

Out of likes Ziggy, I couldn't agree more 👍

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Illmatic said:

 

Yeah, we've seen a couple of legal victories lately ruling lockdowns to be unconstitutional etc but they are little more than moral victories. If the legal route is going to be any use the fight has to happen on several fronts, not just a few well-meaning lawyers trying to take on the state

unfortunately the way i see it ....

the gov has been given a mandate from the people and will exercise that mandate how it sees fit

until there is an election or a vote of no confidence by parliament or an internal removal of the PM things cant change

 

worse so , as in all countries the opposition party is 200% behind the policy and wants even more restrictions

 

and as we keep seeing polls suggest that the majority of the people support the govs actions

 

It is contrary to the UKs traditions, political process and customs if a a minority of people are able to legally over throw the democratically elected and supported government. In fact it is abhorrent regardless of sanity, scientific reason or common sense.

Edited by zArk
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, zArk said:

gah !! i bet Mengele is distraught his 'medical interventions' were not redefined before he set up shop in South America

 

but to be clear , 'an experiment ' can be defined as

An innovative act or procedure:

 

plus if the subject is healthy and functioning and doesnt require medical intervention or life saving treatment the vaccine will be hard pushed to avoid the 'nuremburg' treatment

 

I don't believe the Nuremberg Code or any UN treaty standards have force of law in domestic courts, and though they may be considered to be persuasive points, an English court does not have to adhere to them.

Edited by Ergo Storm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

 

Absolutely correct....The government doesn't have us under house arrest, we are doing it to ourselves!

Same as the mask bollocks.

If everyone pulled their gimp muzzles off and went where and when they liked to see who they wanted to and said stick your needle up your arse what could be done?

Nothing.

Alas.........so, so many sheep and so few free thinkers.

 

That is the solution but has to be done en masse otherwise the few who do will be picked off and given fines, lose their jobs, business closed down etc.

There are consequences for not going along with the mask, lockdown, distancing insanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Ergo Storm said:

 

I don't believe the Nuremberg Code or any UN treaty standards have force of law in domestic courts, and though they may be considered to be persuasive points, an English court does not have to adhere to them.

But the nuremberg treaty is international law, so why do you believe that a domestic court would not follow, as it is a point of law above domestic jurisdiction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

 

Pass the sick bag.

 

Using an extremely overweight league of Gentlethangs, to make you shit your pants with horror just at the site of the monstrosity..

Just a typical BBC article.🤭

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Shining-one said:

My grandparents fought in WW2 against fascism so to pacify it (in any shape or form), to me seems not an option.

 

If all the people destroying and subverting my country hate fascism, it's probably another destructive force that we need to worry about, not fascism.

 

We can keep screaming that the right are fascists, or that the left are the real fascists, but that just gives both a reason to fill their cabinets with even more people that we can't criticize so they can be like "told you we're not nazis". It's terrible optics and doesn't do anything for us.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, zArk said:

unfortunately the way i see it ....

the gov has been given a mandate from the people and will exercise that mandate how it sees fit

until there is an election or a vote of no confidence by parliament or an internal removal of the PM things cant change

 

worse so , as in all countries the opposition party is 200% behind the policy and wants even more restrictions

 

and as we keep seeing polls suggest that the majority of the people support the govs actions

 

It is contrary to the UKs traditions, political process and customs if a a minority of people are able to legally over throw the democratically elected and supported government. In fact it is abhorrent regardless of sanity, scientific reason or common sense.

 

You're right... although I believe the vast majority of people support the lockdown in the same way the vast majority of people in the UK wanted to stay in the EU or the vast majority of Americans wanted Clinton as president in 2016.

 

Unfortunately though the trick of the media is making everyone believe there is consensus when there really isn't. So then everyone goes along with it to some degree because they feel they have to.

 

It works on us too. You see someone in a mask walking down the street and think they are 100% onboard with lockdowns and the vaccine agenda. If you talk with a lot of them though they are as sick and tired as anyone else, they just haven't bothered to look past the surface level and realise that all of it is bullshit.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Morpheus said:

But the nuremberg treaty is international law, so why do you believe that a domestic court would not follow, as it is a point of law above domestic jurisdiction?

 

It's complicated, but in simple terms, domestic courts do not directly enforce 'international law' unless the relevant treaty obligations have been domesticated into UK law using an Act of Parliament. 

 

Some international law has been domesticated and is directly-enforceable.  The main instrument for this was the Human Rights Act 1998, passed under the Blair government, which domesticated the European Convention on Human Rights and also, to a limited extent, some UN convention duties.   

 

To my knowledge, the Nuremberg Code is not directly-enforceable in the UK courts.  That does not necessarily mean an English court would pay it no heed; it all depends on how the argument is put across.

 

If you were to roll up at your local Magistrates' court and say: "You are breaching the Nuremberg Code or my rights under such-and-such UN convention", the Magistrates would probably stare back at you with blank faces and the legally-qualified Justices' Clerk would advise them that:

 

(i). 'international laws' are not usually directly-enforceable in UK courts unless domesticated;

(ii). you're probably a nutter who's been on that David Icke forum, the one where they all discuss lizards.

 

However, as I say, much depends on how things are put across.

 

You could bring up the Nuremberg Code and, while emphasising that you know it is not of direct effect in domestic courts, you could argue that nevertheless it is the accepted international standard for clinical ethics and should be considered a persuasive authority for consideration among other arguments, as it raises a reasonable expectation as to how you should be treated. 

 

It's not a strong argument, though.  Not in the narrow sense that lawyers construct arguments, and unfortunately most cases in Magistrates' Courts nowadays are heard by professional District Judges rather than lay Magistrates, which removes one of the major rights and protections that we once had against abuses.  The lay status of ordinary magistrates can be used to the defendants' advantage sometimes in that they can act a little bit like juries and be more open to arguments and circumstances that might not be strictly relevant in legal terms but are deserving sympathy.  It doesn't happen often that they would let you off, though, as they tend to follow the 'expert' legal advice given to them by the Justices' Clerk, but they often hand out more lenient punishments than normal for this reason. 

Edited by Ergo Storm
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Sexpistol50 said:

Pass the sick bucket , the usual bollocks , Dr Agus looks like Woody Allen, he is 55 years old looks like 75. 

 

It's bollocks, but it's bollocks that's widely-believed or accepted, so we have to come up with counter-arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Avoiceinthecrowd said:

As a kid I would read comic books and was a big fan of scifi. The year 2000 was decades down the road but we were told the technology would free man to a rich life of leisure while the robots would toil to serve us. Well the robots thing was spot on but the man liesure thing sure was off the mark. The fruits of the robotic toil are all confiscated by the upper crust while the lower classes endure the worst abuse.

 

If we listen to elon musk then he claims that automation will free us from the drudgery of work so that we will all have more leisure time

 

I'd be perfectly happy working less and having a better work/life balance but the problem is that the cabal behind the automation have no intention of building a world of leisure for humanity

 

They are hellbent on population reduction and the replacement of human workers through automation simply allows them to pursue that agenda in the knowledge that jobs will still get done

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Pinkman said:

The only way for it to stop is non compliance. These protests don't work. If everyone just stopped complying, opened up their businesses then normality would soon come, even if they still go with their little agenda on TV. 

 

I asked one restaurant if they knew anything about the Great re-opening and if they would be participating.

They didn't know abou it but after I explained, they said "we are not opening". lol

 

It's same ol same ol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DarianF said:

 

People who take it under threat of losing their job, fine I can understand that. But people who willingly take it or even demand it, total morons. No hope left for them.

I asked a random person, a muslim guy. He said I don't watch tv and won't be having the vaccine.

But if everyone is having it...... OK  I know what kind of person you are. zip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EXIT Blueprint

                           

 Non compliance.

A strategy to implement above.

 

We,re gonna need a bigger strategy. 

 

 

 

                                     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ergo Storm said:

 

I don't believe the Nuremberg Code or any UN treaty standards have force of law in domestic courts, and though they may be considered to be persuasive points, an English court does not have to adhere to them.

 but its only useful as an argumentative point anyway

 

n.b check out Bill Thornton explaining common law, sovereignty and a court of record @ 1215.org

https://www.1215.org/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, zArk said:

 but its only useful as an argumentative point anyway

 

n.b check out Bill Thornton explaining common law, sovereignty and a court of record @ 1215.org

https://www.1215.org/

 

 

 

As I've said, the Nuremberg Code does not in itself have force of law, so it looks like we're in agreement.

 

As for the video, I don't personally agree with all that stuff.  

Edited by Ergo Storm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...