CV19 - Cure Worse Than The Disease? (Vol 18)
Discussion
SWoll said:
They're the only western nation still continuing with the restriction, against the advice of their own scientific experts, and having stuck with them for almost 12 months longer than the likes of Australia and New Zealand. They chose to extend the restriction in January to the surprise of everyone with zero reasoning given as to why.
If it isn't political theater, then what is it exactly?
Regarding Djokovic, I’ve already given you my view. He has to abide by the same laws as you and I.If it isn't political theater, then what is it exactly?
Elysium said:
PurplePangolin said:
It is you that has called it a conspiracy theory - quelle surprise
Some of the more antagonistic posters bring ‘conspiracy theory’ into discussions because it provides them with a way of insulting people they don’t agree with without openly breaking forum rules. Whether the laws are good, bad or indifferent is irrelevant to this particular conversation.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/health/other/fda-approve...
Nothing about America's vaccine strategy really makes sense.
They're pretty much out there on their own with approvals and recommendations.
Most Countries, like ours, are winding it back in a bit now, but America seem to be carrying on with the jab everything as many times as possible approach.
Nothing about America's vaccine strategy really makes sense.
They're pretty much out there on their own with approvals and recommendations.
Most Countries, like ours, are winding it back in a bit now, but America seem to be carrying on with the jab everything as many times as possible approach.
isaldiri said:
Roman Rhodes said:
Whether you agree with the US rules or not doesn't matter - he clearly isn't being made an example of.
agreed that Djokovic isn't specifically being made an example. Do you agree with the US vaccine entry requirements?
Roman Rhodes said:
isaldiri said:
Roman Rhodes said:
Whether you agree with the US rules or not doesn't matter - he clearly isn't being made an example of.
agreed that Djokovic isn't specifically being made an example. Do you agree with the US vaccine entry requirements?
Roman Rhodes said:
OK, my ‘theory’ is that Djokovic hasn’t been allowed into the US because he has to follow the same laws as everyone else (which seems fair). Some of you guys have a different ‘theory’ which I would call a conspiracy theory. Sorry if that hurts your feelings. If you’ve evidence that he’s “being made an example of” because he didn’t “take the experimental medicine” then I’m all ears.
Whether the laws are good, bad or indifferent is irrelevant to this particular conversation.
No hurt feelings at all, I wear CT accusations from certain posters as a badge of pride at this point. Whether the laws are good, bad or indifferent is irrelevant to this particular conversation.
They'd happily give someone an exclusion if it fitted their agenda, and I'm sure they have done exactly that many times over the past couple of years. In this case they aren't keen on the optics, therefore IMHO it's political theatre rather than slavishly following the rules and ensuring they are applied fairly.
Roman Rhodes said:
isaldiri said:
Roman Rhodes said:
Whether you agree with the US rules or not doesn't matter - he clearly isn't being made an example of.
agreed that Djokovic isn't specifically being made an example. Do you agree with the US vaccine entry requirements?
Roman Rhodes said:
Elysium said:
PurplePangolin said:
It is you that has called it a conspiracy theory - quelle surprise
Some of the more antagonistic posters bring ‘conspiracy theory’ into discussions because it provides them with a way of insulting people they don’t agree with without openly breaking forum rules. Whether the laws are good, bad or indifferent is irrelevant to this particular conversation
Djokovic is undeniably being made an example of, but not in the way you suggest.
The continuation of the vaccine entry restrictions in the USA is stupid, cruel and pointless. The public attention that Djokovic has received should be a catalyst in changing that, but it won’t be, because that would be politically ‘difficult’ for the Govt.
We can all see that keeping the rules in place is idiotic. The only reason the charade is being continued is politics.
Not conspiracy.
KAgantua said:
Roman Rhodes said:
isaldiri said:
Roman Rhodes said:
Whether you agree with the US rules or not doesn't matter - he clearly isn't being made an example of.
agreed that Djokovic isn't specifically being made an example. Do you agree with the US vaccine entry requirements?
Roman Rhodes said:
KAgantua said:
Roman Rhodes said:
isaldiri said:
Roman Rhodes said:
Whether you agree with the US rules or not doesn't matter - he clearly isn't being made an example of.
agreed that Djokovic isn't specifically being made an example. Do you agree with the US vaccine entry requirements?
Who is the hard of thinking when they can’t differentiate between CT “wibble” and the quite obvious dichotomy of the US covid vaccine policy?
I don’t see the conspiracy theory behind people saying the US rules are pointless. They have a large pharmaceutical industry and are one of only two countries in the world where advertising pharmaceutical products is legal. Of course they’re going to jab as many as possible, it doesn’t matter whether it does anything against covid, it makes more money.
isaldiri said:
Roman Rhodes said:
isaldiri said:
Roman Rhodes said:
Whether you agree with the US rules or not doesn't matter - he clearly isn't being made an example of.
agreed that Djokovic isn't specifically being made an example. Do you agree with the US vaccine entry requirements?
PurplePangolin said:
Roman Rhodes said:
KAgantua said:
Roman Rhodes said:
isaldiri said:
Roman Rhodes said:
Whether you agree with the US rules or not doesn't matter - he clearly isn't being made an example of.
agreed that Djokovic isn't specifically being made an example. Do you agree with the US vaccine entry requirements?
Who is the hard of thinking when they can’t differentiate between CT “wibble” and the quite obvious dichotomy of the US covid vaccine policy?
Opinion on the vaccine requirements for entry to the US = not (necessarily) a conspiracy theory.
Maintaining that Djokovic is being “made an example of” and “it’s about power and control” = conspiracy theory.
HTH
Elysium said:
Roman Rhodes said:
Elysium said:
PurplePangolin said:
It is you that has called it a conspiracy theory - quelle surprise
Some of the more antagonistic posters bring ‘conspiracy theory’ into discussions because it provides them with a way of insulting people they don’t agree with without openly breaking forum rules. Whether the laws are good, bad or indifferent is irrelevant to this particular conversation
Djokovic is undeniably being made an example of, but not in the way you suggest.
The continuation of the vaccine entry restrictions in the USA is stupid, cruel and pointless. The public attention that Djokovic has received should be a catalyst in changing that, but it won’t be, because that would be politically ‘difficult’ for the Govt.
We can all see that keeping the rules in place is idiotic. The only reason the charade is being continued is politics.
Not conspiracy.
The conversation is about Djokovic and whether he has been treated fairly. You’re just expanding it include the wider issue of the rules because you want to argue against them. Sorry, but that is irrelevant.
Perhaps you can elaborate (past “difficult’) why you think Senate and Biden won’t take up the bill passed by the House of Representatives and drop the restrictions after April 10? The public health emergency ends on May 11 so it doesn’t seem unreasonable to pass it.
Roman Rhodes said:
...
Perhaps you can elaborate (past “difficult’) why you think Senate and Biden won’t take up the bill passed by the House of Representatives and drop the restrictions after April 10? The public health emergency ends on May 11 so it doesn’t seem unreasonable to pass it.
One might wonder exactly what is expected or likely to change in the several weeks between now and the dates mentioned above.Perhaps you can elaborate (past “difficult’) why you think Senate and Biden won’t take up the bill passed by the House of Representatives and drop the restrictions after April 10? The public health emergency ends on May 11 so it doesn’t seem unreasonable to pass it.
If nothing, one might wonder exactly what the point is of maintaining restrictions that could be removed in an instant with the swoop of a pen on a Presidential Executive Order (if my understanding is correct).
Sturgeon’s chief clinical adviser seems to have changed his position a bit https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/03/19/cl...
Dr John Campbell ponders on a seemingly strange event in Parliament just prior to the Andrew Bridgen speech on injection harms, where it appears a member of the Conservative party prompts members of the opposition to leave the House, amongst other aspects:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpGcEf2yCok
Bernie Spofforth has posted a tweet that puts forward the suggestion that it was Andrew Mitchell MP involved in the aforementioned event:
https://twitter.com/BernieSpofforth/status/1637181...
who it appears may have had some prior involvement with the GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization) organisation:
https://twitter.com/p_beejal/status/16372411559087...
She has also highlighted a Guardian article suggesting MPs are recipients of funding from drug companies:
https://twitter.com/BernieSpofforth/status/1637072...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpGcEf2yCok
Bernie Spofforth has posted a tweet that puts forward the suggestion that it was Andrew Mitchell MP involved in the aforementioned event:
https://twitter.com/BernieSpofforth/status/1637181...
who it appears may have had some prior involvement with the GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization) organisation:
https://twitter.com/p_beejal/status/16372411559087...
She has also highlighted a Guardian article suggesting MPs are recipients of funding from drug companies:
https://twitter.com/BernieSpofforth/status/1637072...
Roman Rhodes said:
You are portraying yourself as one of the hard of thinking. In two easy stages:
Opinion on the vaccine requirements for entry to the US = not (necessarily) a conspiracy theory.
Maintaining that Djokovic is being “made an example of” and “it’s about power and control” = conspiracy theory.
HTH
The definition of what constitutes a conspiracy theory is getting broader and broader isn't it?Opinion on the vaccine requirements for entry to the US = not (necessarily) a conspiracy theory.
Maintaining that Djokovic is being “made an example of” and “it’s about power and control” = conspiracy theory.
HTH
Used to be that suggesting the world was flat, the moon landings didn't happen or 9-11 was in inside job was the standard. Nowadays suggesting a government is concerned about optics and sticking to the narrative, or that a celebrities tweeting might be motivated by a £5m tax bill, is enough apparently.
How far we've come in such a short space to time..
Roman Rhodes said:
Elysium said:
Roman Rhodes said:
Elysium said:
PurplePangolin said:
It is you that has called it a conspiracy theory - quelle surprise
Some of the more antagonistic posters bring ‘conspiracy theory’ into discussions because it provides them with a way of insulting people they don’t agree with without openly breaking forum rules. Whether the laws are good, bad or indifferent is irrelevant to this particular conversation
Djokovic is undeniably being made an example of, but not in the way you suggest.
The continuation of the vaccine entry restrictions in the USA is stupid, cruel and pointless. The public attention that Djokovic has received should be a catalyst in changing that, but it won’t be, because that would be politically ‘difficult’ for the Govt.
We can all see that keeping the rules in place is idiotic. The only reason the charade is being continued is politics.
Not conspiracy.
The conversation is about Djokovic and whether he has been treated fairly. You’re just expanding it include the wider issue of the rules because you want to argue against them. Sorry, but that is irrelevant.
Roman Rhodes said:
Perhaps you can elaborate (past “difficult’) why you think Senate and Biden won’t take up the bill passed by the House of Representatives and drop the restrictions after April 10? The public health emergency ends on May 11 so it doesn’t seem unreasonable to pass it.
it’s unreasonable that there are any restrictions at all at the point.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff