CV19 - Cure Worse Than The Disease? (Vol 19)
Discussion
Elysium said:
Is this not yet more proof that he is a grade-A pillock (not that proof was needed) rather than some 'ZOMG smoking gun'?It just demonstrates the utter political amoebas we have in charge of the country and have had for the last few years.
This is someone who was playing away in full view of CCTV cameras while telling everyone to wear masks and distance. TBH I'd quite happily see him and a few others tarred, feathered and bullwhipped down Whitehall.
BigMon said:
Elysium said:
Is this not yet more proof that he is a grade-A pillock (not that proof was needed) rather than some 'ZOMG smoking gun'?It just demonstrates the utter political amoebas we have in charge of the country and have had for the last few years.
This is someone who was playing away in full view of CCTV cameras while telling everyone to wear masks and distance. TBH I'd quite happily see him and a few others tarred, feathered and bullwhipped down Whitehall.
jshell said:
I try to avoid deep rabbit-holes surounding Covid, but when checking timelines on the vaccines it seems Moderna were working on a vaccine for Covid in Jan 2020 prior to their being more than 2 Chinese and 1 US fatality. Given the fatality rates of common Influenza, how did they predict the need for $$$$$$$$ of investment for a vaccine that would be rolled-out to billions worldwide.
Trump's wife tweeted that a deal had been signed with Moderna on the 13th January 2020
I don't think that we should underestimate what this means.
So you think that cure is better than prevention, or being prepared?Trump's wife tweeted that a deal had been signed with Moderna on the 13th January 2020
I don't think that we should underestimate what this means.
119 said:
jshell said:
I try to avoid deep rabbit-holes surounding Covid, but when checking timelines on the vaccines it seems Moderna were working on a vaccine for Covid in Jan 2020 prior to their being more than 2 Chinese and 1 US fatality. Given the fatality rates of common Influenza, how did they predict the need for $$$$$$$$ of investment for a vaccine that would be rolled-out to billions worldwide.
Trump's wife tweeted that a deal had been signed with Moderna on the 13th January 2020
I don't think that we should underestimate what this means.
So you think that cure is better than prevention, or being prepared?Trump's wife tweeted that a deal had been signed with Moderna on the 13th January 2020
I don't think that we should underestimate what this means.
Unreal said:
150 Labour votes, of which 8 were Noes.One might not feel confident of much pushback in the future if a red party is in power when 'the next pandemic' arrives.
RSTurboPaul said:
Unreal said:
150 Labour votes, of which 8 were Noes.One might not feel confident of much pushback in the future if a red party is in power when 'the next pandemic' arrives.
jshell said:
RSTurboPaul said:
Unreal said:
150 Labour votes, of which 8 were Noes.One might not feel confident of much pushback in the future if a red party is in power when 'the next pandemic' arrives.
jshell said:
RSTurboPaul said:
Unreal said:
150 Labour votes, of which 8 were Noes.One might not feel confident of much pushback in the future if a red party is in power when 'the next pandemic' arrives.
How are you going to not comply, if there is another global pandemic?
Walk the wrong in Tesco?
Go for 2 walks a day?
Have a party!
Just interested how the free thinkers would non-comply!
jshell said:
RSTurboPaul said:
Unreal said:
150 Labour votes, of which 8 were Noes.One might not feel confident of much pushback in the future if a red party is in power when 'the next pandemic' arrives.
I like to think my letters to him might have had some small influence. He certainly turned against the various restrictions as time went on. I know he read them because he directed some of my questions to ministers and kept me up to date on his efforts to encourage them to reply.
The scariest part of this is that several Labour MPs voting ‘no’ will have done so because they would rather have seen these venues continue to remain closed.
James6112 said:
So when you get pulled up for driving to a park for a run (I pushed it but just about passed the attitude test)
How are you going to not comply, if there is another global pandemic?
Walk the wrong in Tesco?
Go for 2 walks a day?
Have a party!
Just interested how the free thinkers would non-comply!
Well, remember that guidance and legislation were separate things. For example, driving to a park, the arrows on Tesco's floor and the 2 walks a day were never part of legislation (in England at least), whereas the 'having a party for non-household members' was.How are you going to not comply, if there is another global pandemic?
Walk the wrong in Tesco?
Go for 2 walks a day?
Have a party!
Just interested how the free thinkers would non-comply!
My own view was as follows: 1) ignore guidance, but 2) be polite at all times and 3) obey the legislation. Not sure if that makes me a 'free thinker', whatever that might be.
Hants PHer said:
James6112 said:
So when you get pulled up for driving to a park for a run (I pushed it but just about passed the attitude test)
How are you going to not comply, if there is another global pandemic?
Walk the wrong in Tesco?
Go for 2 walks a day?
Have a party!
Just interested how the free thinkers would non-comply!
Well, remember that guidance and legislation were separate things. For example, driving to a park, the arrows on Tesco's floor and the 2 walks a day were never part of legislation (in England at least), whereas the 'having a party for non-household members' was.How are you going to not comply, if there is another global pandemic?
Walk the wrong in Tesco?
Go for 2 walks a day?
Have a party!
Just interested how the free thinkers would non-comply!
My own view was as follows: 1) ignore guidance, but 2) be polite at all times and 3) obey the legislation. Not sure if that makes me a 'free thinker', whatever that might be.
Elysium said:
Hants PHer said:
James6112 said:
So when you get pulled up for driving to a park for a run (I pushed it but just about passed the attitude test)
How are you going to not comply, if there is another global pandemic?
Walk the wrong in Tesco?
Go for 2 walks a day?
Have a party!
Just interested how the free thinkers would non-comply!
Well, remember that guidance and legislation were separate things. For example, driving to a park, the arrows on Tesco's floor and the 2 walks a day were never part of legislation (in England at least), whereas the 'having a party for non-household members' was.How are you going to not comply, if there is another global pandemic?
Walk the wrong in Tesco?
Go for 2 walks a day?
Have a party!
Just interested how the free thinkers would non-comply!
My own view was as follows: 1) ignore guidance, but 2) be polite at all times and 3) obey the legislation. Not sure if that makes me a 'free thinker', whatever that might be.
I would challenge James6112 and anyone else to say that they stuck to the rules fully and never strayed outside them.
My experience is that after the initial panic had died down, people were somewhat flexible with their interpretation despite shouting down those of us who were more visibly breaking the “law”.
Boringvolvodriver said:
Elysium said:
Hants PHer said:
James6112 said:
So when you get pulled up for driving to a park for a run (I pushed it but just about passed the attitude test)
How are you going to not comply, if there is another global pandemic?
Walk the wrong in Tesco?
Go for 2 walks a day?
Have a party!
Just interested how the free thinkers would non-comply!
Well, remember that guidance and legislation were separate things. For example, driving to a park, the arrows on Tesco's floor and the 2 walks a day were never part of legislation (in England at least), whereas the 'having a party for non-household members' was.How are you going to not comply, if there is another global pandemic?
Walk the wrong in Tesco?
Go for 2 walks a day?
Have a party!
Just interested how the free thinkers would non-comply!
My own view was as follows: 1) ignore guidance, but 2) be polite at all times and 3) obey the legislation. Not sure if that makes me a 'free thinker', whatever that might be.
I would challenge James6112 and anyone else to say that they stuck to the rules fully and never strayed outside them.
My experience is that after the initial panic had died down, people were somewhat flexible with their interpretation despite shouting down those of us who were more visibly breaking the “law”.
when I see the obligingly and unquestioningly compliant proudly announcing that they meekly complied with every insane diktat and ever-changing piece of performative pantomime nonsense handed down from our rulers on high, with scant regard for reason, common sense, or scientific justification, and having the temerity to criticise those who questioned any of it.Imagine looking at this lot and thinking you're the clever one for blindly obeying it all
"Stand two metres apart, and follow the one way system."
"Why?"
"Because the virus magically falls to the ground at a distance of 1.99m, and gets confused when asked to move bi-directionally."
"Cover your face with any old rag you happen to have lying around the house. A t-shirt will do."
"Why?"
"Because a virus with an approximate size of 0.1 microns will be thwarted by a fabric weave with a spacing of 500 microns."
"You must wear a face covering when entering a shop, bar or restaurant. But you may remove it when seated."
"Why?"
"Because the virus thrives in enclosed spaces where people congregate. However, it only exists above a height of five feet."
"Gyms, swimming pools, leisure centres and health clubs are all closed, but takeaways & pubs will remain open."
"Why?"
"In the interests of public health."
"You must sit in your home in the middle of winter with all the doors and windows open, for the purposes of ventilation."
"Why?"
"To protect the health and well-being of vulnerable pensioners."
"You may not comfort your fellow grieving mourners at a family funeral."
"Why?"
"To ensure your physical and mental health."
"You may take one hour of outdoor exercise once a day, at a distance no greater than five miles from your home."
"Why?"
"Erm, give us a minute, we'll think of something..."
Boringvolvodriver said:
Was it ever “law” though? There was so much that was guidance but badged as law. The legislation, such as it was, was so badly written that even the government didn’t understand it and the police certainly didn’t.
I would challenge James6112 and anyone else to say that they stuck to the rules fully and never strayed outside them.
My experience is that after the initial panic had died down, people were somewhat flexible with their interpretation despite shouting down those of us who were more visibly breaking the “law”.
I remain of the view that the confusion between law and guidance was something that governments (not just England, but Kim Jong Drakeford and the Chief Mammy too) were rather happy with. As were the police, I think, since it allowed officers to do what they wanted: "Sorry Sir, you may not sit on this park bench, it's against the rules." "Pardon me? What law am I breaking exactly?" "Move along now Sir, don't be difficult."I would challenge James6112 and anyone else to say that they stuck to the rules fully and never strayed outside them.
My experience is that after the initial panic had died down, people were somewhat flexible with their interpretation despite shouting down those of us who were more visibly breaking the “law”.
Note the use of the word "rules". Are rules law or are they guidance? Don't suppose it matters when some copper is telling you to move along........
As you say, it all got a bit lax after a while, but I certainly recall one or two zealots on our local Facebook page who demanded that everyone "follow the rules", be they law or guidance. IIRC there were one or two posters on here who shared that mentality.
Roderick Spode said:
It always makes me when I see the obligingly and unquestioningly compliant proudly announcing that they meekly complied with every insane diktat and ever-changing piece of performative pantomime nonsense handed down from our rulers on high, with scant regard for reason, common sense, or scientific justification, and having the temerity to criticise those who questioned any of it.
Imagine looking at this lot and thinking you're the clever one for blindly obeying it all
"Stand two metres apart, and follow the one way system."
"Why?"
"Because the virus magically falls to the ground at a distance of 1.99m, and gets confused when asked to move bi-directionally."
"Cover your face with any old rag you happen to have lying around the house. A t-shirt will do."
"Why?"
"Because a virus with an approximate size of 0.1 microns will be thwarted by a fabric weave with a spacing of 500 microns."
"You must wear a face covering when entering a shop, bar or restaurant. But you may remove it when seated."
"Why?"
"Because the virus thrives in enclosed spaces where people congregate. However, it only exists above a height of five feet."
"Gyms, swimming pools, leisure centres and health clubs are all closed, but takeaways & pubs will remain open."
"Why?"
"In the interests of public health."
"You must sit in your home in the middle of winter with all the doors and windows open, for the purposes of ventilation."
"Why?"
"To protect the health and well-being of vulnerable pensioners."
"You may not comfort your fellow grieving mourners at a family funeral."
"Why?"
"To ensure your physical and mental health."
"You may take one hour of outdoor exercise once a day, at a distance no greater than five miles from your home."
"Why?"
"Erm, give us a minute, we'll think of something..."
when I see the obligingly and unquestioningly compliant proudly announcing that they meekly complied with every insane diktat and ever-changing piece of performative pantomime nonsense handed down from our rulers on high, with scant regard for reason, common sense, or scientific justification, and having the temerity to criticise those who questioned any of it.Imagine looking at this lot and thinking you're the clever one for blindly obeying it all
"Stand two metres apart, and follow the one way system."
"Why?"
"Because the virus magically falls to the ground at a distance of 1.99m, and gets confused when asked to move bi-directionally."
"Cover your face with any old rag you happen to have lying around the house. A t-shirt will do."
"Why?"
"Because a virus with an approximate size of 0.1 microns will be thwarted by a fabric weave with a spacing of 500 microns."
"You must wear a face covering when entering a shop, bar or restaurant. But you may remove it when seated."
"Why?"
"Because the virus thrives in enclosed spaces where people congregate. However, it only exists above a height of five feet."
"Gyms, swimming pools, leisure centres and health clubs are all closed, but takeaways & pubs will remain open."
"Why?"
"In the interests of public health."
"You must sit in your home in the middle of winter with all the doors and windows open, for the purposes of ventilation."
"Why?"
"To protect the health and well-being of vulnerable pensioners."
"You may not comfort your fellow grieving mourners at a family funeral."
"Why?"
"To ensure your physical and mental health."
"You may take one hour of outdoor exercise once a day, at a distance no greater than five miles from your home."
"Why?"
"Erm, give us a minute, we'll think of something..."
Very well said Rodders. Echoes my thoughts perfectly.I'm just wondering where the line in the sand would have been for the "just obeying the legislation" Big Daddy Government fanboys like Hants PHer above. I mean, we already witnessed the theatre of the mask nonsense in restaurants and pubs where The Science™ said The Deadly Virus would only get you if you were walking to the bar, or the toilet, but you were completely safe from it so long as you were sat down, and they all obediently went along with it.
Would these same people also have bent over and slipped down their underwear to be anal swabbed for The Deadly Virus as per what happened in China? If The Science™ had fabricated some scary looking graphs and wheeled out some doctors from the WHOs payroll to say that everyone needed their faecal matter testing to help stop the spread and it's for the greater good, how many would have complied? I'm willing to bet with enough screen time by the BBC and footage of hospital stage sets showing bodies piled up in the corridors, the vast majority of people would have done it. Critical thought process for these people = 0.
For the avoidance of doubt, and to correct r3g's unhinged misconceptions, I can confirm that I never once wore a face covering, and I never would. The law, remember, allowed for exemptions from so doing.
I think it's an interesting question to consider: when is it OK to break the law? On the one hand, one might take the view that a law is unjust and it's OK to break it. Then again, that is a subjective line to cross. I might believe that a 20 mph limit on a stretch of road is ridiculous, but is it acceptable to drive faster than that speed? Many drivers seem to think it's fine to use a mobile phone while driving whilst others disagree. And so on.
When one starts labelling those who abide by laws as "government fan boys", one could be accused of shallow and simplistic thinking. Or perhaps even that one is someone who posts nonsense and with whom engagement is best avoided. You know what they say about arguing with a fool on the internet, after all.
I think it's an interesting question to consider: when is it OK to break the law? On the one hand, one might take the view that a law is unjust and it's OK to break it. Then again, that is a subjective line to cross. I might believe that a 20 mph limit on a stretch of road is ridiculous, but is it acceptable to drive faster than that speed? Many drivers seem to think it's fine to use a mobile phone while driving whilst others disagree. And so on.
When one starts labelling those who abide by laws as "government fan boys", one could be accused of shallow and simplistic thinking. Or perhaps even that one is someone who posts nonsense and with whom engagement is best avoided. You know what they say about arguing with a fool on the internet, after all.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff