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

10 minutes ago, alexa said:

 

 

 

a anu.jpg

 

"One has had a terrible year.  One's castle burned down.  One's son got divorced.  One's popularity went through the floor.  Philip made the usual gaffs.  And to top it all orrrrff, I've had my arse prodded and probed.  It's been a literal annus horribilis."

 

 

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

9 minutes ago, Ergo Storm said:

 

"One has had a terrible year.  One's castle burned down.  One's son got divorced.  One's popularity went through the floor.  Philip made the usual gaffs.  And to top it all orrrrff, I've had my arse prodded and probed.  It's been a literal annus horribilis."

 

These Royals are used to this by Groom of the stool🤮

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, alexa said:

Ministers warn 'going on holiday is illegal' in new ad campaign to halt foreign travel 

Under lockdown rules in place since the start of the month 'going on a foreign holiday is not a valid reason to leave home,' one official said, adding that it 'increases the risk of spreading the virus.

Daily Fail

 

It's like living in a science fiction film.  But one reason they can now get away with this is that our civil liberties have been eroded slowly and gradually over a very long time with little opposition.  This is not a cliff edge, it is just the cumulation of long trends that people have accepted, even supported, in the name of fighting crime or terrorism, much of it with only a tenuous justification.

 

Examples that come to mind off-hand:

 

-Racially-motivated public order offences, introduced during the 1980s.

-Use of nationalised police during the 1984/85 Miners' Strike.

-Paramilitarisation of the police.

-Intrusive and Kafkaesque anti-money laundering laws.

-The attempt to introduce compulsory ID cards, now brought in by the backdoor with photocard driving licences, which were made compulsory with little or no opposition.

- Hate speech laws introduced by the Blair government.

- Intrusive employment laws that micro-manage employer-employee relations.

- Anti-discrimination laws.

- Restrictions on demonstrations and protests generally, and in specific sensitive areas like Westminster.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/russia-real-sweden-one-place-europe-anything-goes/

 

Quote

 

Moscow locked down hard in the spring, requiring residents to download digital passes to leave their homes. The city’s sophisticated video-surveillance network was put in use to catch quarantine violators. Clips shared on social media showed police halting joggers mid-run and breaking up barbecues, while the palatial stations of the city’s Stalin-era metro system were all but empty. The Kremlin closed Russia’s borders: not only banning foreigners from entering but also Russians from leaving, apart from on essential travel. 

In June, however, President Vladimir Putin declared “victory” over the virus. Authorities lifted the lockdown in time for Russians to vote in a delayed referendum that changed the constitution to allow Mr Putin to extend his rule until 2036. 

Since then, the country has never looked back. Aside from masks in shops and on public transport – occasionally enforced by police, and encouraged by a recent video from the Moscow Metro showing a glamorous young couple dancing in a carriage in face-coverings and gloves – the streets resemble life pre-pandemic. 

The Kremlin has handed over decision-making on restrictions to regional authorities, while making clear that it expects the Russian economy to keep moving. (Moscow has asked employers to keep a third of their workforce at home and put high-school students into distance learning, while the region outside the capital has told over-65s to self isolate. The country’s health watchdog has suggested an 11pm curfew for businesses, which Moscow has ignored but Saint Petersburg is enforcing.)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Ergo Storm said:

 

It's like living in a science fiction film.  But one reason they can now get away with this is that our civil liberties have been eroded slowly and gradually over a very long time with little opposition.  This is not a cliff edge, it is just the cumulation of long trends that people have accepted, even supported, in the name of fighting crime or terrorism, much of it with only a tenuous justification.

 

Examples that come to mind off-hand:

 

-Racially-motivated public order offences, introduced during the 1980s.

-Use of nationalised police during the 1984/85 Miners' Strike.

-Paramilitarisation of the police.

-Intrusive and Kafkaesque anti-money laundering laws.

-The attempt to introduce compulsory ID cards, now brought in by the backdoor with photocard driving licences, which were made compulsory with little or no opposition.

- Hate speech laws introduced by the Blair government.

- Intrusive employment laws that micro-manage employer-employee relations.

- Anti-discrimination laws.

- Restrictions on demonstrations and protests generally, and in specific sensitive areas like Westminster.


Speaking of erosion of civil liberties I've noticed the Daily Mail publishing a lot of articles over the years that seem to be directed at persuading the general public to request for Human Rights to be removed. They appear to use examples of the worst people who get protected by Human Rights to provoke a reaction from the public. I don't necessarily condone the actions of criminals that are protected by them and I have a lot of sympathy for the victims of the crimes. What I worry about is how removal of certain basic human rights might impact innocent people who are wrongly convicted or how changes in those laws might result in abuse of innocent citizens who would under the right circumstances be protected by them. It's rough territory.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, facere arbitrium said:


Speaking of erosion of civil liberties I've noticed the Daily Mail publishing a lot of articles over the years that seem to be directed at persuading the general public to request for Human Rights to be removed. They appear to use examples of the worst people who get protected by Human Rights to provoke a reaction from the public. I don't necessarily condone the actions of criminals that are protected by them and I have a lot of sympathy for the victims of the crimes. What I worry about is how removal of certain basic human rights might impact innocent people who are wrongly convicted or how changes in those laws might result in abuse of innocent citizens who would under the right circumstances be protected by them. It's rough territory.

 

This is an example of exactly what I mean.  There is a highly-contested saying in the law: Hard cases make bad law.  I think sometimes this adage is adaptable to situations covered by popular newspapers.  They take extreme or unpopular cases - 'hard cases' - and try to suggest that the law should generally be adapted to these, not appreciating how the same laws that bad people take advantage of are also necessary to protect the liberties of the average person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ergo Storm said:

 

This is an example of exactly what I mean.  There is a highly-contested saying in the law: Hard cases make bad law.  I think sometimes this adage is adaptable to situations covered by popular newspapers.  They take extreme or unpopular cases - 'hard cases' - and try to suggest that the law should generally be adapted to these, not appreciating how the same laws that bad people take advantage of are also necessary to protect the liberties of the average person.


Agree with you there man and appreciate the information. Seems to be a recurring pattern with that rag even with the Rona virus. Using the stories that fit their persuasive narrative and ignoring stories of people who've been harmed by vaccines or dying of other treatable diseases due to lock downs. Stories where people's lives have been devastated by circumstances that they don't really want anyone to think about. It's absolutely insane how even just discussing vaccines people have gotten to the point where all someone has to say is 'anti-vax' and it immediately ends further self-inquiry or debate on the subject. Willful ignorance.

I don't get my news from that rag but I do view it occasionally to get an idea of what public are being fed. I think a lot of people, but not all, take their news on face value and accept it as their own opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, alexa said:


Their narratives are ridiculous and beyond a joke. It'd be funny in normal times but they're quite sick. There's no conspiracy in the fact they're trialing vaccines that have been rushed through development in a year when the process ordinarily takes 10 years.

That they're using new technologies in the vaccines that they have no long term data on. That the general public is mostly unaware they're participating in what is essentially an experiment, whilst being persuaded to use post marketing surveillance to gather the data they don't have on the safety and efficacy of the vaccines; Due to the short time they have been rushed out in.

All this is evident in their own literature on the government sites, the governments own actions and words during their public announcements and gets repeated in their own words by the doctors who support the rolling out of the vaccines themselves.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add a point of balance, there may be vulnerable people about. The vaccine isn't necessarily going to stop them from getting or spreading the virus. If the great reopening is going ahead, vulnerable people should be supported and asked if they can be assisted with chores or shopping. They should also be made aware of being able to further protect themselves using Vitamin C, D and Zinc to enhance their immunity and lower inflammation. These are precautions that come with considerably less risk and good benefits. It's not unreasonable to assume we have a duty of care to one another especially if people are serious about taking self-responsibility. The last thing a compassionate self-responsible society would want to do is make their own people fearful. People need to know they're safe, supported and cared for. And most importantly they should know what they can do to help themselves and that there are people who will help them with what they need.

This along with a healthy diet, low stress, some light exercise and good sleep will be beneficial for everyone.

I wish the small business owners a successful re-opening and more than anything I hope nobody will come to any harm. It's important to be receptive if any issues arise and respond appropriately to protect one another.

Edited by facere arbitrium
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alexa said:

 

That's an important article.  I've always known that the Daily Mail are scum, but even I'm slightly disconcerted that they are now contacting people's employers to grass on them.  That's really scummy and arguably amounts to harassment because posts to a Facebook group are not of public interest and NHS workers have a right to hold and express their private views.

 

Without wishing in any way to be disrespectful to the lady who owns the hairdressers, when she talks about how she is a 'fictitious character', she is revealing the weakness of the position she is in.  A judge or Magistrate can still put her fictitious character in prison, and her arguments will be of no aid as her fictitious character sits in a 125-square foot cell dressed in prison fatigues.  

 

I know some people here believe in the common law arguments, but they are of no validity.  At best, the common law theory has a nuisance value and works as a theatrical psychological ploy in difficult legal situations.  You can probably use it as a blag now and then with the odd Magistrates' bench or judge, who know you're full of crap but might agree to dismiss the case just to get rid of you if they're busy and have other cases to hear. 

 

But it's not a real argument.  I believe it was the American poet, Carl Sandberg (not a lawyer), who once famously quipped:

 

Quote

If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell

 

These 'common law' arguments are mostly at that level, but it has to be admitted that Sandberg's advice is astute. 

 

One more thing.  The article includes reference to a bullying official in North Yorkshire:

 

Quote

 

Richard Webb, North Yorkshire County Council's corporate director for health and adult services, said: 'Yesterday we were made aware of a campaign doing the rounds across the north of England which urges businesses to have what they called a ''great reopening'' tomorrow.

 

'My plea to all businesses is to ignore this campaign. There will be no great reopening on January 30. I would ask that you continue to act as you have been doing throughout this lockdown and before that and that we fight together this deadly virus.

 

'My warning to those who choose to take part in this campaign is that the enforcement authorities, police, trading standards, environmental health and others will have no choice but to take ultimate action against you.'

 

Mr Webb thanked the businesses in the county who were complying with the closure requirements.'

 

 

The names of these people must be recorded and they must face punishment in the event there are inquiries and this whole thing turns into a massive scandal.  It has been said before, including by myself, and it bears repeating: the Nuremberg defence will not avail.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went to a private hospital (as an NHS patient) for a scan last week. A staff member there quizzed me at the door, made me sanitise my hands & don a mask, as they always do now, and showed me to the waiting room. 

 

While chatting, she said that 2 of her relatives had died from Covid. I sympathised, but then asked gently, "How do you know it was Covid though? They're calling everything from rickits to ingrowing toenails Covid, aren't they!" She opened and closed her mouth for a bit, then reluctantly acknowledged, "Yes they are". She looked worried and upset.

 

These hospital staff know really. I think they just don't wish to face it. And if everyone they're in contact with just goes along with the deception submissively, they can easily bury their heads in the sand and convince themselves that they have no personal responsibility for perpetuating the colossal lie.

  • Like 4
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, facere arbitrium said:

The vaccine isn't necessarily going to stop them from getting or spreading the virus.

 

IMO these vaccines are giving some sort of virus to the public. So personally I'd stay clear of anyone who's been jabbed.

edit

or at least wear a mask 😷

Edited by alexa
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tinfoil Hat said:

I went to a private hospital (as an NHS patient) for a scan last week. A staff member there quizzed me at the door, made me sanitise my hands & don a mask, as they always do now, and showed me to the waiting room. 

 

While chatting, she said that 2 of her relatives had died from Covid. I sympathised, but then asked gently, "How do you know it was Covid though? They're calling everything from rickits to ingrowing toenails Covid, aren't they!" She opened and closed her mouth for a bit, then reluctantly acknowledged, "Yes they are". She looked worried and upset.

 

These hospital staff know really. I think they just don't wish to face it. And if everyone they're in contact with just goes along with the deception submissively, they can easily bury their heads in the sand and convince themselves that they have no personal responsibility for perpetuating the colossal lie.

 

As I've mentioned before, I do sympathise with these individuals because they are just ordinary people with limited agency and responsibility, but unfortunately many of these people will have to be punished when [if?] this is over.  We can't live like this and we can't tolerate a society of lies.  There have to be consequences.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, alexa said:

 

IMO these vaccines are giving some sort of virus to the public. So personally I'd stay clear of anyone who's been jabbed.

edit

or at least wear a mask 😷

 

I can see the mask becoming our friend:classic_biggrin:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ergo Storm said:

 

It could be that we're the ones who end up wearing the masks, as a protection against the zombies.

 

It's like being in a real-life zombie film.

 

It is, or rather it will be :classic_biggrin: I'm out of likes 👍

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...