Differences on re-opening

[jimnyc]

Folks have many varied opinions on this. Makes complete sense as this is lives we're talking about, and world economies

For the most part, folks are most concerned with life and death first and foremost. Everyone wants to protect themselves and others. Just a difference in when, in how, informing one another on common sense and how we can all best protect one another. Folks may be disagreeing to an extent, but all still concerned about the welfare of others, even as we may be demanding rights or still having no choice but to go out. Point is, the massive concern for humanity is there. The sharing is there. Doing all we can to help one another is there. So yeah, some disagreement, but the concern for one another is at a high, IMO. Disagreeing, but getting everything out there the best we can so folks can remain informed. You get my point.

But then the left are different animals. Most of them have a primary goal of attacking orange man. So many outright wanting harm to the economy so it may harm Trump. Wanting bad news and even ignoring a ton, simply to make Trump look bad. And the lies. More this short year than ever before, and that's saying a lot. FEAR. Perhaps CNN and others are getting more viewers with folks home, and it's all negativity and fear and lies. But probably money, and whatever it takes to harm our country until Trump is out.

The right is talking about HOW we can protect the vulnerable, whether folks going out or not. We all know they are at most risk. Get the facts out.

The left is more interested in continuing the fear game and the blame game and the lying game.

---

We can protect the most vulnerable and reopen the economy

The struggle between President Trump’s drive to reopen the American economy as quickly as possible, and the insistence by his public health team and many others that this has to be delayed until further hurdles are overcome, is largely a false dilemma. We can simultaneously increase protection for those who are most vulnerable to coronavirus and, with appropriate precautions, reopen most of our economy and society.

The key to unlocking this false dilemma is a clear understanding of who, in fact, is most vulnerable to death from this novel killer — and who is not. As data from the deaths of the more than 58,000 of our fellow citizens to date show, the answer is clear.

Those at greatest risk of death from coronavirus are a subset of the 15 percent of Americans older than 65. More than 80 percent of all the deaths in America from coronavirus have come from this group. Moreover, the data show that vulnerability increases with age beyond 65, especially among individuals with one or more specific preexisting conditions. And among those who have died, three of every five have been males. In the death toll to date, how many were individuals under 25? Of the 200 million Americans under 45, how many have died from this novel virus? The answers are: fewer than 100 among under 25s and fewer than 1,000 under 45s.

Thus, in contrast to the specter of a nation at risk, when properly understood, coronavirus should be seen as a big threat to a small percentage of our population and a small threat to the overwhelming majority. To clarify this increased danger, it is instructive to distinguish between BC (before coronavirus appeared) and AC (after coronavirus). The fraction of Americans who today face a significantly greater risk of death than they did BC is likely to be roughly 10 percent.

Moreover, as we are debating choices about next steps up the staircase to reopening the economy, we should recognize that most of those individuals already had retired from the workforce before 2020 began. At the other end of the spectrum, risks of death from coronavirus among those under 65 essentially fall with age, risks for those in the earlier decades of life being substantially lower than many other threats they were living with BC.

President Trump has taken a step in the right direction in issuing guidelines on April 16 that specifically single out “the most vulnerable.” What is needed at this point is for the White House Task Force to follow up with more specific guidelines that it might label “Smart Steps” encouraging governors to exercise their ingenuity. Historically, one of the great strengths of our nation is that we have 50 “laboratories of democracy.” They can learn from each other how best to operationalize smart next steps ahead.

Rest - https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/494949-we-can-protect-the-most-vulnerable-and-reopen-the-economy


Here, we just need to admit it, we WANT people to die is what they are claiming. :rolleyes: Or this kind of bullshit.


Georgia’s Experiment in Human Sacrifice

The state is about to find out how many people need to lose their lives to shore up the economy.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/04/why-georgia-reopening-coronavirus-pandemic/610882/?utm_term=2020-04-29T17%253A03%253A35&utm_content=edit-promo&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_source=twitter

Not even gonna print the fear inducing blaming BS from this one, read on your own, the title is enough.

[FakeNewsSux]

Folks have many varied opinions on this. Makes complete sense as this is lives we're talking about, and world economies

For the most part, folks are most concerned with life and death first and foremost. Everyone wants to protect themselves and others. Just a difference in when, in how, informing one another on common sense and how we can all best protect one another. Folks may be disagreeing to an extent, but all still concerned about the welfare of others, even as we may be demanding rights or still having no choice but to go out. Point is, the massive concern for humanity is there. The sharing is there. Doing all we can to help one another is there. So yeah, some disagreement, but the concern for one another is at a high, IMO. Disagreeing, but getting everything out there the best we can so folks can remain informed. You get my point.

But then the left are different animals. Most of them have a primary goal of attacking orange man. So many outright wanting harm to the economy so it may harm Trump. Wanting bad news and even ignoring a ton, simply to make Trump look bad. And the lies. More this short year than ever before, and that's saying a lot. FEAR. Perhaps CNN and others are getting more viewers with folks home, and it's all negativity and fear and lies. But probably money, and whatever it takes to harm our country until Trump is out.

The right is talking about HOW we can protect the vulnerable, whether folks going out or not. We all know they are at most risk. Get the facts out.

The left is more interested in continuing the fear game and the blame game and the lying game.

---

Georgia’s Experiment in Human Sacrifice

The state is about to find out how many people need to lose their lives to shore up the economy.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/04/why-georgia-reopening-coronavirus-pandemic/610882/?utm_term=2020-04-29T17%253A03%253A35&utm_content=edit-promo&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_source=twitter

Not even gonna print the fear inducing blaming BS from this one, read on your own, the title is enough.

I wonder who will be writing the mea culpa when the lib wet dream for the people of Georgia does not materialize. Oh, I forgot, no one. Kind of like the retraction we're still waiting for from James Carville:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH7HyU2Uhwk

Equating the Wisconsin Primary with the Bataan Death March seemed a bit over the top even for Carville. Now that the State of Wisconsin has done the analysis of COVID data since the elections took place and have concluded that it made no statistical difference in the number of cases. Don't hold your breath for an apology and besides, he accomplished his goal of scaring the shit out of you for another week or two.

[Kathianne]

Seems to me that folks will have to make their own choices. I can honestly say that you couldn't pay me to fly right now. Same with going into restaurant for sit down. I would not go to a movie or to see a play or concert. I will go to the grocery, as seldom as possible-same as now. I will continue to work, as I have the entire time.

I'll wait for people to regularly do some or all of these things and see how it works out for them.

I'll continue to go for my walks, read my books, visit here, and read/watch the news. ''

When it appears that the virus is under control, not because of lack of opportunity alone, I'll reconsider what I'm doing.

[Evmetro]

People generally have their own unique perception of why re opening is good or bad, and it is typically based on what information, news, propaganda, and data that we see or use. For many of us though, it is based on the phrase " Live free or die". Many have paid the ultimate price to protect our freedom.

[Abbey Marie]

People generally have their own unique perception of why re opening is good or bad, and it is typically based on what information, news, propaganda, and data that we see or use. For many of us though, it is based on the phrase " Live free or die". Many have paid the ultimate price to protect our freedom.

I doubt Patrick Henry was thinking about making an unfettered trip to McDonald’s when he uttered the phrase “Give me liberty or give me death”. You are still free to think, speak, read what you want, write what you want, worship/not worship God, support whichever candidate you want, enjoy taxation with representation, take a walk, have as many children as you want, or none, wear what you want, marry whomever you love, buy whichever car you can afford. I could go on and on.

All this talk of “freedom or death” makes a mockery of those who truly do live in highly restrictive societies. I think they would scoff at such dramatics.

[Drummond]

I'm not sure that I've got much to say. I see both sides of this. I've always seen the herd immunity principle as sound and, purely in terms of the eventual health of any nation, it's a reasonable option, IF we don't get a vaccine.

I can't help but wonder if the initial horrors it'd create are fully comprehended by its most enthusiastic proponents, though. Don't forget that problems in healthcare that fully opening up would create, would impact on everything. Reliant on treatments to combat cancer ? Say goodbye to them, for a couple of months, while hospitals are overwhelmed with virus patients.

Opening up economies has to happen, but when, and how completely ? There's a spectrum of differing viewpoints. But, the balance has to be got right. Covid-19, at least until / unless it mutates, is a very specific threat for which only the one most optimal solution exists.

'Just decide how many must die' is really what it comes down to.

But whatever your decision: remember, whatever you decide, you are highly likely to be deciding for the entire world. Yours is a large population, and a substantial proportion are bound to be within a 'let's open everything up' jurisdiction. So, is there absolutely no likelihood of anyone from any of those areas either travelling abroad, or, infecting someone who will ?

Say a freight handler who's infected leaves Covid-19 on some surfaces where the virus can live for a couple of days. The freight makes its journey, and the virus survives it. The recipient country starts to know a fresh Covid outbreak, whether or not it's beating its own pool of infection up to that point.

Did the Wuhan outbreak come from far more modest beginnings than all the US States that open up and start their increased infections ?

Whatever the US decides, I say that the rest of the world has a stake in your decision. That is, unless, you close your borders tight, quarantine the whole of the USA, 'for the duration of the emergency'.

I'm a foreigner who wants the maximum chance to survive for years to come. I hope I get it ...

[jimnyc]

I know that everyone has valid reasons for their opinions, and all are valid!

Didn't want everyone to think I created yet another thread to debate opening - but more so how folks on the left want to make up such disgusting crap, and try to claim that others want to open up in order have some science experiment or whatever.

If someone wants their rights, it doesn't mean their wrong, or want to kill people purposely. The argument from those not ready to open, including here, aren't claiming that the others purposely want to kill people. But the left does.

[Abbey Marie]

Re: my post above, here is an example from today’s headlines of folks who can truly gripe about not being free:

12556

[jimnyc]

I doubt Patrick Henry was thinking about making an unfettered trip to McDonald’s when he uttered the phrase “Give me liberty or give me death”. You are still free to think, speak, read what you want, write what you want, worship/not worship God, support whichever candidate you want, enjoy taxation with representation, take a walk, have as many children as you want, or none, wear what you want, marry whomever you love, buy whichever car you can afford. I could go on and on.

All this talk of “freedom or death” makes a mockery of those who truly do live in highly restrictive societies. I think they would scoff at such dramatics.

Some things are way too far from both sides. And of course it goes without saying that freedom comes with responsibility.

And while I fight for rights, it isn't to run out to Mcdonalds for sure! But I would honor the owners right to open, I just wouldn't visit. Same with anywhere else opening that isn't up to my standards of staying safe and protecting others. So many things we can still do without crowds and purposely taking chances.

And while I guarantee I'll always be free - some folks are being told they can't go for that walk, must wear something & all the other crap I listed. And then other things simply not free to do, because you can't leave home.

I agree with 100% of all you said throughout, and ya know I would go out of my way to protect you! Same goes for others. Weird to say considering my arguments on opening and rights. But I did say all along about common sense and PPE - and elderly and compromised - and all the businesses out there working to minimize and protect...

And I'm NOT diminishing anything you say, never would! Just adding to it with an explanation if that makes sense? Like I said, I agree with you, so don't get me wrong.

The left is convinced we want to go lick items. Run out without protection. Be greedy capitalists with hidden euthanasia to profit further. Any BS they can invent to vilify.

[jimnyc]

People generally have their own unique perception of why re opening is good or bad, and it is typically based on what information, news, propaganda, and data that we see or use. For many of us though, it is based on the phrase " Live free or die". Many have paid the ultimate price to protect our freedom.

And location!

Some states out there have less than 1k infections and less than a couple hundred deaths or even much much less. They should use different plans than NY, for example. But even though doing better, doesn't mean go nuts, and now I'm free 'lets go on a vacation to NY to see the Statue of Liberty'. But I also don't think every citizen in that particular state should be locked down as severely as others. It varies. AND - the main thing we have to look out for - and prepare for - I said awhile back - rolling openings and closings. Some may open for a month and then have to close shop for 2 weeks again, and continue onward. Might see staggered openings based on location and season. Lots of differences and I honestly don't think everywhere has to be treated identically.

[jimnyc]

15 years for speaking out. Others worse, just disappearing when they videotape something and share! Others jailed. Others questioned for weeks.

Yeah, no doubt, even when locked down we do better than them!

[Abbey Marie]

I know that everyone has valid reasons for their opinions, and all are valid!

Didn't want everyone to think I created yet another thread to debate opening - but more so how folks on the left want to make up such disgusting crap, and try to claim that others want to open up in order have some science experiment or whatever.

If someone wants their rights, it doesn't mean their wrong, or want to kill people purposely. The argument from those not ready to open, including here, aren't claiming that the others purposely want to kill people. But the left does.

This is not directed at you, Jim. It’s to everyone.

I don’t think rational people want to kill people purposely. But this has as we all know devolved into dirty politics. The reality that people put party over life itself is shameful. This applies to both Dems and Republicans.

I can respect and find truth in both sides’ arguments in this, as long as it is not based on politics or selfishness. Base it on reality. If the sentiment is now, ‘getting my life and my business back to normal is more important than the lives of our older folks’, let’s just be honest and say it. Let’s not couch it in rhetoric about the virus being no big deal. No big deal to whom, exactly?

I want Trump re-elected as much as anyone. I want the economy and my 401k back to thriving. But the “live free or die” histrionics I see out there are a bridge too far for me.

[Abbey Marie]

And location!

Some states out there have less than 1k infections and less than a couple hundred deaths or even much much less. They should use different plans than NY, for example. But even though doing better, doesn't mean go nuts, and now I'm free 'lets go on a vacation to NY to see the Statue of Liberty'. But I also don't think every citizen in that particular state should be locked down as severely as others. It varies. AND - the main thing we have to look out for - and prepare for - I said awhile back - rolling openings and closings. Some may open for a month and then have to close shop for 2 weeks again, and continue onward. Might see staggered openings based on location and season. Lots of differences and I honestly don't think everywhere has to be treated identically.

Wouldn’t all that opening and closing again really screw up people receiving unemployment?

[revelarts]

People generally have their own unique perception of why re opening is good or bad, and it is typically based on what information, news, propaganda, and data that we see or use.
Exactly. and I'd add one's personal financial stability/independence and one's general faith in our various establishment social structures.

.

For many of us though, it is based on the phrase " Live free or die". Many have paid the ultimate price to protect our freedom.
That's a real one for plenty of folks, but I suspect for fewer than it may seem. (at least in a universal sense, as in EVERYONE'S rights or ALL the rights outlined in the constitution)


.

I doubt Patrick Henry was thinking about making an unfettered trip to McDonald’s when he uttered the phrase “Give me liberty or give me death”. You are still free to think, speak, read what you want, write what you want, worship/not worship God, support whichever candidate you want, enjoy taxation with representation, take a walk, have as many children as you want, or none, wear what you want, marry whomever you love, buy whichever car you can afford. I could go on and on.
All this talk of “freedom or death” makes a mockery of those who truly do live in highly restrictive societies. I think they would scoff at such dramatics.
We can still go to McDonald's... just the drive through. the gov't has closed the sit down areas.
And I suspect if Patrick Henry was told by the British gov't that he couldn't open his shop until the British gov't said so... indefinitely...
And if he were questioned, detained, fined or threatened for simply trying to travel.
And if they told him that he wasn't allowed to go to church...indefinitely... I can go on an on... that he and a few other founding Americans might have a problem with that Abbey.

It's always interesting to me how at each level of loss of constitutional rights there are some folks that claim that -little- or -nothing important- has been lost, and that some unknown level of "safety" is FAR more important than the loss of a "few" freedoms.

[jimnyc]

Wouldn’t all that opening and closing again really screw up people receiving unemployment?

Yup, probably would!

My answer? I would only do 2-3 week rollings here and there IF necessary, and unfortunately any bailout money may need to be reserved, and it can be allocated as such. Ain't easy, no easy answers. There has got to be an in between with massive concern that works. An extreme to either side would be problematic.

[Evmetro]

I know that everyone has valid reasons for their opinions, and all are valid!

Didn't want everyone to think I created yet another thread to debate opening - but more so how folks on the left want to make up such disgusting crap, and try to claim that others want to open up in order have some science experiment or whatever.

[B]If someone wants their rights, it doesn't mean their wrong, or want to kill people purposely. The argument from those not ready to open, including here, aren't claiming that the others purposely want to kill people. But the left does.[b/]

Indeed.

From an objective standpoint, I see people from both sides of the aisle making politically motivated arguments, but I would be inclined to agree with you that lefties tend to perpetuate a notion that righties want to purposely kill people. When I read lefty arguments that righties want to purposely kill people, I just zoom out to see the full and accurate context of how they came up with their headline or argument. Politically motivated arguments from lefties rarely pass the the test when I zoom out to see context.

[Abbey Marie]

Exactly. and I'd add one's personal financial stability/independence and one's general faith in our various establishment social structures.

.

That's a real one for plenty of folks, but I suspect for fewer than it may seem. (at least in a universal sense, as in EVERYONE'S rights or ALL the rights outlined in the constitution)


.

We can still go to McDonald's... just the drive through. the gov't has closed the sit down areas.
And I suspect if Patrick Henry was told by the British gov't that he couldn't open his shop until the British gov't said so... indefinitely...
And if he were questioned, detained, fined or threatened for simply trying to travel.
And if they told him that he wasn't allowed to go to church...indefinitely... I can go on an on... that he and a few other founding Americans might have a problem with that Abbey.

It's always interesting to me how at each level of loss of constitutional rights there are some folks that claim that -little- or -nothing important- has been lost, and that some unknown level of "safety" is FAR more important than the loss of a "few" freedoms.


Good to see you, Rev. :cool:


The difference is, it’s all for an extremely important, unprecedented, reason, not at the whim of some distant greedy colonizing monarchy. And it’s temporary. Temporary. You are comparing apples and cantaloupe.

[Drummond]

I know that everyone has valid reasons for their opinions, and all are valid!

Didn't want everyone to think I created yet another thread to debate opening - but more so how folks on the left want to make up such disgusting crap, and try to claim that others want to open up in order have some science experiment or whatever.

If someone wants their rights, it doesn't mean their wrong, or want to kill people purposely. The argument from those not ready to open, including here, aren't claiming that the others purposely want to kill people. But the left does.:clap::clap::clap:

Well said. Especially on reminding us (if we need it) of the disgusting vileness of the Left.

i'd love to believe that, out of all this, a wave of anti-Left sentiment does them enormous political harm. What they say and do marks them out as the dregs of humanity (& maybe I'm being too kind).

[jimnyc]

:clap::clap::clap:

Well said. Especially on reminding us (if we need it) of the disgusting vileness of the Left.

i'd love to believe that, out of all this, a wave of anti-Left sentiment does them enormous political harm. What they say and do marks them out as the dregs of humanity (& maybe I'm being too kind).

Even yourself and I have seen things differently. But we both informed, and both want what is best for others and neither wants to see anyone get sick. Differences of course, but underneath it's about rights and goodness and humanity.

With the left, it's get bad orange man out of office. Get the right. They literally look at a story - does it harm the right or left? If left, discard it. If right, move forward. Does it harm Trump? If not, make something up. If it does, exaggerate it. Hell, with the election not far off, the left has decided to immediately jump on various investigations into Trump over this virus. Everyone knows it's an election tool.

[revelarts]

This is not directed at you, Jim. It’s to everyone.

I don’t think rational people want to kill people purposely. But this has as we all know devolved into dirty politics. The reality that people put party over life itself is shameful. This applies to both Dems and Republicans.

I can respect and find truth in both sides’ arguments in this, as long as it is not based on politics or selfishness. Base it on reality. If the sentiment is now, ‘getting my life and my business back to normal is more important than the lives of our older folks’, let’s just be honest and say it. Let’s not couch it in rhetoric about the virus being no big deal. No big deal to whom, exactly?

I want Trump re-elected as much as anyone. I want the economy and my 401k back to thriving. But the “live free or die” histrionics I see out there are a bridge too far for me.

The labels like "Live free or Die" or flags that people fly under are symbolic of real concerns.
the concerns of the health of our neighbors is a real concern as well.
How those concerns are worked out in practice is the question. Are they to be by unconstitutional police state mandates or by voluntary commonsense actions?
I have an elderly Aunt whose practically a shut in. Even before the "shutdown" family members brought her food and other necessities and she very rarely left home.
the difference now ... not by law... but out of concern, is that I don't hug her, or stay long and hope and pray that nothing i bring to her is contaminated and even wiping down certain items.

As i've said before.
the elderly and Sick should stay home.
If some people are just afraid to leave the home, they should stay home... and not be penalized for it.
But otherwise healthy or asymptomatic people should not be mandated by law to curb their activity... and not be penalized for it.
MOST people are voluntarily doing "social distancing" or covering up and hand washing etc...

There's no need (and it's Illegal) for politicians to pretend they are saving our lives by force of law.
especially as it becomes clearer that most people are not any real danger of death.

[Abbey Marie]

The labels like "Live free or Die" or flags that people fly under are symbolic of real concerns.
the concerns of the health of our neighbors is a real concern as well.
How those concerns are worked out in practice is the question. Are they to be by unconstitutional police state mandates or by voluntary commonsense actions?
I have an elderly Aunt whose practically a shut in. Even before the "shutdown" family members brought her food and other necessities and she very rarely left home.
the difference now ... not by law... but out of concern, is that I don't hug her, or stay long and hope and pray that nothing i bring to her is contaminated and even wiping down certain items.

As i've said before.
the elderly and Sick should stay home.
If some people are just afraid to leave the home, they should stay home... and not be penalized for it.
But otherwise healthy or asymptomatic people should not be mandated by law to curb their activity... and not be penalized for it.
MOST people are voluntarily doing "social distancing" or covering up and hand washing etc...

There's no need (and it's Illegal) for politicians to pretend they are saving our lives by force of law.
especially as it becomes clearer that most people are not any real danger of death.

You said it exactly with your own words. You bring your Aunt food, and “hope and pray you don’t bring her anything contaminated”. If we open too soon, the chances of you doing that very thing could climb a good bit. Her staying home won’t help her, if you bring the virus to her. This has been my exact point all along. Telling folks at risk to”just stay home” only works for actual hermits. Everyone else must have interactions with potentially infected people and objects.

[revelarts]

Good to see you, Rev. :cool:Abbey Luv ya, glad you're well.

.


The difference is, it’s all for an extremely important, unprecedented, reason, not at the whim of some distant greedy colonizing monarchy. And it’s temporary. Temporary. You are comparing apples and cantaloupe.
well honestly, we've had bad illnesses before, so it's not really unprecedented. the reaction is unprecedented. the gov't has never told the sick and the HEALTHY of the whole population to stay home. it's NEVER happened before.

As far as it being temporary? Is it? I remember how many of the "temporary" 9/11 rules and powers were supposed to be go away as well.
But today we're all just living under that "New Normal" and some people even cry in fear if folks propose they be removed. (unless some are used against Trump)
And many of our officials are talking about our "New Normal" to be imposed by this disease. To the point of adding EXTRA tracking apps to our phones and forced vaccinations and carrying vaccination cards before we are allowed to leave home or travel or go to work.

So, it's not as different as apples and cantaloupe.
I mean Left boot or Right boot on your neck what's the real difference Abbey?

[revelarts]

You said it exactly with your own words. You bring your Aunt food, and “hope and pray you don’t bring her anything contaminated”. If we open too soon, the chances of you doing that very thing could climb a good bit. Her staying home won’t help her, if you bring the virus to her. This has been my exact point all along. Telling folks at risk to”just stay home” only works for actual hermits. Everyone else must have interactions with potentially infected people and objects.

Yes and the Gov't shouldn't pretend to keep us safe by making up BS laws like telling everyone to stay home indefinitely.
If i don't have job i can't bring her food.
If I'm homeless am I safer?
Should i stop going to church indefinitely to possibly maybe hopefully not get the virus? I should go to the "essential" ABC store instead for the spirits there. to keep her safe.
Trump was right, this virus is not much worse than the FLU
life is not without risk. it never will be. voluntarily taking precautions is what we all should do IMHO.
90% of Sweden hasn't died not even 5%. It's clear that it's not as dangerous they initially claimed.

[Abbey Marie]

Abbey Luv ya, glad you're well.

.

well honestly, we've had bad illnesses before, so it's not really unprecedented. the reaction is unprecedented. the gov't has never told the sick and the HEALTHY of the whole population to stay home. it's NEVER happened before.

As far as it being temporary? Is it? I remember how many of the "temporary" 9/11 rules and powers were supposed to be go away as well.
But today we're all just living under that "New Normal" and some people even cry in fear if folks propose they be removed. (unless some are used against Trump)
And many of our officials are talking about our "New Normal" to be imposed by this disease. To the point of adding EXTRA tracking apps to our phones and forced vaccinations and carrying vaccination cards before we are allowed to leave home or travel or go to work.

So, it's not as different as apples and cantaloupe.
I mean Left boot or Right boot on your neck what's the real difference Abbey?

I’m so glad to see you, I’m not even going to disagree.

How are things in VA? Is your family doing well? Job security?

[revelarts]

I’m so glad to see you, I’m not even going to disagree.

How are things in VA? Is your family doing well? Job security?
Family's good,
Things are OK in VA, I live close to one of the larger outbreaks in the state, and like elsewhere the deaths are mostly elderly. several in one nursing home i believe, multiple staff had the virus apparently.
Thankfully my Job falls into "essential" category, if not I'd literally be in danger of losing my home.

However many businesses here are not following the closure "orders", like me they simply can't afford to.
A $1200 check is not going to pay rent and utilities when your living paycheck to paycheck or have a payroll to meet.

sorry didn't mean to go of in the same direction but, hey just as the dangers of illness are real, the dangers of falling into real poverty and even homeless is out there too.
So yeah where i work business is slow but it's still going on. Thank God.

[Evmetro]

Yes and the Gov't shouldn't pretend to keep us safe by making up BS laws like telling everyone to stay home indefinitely.
If i don't have job i can't bring her food.
If I'm homeless am I safer?
Should i stop going to church indefinitely to possibly maybe hopefully not get the virus? I should go to the "essential" ABC store instead for the spirits there. to keep her safe.
Trump was right, this virus is not much worse than the FLU
life is not without risk. it never will be. voluntarily taking precautions is what we all should do IMHO.
90% of Sweden hasn't died not even 5%. It's clear that it's not as dangerous they initially claimed.
Rock solid post.

[Kathianne]

Good to see you, Rev. :cool:


The difference is, it’s all for an extremely important, unprecedented, reason, not at the whim of some distant greedy colonizing monarchy. And it’s temporary. Temporary. You are comparing apples and cantaloupe.
Abbey, you already know that I empathize with what you are addressing. However, I don't see the 'temporary' being as understood as you do. I see what's going on with governors in MI, the punishment of Orange County, CA, etc. These governors, including some of the conservatives moving in the opposite direction of 'open it all up, now,' seem on power trips. They will act to protect what they think they are carving out.

To ignore that would be foolish.

[jimnyc]

Family's good,
Things are OK in VA, I live close to one of the larger outbreaks in the state, and like elsewhere the deaths are mostly elderly. several in one nursing home i believe, multiple staff had the virus apparently.
Thankfully my Job falls into "essential" category, if not I'd literally be in danger of losing my home.

However many businesses here are not following the closure "orders", like me they simply can't afford to.
A $1200 check is not going to pay rent and utilities when you living paycheck to paycheck or have a payroll to meet.

sorry didn't meant to go of in the same direction but, hey just as the dangers of illness are real, the dangers of falling into real poverty and even homeless is out there too.
So yeah where i work business is slow but it's still going on. Thank God.

More than welcome to come stay here in NY if need be. :thumb:

Hell, I wonder if I can even leave? I wonder - 10 minutes north tops to the CT border, and less than 30 to GWB or TZ to go into NJ. Would I be followed or denied? I doubt it, but the stories back in the beginning!

[jimnyc]

Another one and another example. People want to be able to eat, so this is what they come up with.

---

Republicans literally want to work Americans to death

The Republican Party represents regular working stiffs, the forgotten men and women of America, who have been left behind by the country's effete liberal elites. Or at least that's the message that President Trump, GOP leadership, and the American right in general have been pushing for years. But while their words are one thing, their actions are another. And the actions of Trump and his fellow Republicans during the coronavirus pandemic suggest they see American workers as nothing but cannon fodder to be sacrificed in the name of a rejuvenated economy.

The most recent example was the president's executive order from earlier this week, telling meatpacking plants to remain open. The industry, which involves thousands of often poorly-paid workers laboring shoulder to shoulder to process and package poultry, pork, and other items, has become a hotspot for COVID-19 outbreaks. Facilities are shutting down, at least 20 workers in meat and food processing have died, and thousands have either been infected or had to self-quarantine. Pork and beef processing has already fallen 25 percent, and the Trump administration was concerned capacity could be cut by as much as 80 percent. The president's decision was no doubt influenced by an ad taken out by the chairman of Tyson Foods this weekend, warning that America's food supply chain "is breaking."

Rest - https://theweek.com/articles/911623/republicans-literally-want-work-americans-death

[Drummond]

Yes and the Gov't shouldn't pretend to keep us safe by making up BS laws like telling everyone to stay home indefinitely.
If i don't have job i can't bring her food.
If I'm homeless am I safer?
Should i stop going to church indefinitely to possibly maybe hopefully not get the virus? I should go to the "essential" ABC store instead for the spirits there. to keep her safe.
Trump was right, this virus is not much worse than the FLU
life is not without risk. it never will be. voluntarily taking precautions is what we all should do IMHO.
90% of Sweden hasn't died not even 5%. It's clear that it's not as dangerous they initially claimed.

America, even if it does it on a State-by-State basis, has a decision to reach on how long lockdowns last, how quickly they're lifted, what levels of infection it wants to tolerate, and why.

All of this is America's decision to take, whatever the direction chosen.

But ... if you're dead, it won't matter if you don't have food available. Death is death. Choose to risk it if you must.

I'd like to make two points. One, the virus not being much worse than flu is nonsense. With Covid-19, it's more of a killer, it presents symptoms in a variety of ways, and in some cases not at all ... YET ... it still infects, goes on to kill somebody else, maybe without the spreader of it having any idea that he or she is any danger to others.

We in the UK have a Prime Minister who nearly died of this 'not much worse than flu' virus. He'd never agree with you, and he should know !! Try telling him that Covid-19 isn't a great danger to all of us.

And Sweden has death rates multiples of times greater than its more cautious neighbours. A pity you didn't acknowledge that.

I am from the UK. I ask that consideration be given to America quarantining itself from the rest of the world, because I'd really rather not be on the receiving-end of a second wave of this pandemic, caused by America's choices.

What you decide, all of us may have to suffer, whether we like it or not. So, I say ... decide wisely. Please.

[revelarts]

I'm not sure that I've got much to say. I see both sides of this. I've always seen the herd immunity principle as sound and, purely in terms of the eventual health of any nation, it's a reasonable option, IF we don't get a vaccine.
correct me if i'm wrong but for herd immunity to work many, if not most people have to get the virus.
.


I can't help but wonder if the initial horrors it'd create are fully comprehended by its most enthusiastic proponents, though. Don't forget that problems in healthcare that fully opening up would create, would impact on everything. Reliant on treatments to combat cancer ? Say goodbye to them, for a couple of months, while hospitals are overwhelmed with virus patients.
Seems the worse has already pasted. the virus has gone around the world. And thankfully few healthcare facilities ... if any.. have been totally overwhelmed with covid1984 cases. But in many cases most of urgent need illneses have been put on hold. Cancer treatments, heart surgeries etc. with some doctors saying at this point that they see no way to catch up on the backlog of cases of other serious illnesses. All becasue many hospitals were essentially shutdown to focused on receiving the expected but Non-existent flood of covid1984 patients. At this point it's a bit of monday morning quarterbacking, but going forward based on what when seen, mass lockdowns makes little sense and even hurts patients with other critical care issues.

.


Opening up economies has to happen, but when, and how completely ? There's a spectrum of differing viewpoints. But, the balance has to be got right. Covid-19, at least until / unless it mutates, is a very specific threat for which only the one most optimal solution exists.
'Just decide how many must die' is really what it comes down to.
Frankly They don't know "how many must die". They overestimated by tens of thousands how many would die already. why should we assume the worst at this point?
But think of this, we can ADD estimates for how many will die from a dead economy as well. Folks act like somehow people can simply live without work. No, people die when there are no jobs and not enough to pay bills.
Some die from depression and suicide. Some from stress and not getting health care needs addressed becasue of poverty. Many people already choose between paying for meds and food. Does crime increase or decrease in situations of sudden and desperate poverty?
Choose your problems, slow deaths that could turn into generational poverty and illnesses or the now less than 0.05% chance of death from the covid1984 virus.
Most of us take a greater risk driving to work everyday or going swimming.
Washing hands won't save us from a car accidents or drowning but it can ... and likely has... mitigated the worse that the virus can do.



But whatever your decision: remember, whatever you decide, you are highly likely to be deciding for the entire world. Yours is a large population, and a substantial proportion are bound to be within a 'let's open everything up' jurisdiction. So, is there absolutely no likelihood of anyone from any of those areas either traveling abroad, or, infecting someone who will ?
Say a freight handler who's infected leaves Covid-19 on some surfaces where the virus can live for a couple of days. The freight makes its journey, and the virus survives it. The recipient country starts to know a fresh Covid outbreak, whether or not it's beating its own pool of infection up to that point.
there are many "essential" businesses open now where the same risk is present.
But sure , If you or the company that receives U.S. goods are concerned let the packages sit at the dock for a few more days. Until the virus is dead.. and spray it, wipe it, hit it with UV light, etc.. there's more than one way to realistically deal with the problem. To keep people safe to the degree of your concern AND restore the work force. The 2 are not mutually exclusive. With the added possible economic benefit of ADDING a layer of workers and overall safety to deal with testing and disinfecting of shipped goods. Plus that'd be a legal way help trace back infected persons.

But everyone hiding their homes for months (years?) on end until everyone feels completely safe is not a sustainable. And questionably effective.
Again many people would end up in the streets or ... moving in with relatives, friends, (or Jim) or shelters. Making the problem worse.
Getting out and FIGHTING the problem is a plan that's a win win.

.


I'd like to make two points. One, the virus not being much worse than flu is nonsense.
Didn't say it was not "much worse than flu". I said the DEATH RATE is not much worse than the flu.
that's a simple fact.

.


We in the UK have a Prime Minister who nearly died of this 'not much worse than flu' virus. He'd never agree with you, and he should know !! Try telling him that Covid-19 isn't a great danger to all of us.
thankfully he didn't die. and well over 95% of people that have caught the virus have not died and most didn't even know they had it.
that's just the facts.
We can be driven into paralysis by hyping fears or we can take realistic assessment and attack the problem based on the facts.

.


And Sweden has death rates multiples of times greater than its more cautious neighbours. A pity you didn't acknowledge that.

Ok but to start Sweden's neighbours have half the population Sweden. But taking that into account Sweden's numbers are still higher. but by how much. Has 50% of it's population died?
25% 10%? no. I don't have the most current numbers but i think it's even less than 1%. correct me if I'm wrong. and those are ... as everywhere... mostly elders with preexisting condition

But lets compare Sweden with other neighbours in Europe and elsewhere.

as of last week or so
Sweden having no lock-down At All
apx 10 million people.
they've had 2000+ deaths so far.

Portugal with lock-down
apx 10 million people
they've had 800+ deaths

Belgium with lock-down
apx 11 million people
they've had 6500+ deaths

Switzerland with lock-down
apx 10 million people
they've had 1500+ deaths

how is this relatively small difference in death rates becasue of lock-downs/quarantines?
How does it rationally justify lock-downs and extreme measures of nations?

New York state in thE US with 20 million people had 16 thousand+ deaths (NYC is one place that the lockdown probably sense... for about 4 weeks)
.


I am from the UK. I ask that consideration be given to America quarantining itself from the rest of the world, because I'd really rather not be on the receiving-end of a second wave of this pandemic, caused by America's choices.
What you decide, all of us may have to suffer, whether we like it or not. So, I say ... decide wisely. Please.
No one wants more of this virus trouble. But the evidence does NOT suggest that quarantining is a strategy that is very effective in stopping the virus.
Even though politicians, MSM news and the W.H.O. and various experts promotes it as such.

[jimnyc]

America, even if it does it on a State-by-State basis, has a decision to reach on how long lockdowns last, how quickly they're lifted, what levels of infection it wants to tolerate, and why.

All of this is America's decision to take, whatever the direction chosen.

But ... if you're dead, it won't matter if you don't have food available. Death is death. Choose to risk it if you must.

I'd like to make two points. One, the virus not being much worse than flu is nonsense. With Covid-19, it's more of a killer, it presents symptoms in a variety of ways, and in some cases not at all ... YET ... it still infects, goes on to kill somebody else, maybe without the spreader of it having any idea that he or she is any danger to others.

We in the UK have a Prime Minister who nearly died of this 'not much worse than flu' virus. He'd never agree with you, and he should know !! Try telling him that Covid-19 isn't a great danger to all of us.

And Sweden has death rates multiples of times greater than its more cautious neighbours. A pity you didn't acknowledge that.

I am from the UK. I ask that consideration be given to America quarantining itself from the rest of the world, because I'd really rather not be on the receiving-end of a second wave of this pandemic, caused by America's choices.

What you decide, all of us may have to suffer, whether we like it or not. So, I say ... decide wisely. Please.

I think he is speaking of the possibility of it killing you and who you are. The mortality rate for starters. The flu deaths will change by each year. Depending on the year and who you talk to, the rate is between .01 and .03.

80,000 dead last year in the USA from the flu and complications from the flu. That is NOT to compare or diminish this illness, solely showing how deadly the flu is and how it's treated differently (some for much good reason).

Then they say 15.4 million to 17.8 million got the flu from October of last year until now. My point with this is solely to show that the flu is a deadly illness that happens year after year after year. No permanent solution in sight. I think they said the latest flu has the vaccine helping 47% of people. Overall it's 40-60% effective. But thankfully the numbers are as "low" as they are. 40% doesn't instill a lot of confidence!!

But yet, year after year after year once again, while they deal with these huge numbers, and we unfortunately lose people every time, and that vaccine isn't guaranteed, we still never lockdown or close things up or demand this and that of folks because of it. People get the vaccine in massive numbers, and learn to protect elderly, compromised & babies.

And now this crap. At .05 in the USA for example. Doesn't sound like a monster difference, but that IS double the flu or worse. And in ADDITION to the flu, not a trade off. So it's bad in that respect. It's bad as in it seems to be more contagious. And of course they are still learning the disease and working towards a vaccine and testing medications. Like the flu, it seems most harmful to the elderly and compromised. But by no means does that make others somehow immune. Hell, I got the flu like maybe 15x or so over my lifetime? Never too bad, likely because I was always young and healthy and nothing compromised. I think other factors do go into it that we likely don't know yet that make some susceptible.

There is less known about this one. It's more deadly and more contagious. There is a lack of testing, which is huge, as that will tell us so much more. A lack of PPE and too many indians reporting information all over the map. So a lot of reasons that make valid staying at home in the beginning, using masks, cleaning non-stop, don't touch your face and everything else folks have been doing.

So I could make an argument myself for either side. BUT, the reality is that we're finding out it is a lot less deadly than we originally thought. And when full testing is available, we very well could find out it's even closer to the flu. IF we had a vaccine of course.... then perhaps you could see the comparison come together even more. I'm confident folks have died due to lack of knowledge, lack of medication of course & several other factors. Let's hope for the best, but if not, we can work to minimize this like done to the flu and someone find an effective vaccine. Eradication would be fantastic but I don't see that happening with all of the asymptomatic talk out there.

So then what? I think we can all admit that we can't stay at home indefinitely and out of jobs and expect to be able to purchase things necessary without having income. The government can't just print money and give it away forever. So many things cannot continue, but I understand that some needs to, and that others need more protection than others. We're already seeing a breakdown in food and other supplies and what's it been, 6 weeks of orders, maybe 8?

There HAS GOT to be an in-between. Things MUST reopen - but in an orderly fashion. A protective fashion. And whatever fashion each state and each company and each individual sees fit. We MUST protect all the folks I mentioned first and foremost. States protect other states, people protect one another, folks use common sense and protections, scientists and our best doctors around the world are working hard towards medications and/or a vaccine.

I think this is bad, no denying that. But with all of the numbers and being realistic, I don't see this as the end of humanity. And with decency and common sense and blah blah blah instead of repeating myself, I think we can maybe beat this or lower it to flu numbers or less.

[jimnyc]

Didn't say it was not "much worse than flu". I said the DEATH RATE is not much worse than the flu.
that's a simple fact.


I think I took a little too long in replying to say that's what I thought you meant!

[Drummond]

correct me if i'm wrong but for herd immunity to work many, if not most people have to get the virus.

Those who survive, Revelarts. Those who survive.


Seems the worse has already pasted. the virus has gone around the world. And thankfully few healthcare facilities ... if any.. have been totally overwhelmed with covid1984 cases.

.... because, the vast majority instituted strict lockdowns !!

Boris Johnson himself was extremely clear: to him, a main reason for applying a lockdown was to stop our NHS from being overwhelmed. What much of America is now looking to do is to remove that safeguard. Once you do, watch the infections spike, and THEN tell me that your hospitals are coping.

WITH our lockdown, one British hospital declared a 'critical incident' ...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-uk-cases-intensive-care-nhs-northwick-park-a9414311.html

Quick note: it's 2020, not 1984.


But in many cases most of urgent need illneses have been put on hold. Cancer treatments, heart surgeries etc. with some doctors saying at this point that they see no way to catch up on the backlog of cases of other serious illnesses. All becasue many hospitals were essentially shutdown to focused on receiving the expected but Non-existent flood of covid1984 patients. At this point it's a bit of monday morning quarterbacking, but going forward based on what when seen, mass lockdowns makes little sense and even hurts patients with other critical care issues.

Sure that's accurate ? Here, cancer treatments, operations etc have been suspended for the foreseeable future precisely because our hospitals were committed to dealing with Covid-19 patients. The sheer number of patients dictated it. By the way, every Thursday at 8 pm, the nation's citizens of the UK step out of their homes for a mass clapping session ... public support for all our nurses, as a 'thank you' for working as they are under extreme conditions.

That's with a lockdown, remember.


Frankly They don't know "how many must die". They overestimated by tens of thousands how many would die already. why should we assume the worst at this point?

The logic of your point escapes me. If they don't know, then they don't. So, why not assume the worst ? You don't know you'd be wrong if you did !


But think of this, we can ADD estimates for how many will die from a dead economy as well. Folks act like somehow people can simply live without work. No, people die when there are no jobs and not enough to pay bills.
Some die from depression and suicide. Some from stress and not getting health care needs addressed becasue of poverty. Many people already choose between paying for meds and food. Does crime increase or decrease in situations of sudden and desperate poverty?
Choose your problems, slow deaths that could turn into generational poverty and illnesses or the now less than 0.05% chance of death from the covid1984 virus.

0.05% chance of death from the 'covid1984' virus ?? Eh ?? Are you making it up as you go along, or are you convinced that we're being revisited by an old virus ?

Please remain focused on today's reality. Thank you.


Most of us take a greater risk driving to work everyday or going swimming.
Washing hands won't save us from a car accidents or drowning but it can ... and likely has... mitigated the worse that the virus can do.

In a lockdown situation, people are not going swimming or driving. Are you telling me that every country instituting one hasn't seen any increase in its death rate ??

And if washing hands was the whole answer, we'd have come close to wiping out the virus by now.


there are many "essential" businesses open now where the same risk is present.

Ever heard of distancing rules ? How easily can those businesses operate if they're applied ? And you only need ONE infected employee who's lax about hand washing for the virus to start spreading.


But sure , If you or the company that receives U.S. goods are concerned let the packages sit at the dock for a few more days. Until the virus is dead.. and spray it, wipe it, hit it with UV light, etc.. there's more than one way to realistically deal with the problem.

Yes, that's fair. Can you be sure it'll be done ? Or, would businesses be too keen to make their profit, without waiting for it ?

Where I am, we'd have a solution. You'd pass a law mandating such a holding period. I wonder if Americans would take kindly to having police forces insisting they kept to that rule, and arresting those who didn't ?


But everyone hiding their homes for months (years?) on end until everyone feels completely safe is not a sustainable. And questionably effective.

Again many people would end up in the streets or ... moving in with relatives, friends, (or Jim) or shelters. Making the problem worse.
Getting out and FIGHTING the problem is a plan that's a win win.

You forget, I support herd immunity as a sound scientific principle. The point is that without lockdowns, you'd get a severe infection spike. That's my objection. As for people moving in with relatives and friends ? Seriously ? People would be THAT contemptuous of lockdown rules ?

Or are you just describing crass irresponsibility ? Suggesting that the friends and relatives they'd be moving in with, they'd threaten with infection ?


Didn't say it was not "much worse than flu". I said the DEATH RATE is not much worse than the flu.
that's a simple fact.

Let's check.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-disease-2019-vs-the-flu


COVID-19: Approximately 233,704 deaths reported worldwide; 63,019 deaths in the U.S., as of May 1, 2020.*

Flu: 291,000 to 646,000 deaths worldwide; 12,000 to 61,000 deaths in the U.S. per year

How long has Covid-19 been around ? An entire year ?

Do we have lockdowns to fight flu ? NO. The stats above reflect what's true of most of the world under lockdown .. and over only a four month period, so far, not an entire year.

So, though you were very careful with your wording (& I don't blame you), there's a clear fact here. Covid-19 is many multiples of times deadlier.

I'm going to stop here. This post is more than long enough as it is. My suggestion is that you stick to facts, recognise that 1984 is long gone (that would definitely help), and that Covid-19 is so deadly that almost all countries think they need lockdowns to fight it.

Kindly prove that you are right, and almost all the rest of the world is wrong.

By the way, it's still 2020.

If you like, I'll send you a copy of this year's calendar.

No charge.

[Drummond]

I think he is speaking of the possibility of it killing you and who you are. The mortality rate for starters. The flu deaths will change by each year. Depending on the year and who you talk to, the rate is between .01 and .03.

80,000 dead last year in the USA from the flu and complications from the flu. That is NOT to compare or diminish this illness, solely showing how deadly the flu is and how it's treated differently (some for much good reason).

Then they say 15.4 million to 17.8 million got the flu from October of last year until now. My point with this is solely to show that the flu is a deadly illness that happens year after year after year. No permanent solution in sight. I think they said the latest flu has the vaccine helping 47% of people. Overall it's 40-60% effective. But thankfully the numbers are as "low" as they are. 40% doesn't instill a lot of confidence!!

But yet, year after year after year once again, while they deal with these huge numbers, and we unfortunately lose people every time, and that vaccine isn't guaranteed, we still never lockdown or close things up or demand this and that of folks because of it. People get the vaccine in massive numbers, and learn to protect elderly, compromised & babies.

And now this crap. At .05 in the USA for example. Doesn't sound like a monster difference, but that IS double the flu or worse. And in ADDITION to the flu, not a trade off. So it's bad in that respect. It's bad as in it seems to be more contagious. And of course they are still learning the disease and working towards a vaccine and testing medications. Like the flu, it seems most harmful to the elderly and compromised. But by no means does that make others somehow immune. Hell, I got the flu like maybe 15x or so over my lifetime? Never too bad, likely because I was always young and healthy and nothing compromised. I think other factors do go into it that we likely don't know yet that make some susceptible.

There is less known about this one. It's more deadly and more contagious. There is a lack of testing, which is huge, as that will tell us so much more. A lack of PPE and too many indians reporting information all over the map. So a lot of reasons that make valid staying at home in the beginning, using masks, cleaning non-stop, don't touch your face and everything else folks have been doing.

So I could make an argument myself for either side. BUT, the reality is that we're finding out it is a lot less deadly than we originally thought. And when full testing is available, we very well could find out it's even closer to the flu. IF we had a vaccine of course.... then perhaps you could see the comparison come together even more. I'm confident folks have died due to lack of knowledge, lack of medication of course & several other factors. Let's hope for the best, but if not, we can work to minimize this like done to the flu and someone find an effective vaccine. Eradication would be fantastic but I don't see that happening with all of the asymptomatic talk out there.

So then what? I think we can all admit that we can't stay at home indefinitely and out of jobs and expect to be able to purchase things necessary without having income. The government can't just print money and give it away forever. So many things cannot continue, but I understand that some needs to, and that others need more protection than others. We're already seeing a breakdown in food and other supplies and what's it been, 6 weeks of orders, maybe 8?

There HAS GOT to be an in-between. Things MUST reopen - but in an orderly fashion. A protective fashion. And whatever fashion each state and each company and each individual sees fit. We MUST protect all the folks I mentioned first and foremost. States protect other states, people protect one another, folks use common sense and protections, scientists and our best doctors around the world are working hard towards medications and/or a vaccine.

I think this is bad, no denying that. But with all of the numbers and being realistic, I don't see this as the end of humanity. And with decency and common sense and blah blah blah instead of repeating myself, I think we can maybe beat this or lower it to flu numbers or less.

Just the one point, repeated for clarity: comparisons between flu stats per year and Covid-19 cannot work, because Covid-19 is too new !!

Cough up flu stats of deaths for one year, and the TOTAL Covid-19 stats available, and you're comparing a year versus stats covering just 3-4 months, AND, not taking into account that nobody takes lockdown precautions against flu !!

No. Covid-19 is many times deadlier than flu. This has to be recognised in tackling it.

[revelarts]

Those who survive, Revelarts. Those who survive.
the 99.x%... yes. the 99.x% who survive.




.... because, the vast majority instituted strict lockdowns !!
Boris Johnson himself was extremely clear: to him, a main reason for applying a lockdown was to stop our NHS from being overwhelmed. What much of America is now looking to do is to remove that safeguard. Once you do, watch the infections spike, and THEN tell me that your hospitals are coping.
WITH our lockdown, one British hospital declared a 'critical incident' ...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-uk-cases-intensive-care-nhs-northwick-park-a9414311.html
Quick note: it's 2020, not 1984.
Sure that's accurate ? Here, cancer treatments, operations etc have been suspended for the foreseeable future precisely because our hospitals were committed to dealing with Covid-19 patients. The sheer number of patients dictated it. By the way, every Thursday at 8 pm, the nation's citizens of the UK step out of their homes for a mass clapping session ... public support for all our nurses, as a 'thank you' for working as they are under extreme conditions.
That's with a lockdown, remember.
The logic of your point escapes me. If they don't know, then they don't. So, why not assume the worst ? You don't know you'd be wrong if you did !
0.05% chance of death from the 'covid1984' virus ?? Eh ?? Are you making it up as you go along, or are you convinced that we're being revisited by an old virus ?
Please remain focused on today's reality. Thank you.
In a lockdown situation, people are not going swimming or driving. Are you telling me that every country instituting one hasn't seen any increase in its death rate ??
And if washing hands was the whole answer, we'd have come close to wiping out the virus by now.
Ever heard of distancing rules ? How easily can those businesses operate if they're applied ? And you only need ONE infected employee who's lax about hand washing for the virus to start spreading.
Yes, that's fair. Can you be sure it'll be done ? Or, would businesses be too keen to make their profit, without waiting for it ?
Where I am, we'd have a solution. You'd pass a law mandating such a holding period. I wonder if Americans would take kindly to having police forces insisting they kept to that rule, and arresting those who didn't ?
You forget, I support herd immunity as a sound scientific principle. The point is that without lockdowns, you'd get a severe infection spike. That's my objection. As for people moving in with relatives and friends ? Seriously ? People would be THAT contemptuous of lockdown rules ?
Or are you just describing crass irresponsibility ? Suggesting that the friends and relatives they'd be moving in with, they'd threaten with infection ?
Let's check.
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-disease-2019-vs-the-flu
How long has Covid-19 been around ? An entire year ?
Do we have lockdowns to fight flu ? NO. The stats above reflect what's true of most of the world under lockdown .. and over only a four month period, so far, not an entire year.
So, though you were very careful with your wording (& I don't blame you), there's a clear fact here. Covid-19 is many multiples of times deadlier.
I'm going to stop here. This post is more than long enough as it is. My suggestion is that you stick to facts, recognise that 1984 is long gone (that would definitely help), and that Covid-19 is so deadly that almost all countries think they need lockdowns to fight it.
Kindly prove that you are right, and almost all the rest of the world is wrong.
By the way, it's still 2020.
If you like, I'll send you a copy of this year's calendar.
No charge.



I didn't think you'd be moved by my comments and i won't do a back and forth with you.
except to mention the following.

1st.
since Sweden did not lockdown and their death rate did not skyrocket we can be sure that Locking down is NOT a major force in keeping down the death rate.
that's plain and obvious. It's not really a debatable point. it's a clear fact.
If locksdown were an indispensable component to safety the number of Swedes dead today would be FAR higher. correct?

BTW 8 U.S. states have NOT issued lock-downs but they DO NOT have out sized deaths or cases either in fact the open states have a LOWER per capita death rate.

(btw there are real questions about the reported covid1984 death rates across the obard, with hospitals and docs over reporting covid1984 deaths. Drug addicts and car accident victims have been overtly added to the "covid1984" death toll.)

2ndly
Stanford Study Proves Covid-19 Was Overhyped. “Death Rate Is Likely Under 0.2%”

Stanford study proves many more people are infected - between 50-85 times more - than reported and thus the "death rate" is astronomically lower than we were told.
"Michael Levitt, a Nobel laureate and Stanford University biophysicist, began analyzing the number of COVID-19 cases worldwide in January and correctly calculated that China would get through the worst of its coronavirus outbreak long before many health experts had predicted.
Now he foresees a similar outcome in the United States and the rest of the world.
While many epidemiologists are warning of months, or even years, of massive social disruption and millions of deaths, Levitt says the data simply don’t support such a dire scenario — especially in areas where reasonable social distancing measures are in place.
“What we need is to control the panic,” he said. In the grand scheme, “we’re going to be fine.”...

https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2020-03-22/coronavirus-outbreak-nobel-laureate

The study suggests the COVID-19 mortality rate to be far lower than previously thought. As of Tuesday April 14, the United States reported fatality rate of COVID-19 infected persons to be 4.1%, The Guardian reports.
" The study from Stanford University, which was released Friday and has yet to be peer reviewed, tested samples from 3,330 people in Santa Clara county and found the virus was 50 to 85 times more common than official figures indicated.
The article would also reluctantly note that (emphasis added):
'That also means coronavirus is potentially much less deadly to the overall population than initially thought. As of Tuesday, the US’s coronavirus death rate was 4.1% and Stanford researchers said their findings show a death rate of just 0.12% to 0.2%."
..........
...In fact, MIT Tech Review had to admit that the actual death rate is likely under 0.2%, which means its is about as “dangerous” as the common flu. If the common flu isn’t “reshaping the world,” Covid-19 certainly isn’t – at least not the pathogen itself...

https://www.globalresearch.ca/mit-tech-review-smears-study-proving-covid-19-overhyped/5710088
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/17/antibody-study-suggests-coronavirus-is-far-more-widespread-than-previously-thought
https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2020-03-22/coronavirus-outbreak-nobel-laureate

Add to that

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-big-tech-is-using-coronavirus-to-increase-its-power-and-the-us-is-becoming-more-like-china


"In a nearly hour-long video produced by two physicians in California, Dr. Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi.
...they noted that the newly adjusted death rate in their state of California, which is much lower than anyone expected it to be, and they asked if government officials there should change their policies based on this new science.
Dr. Dan Erickson: "We've seen 1,227 deaths in the state of California with a possible incidence or prevalence of 4.7 million. That means you have a 0.03 chance of dying from COVID-19 in the state of California. 0.03 chance of dying from COVID in the state of California -- is that -- does that necessitate sheltering in place? Does that necessitate shutting down medical systems? Does that necessitate people being out of work?"
..........

There is no empirical evidence for these lockdowns
Comparing US states shows there is no relationship between lockdowns and lower Covid-19 deaths.
Wilfred Reilly, who is a professor at Kentucky State University...
"...As a professional political scientist, I have analysed data from the Worldometers Coronavirus project, along with information about the population, population density, median income, median age and diversity of each US state, to determine whether states that have adopted lockdowns or ‘shelter in place’ orders experience fewer Covid-19 cases and deaths than those which pursue a social-distancing strategy without a formal lockdown. I then briefly extend this analysis to compare countries. In short, I do not find that lockdowns are a more effective way of handling coronavirus than well-done social-distancing measures....
...How do these states measure up to the rest of the US? Rather well. According to Worldometers, by the same time the number of officially tested Covid-19 cases across the US states – including Guam, Puerto Rico, and Washington, DC – ranged from 226,343 in New York to 135 in Guam. The average number of Covid cases in a US state was 12,520. The state-by-state number of deaths varied from 16,251 (New York) to two (Wyoming), with the average figure for deaths being 642. Removing the outlier case of New York state, where roughly half of all US Covid-19 deaths have taken place, shifted these figures downward somewhat – to 8,408 cases and 342 deaths in the average state. However, the social-distancing states experienced substantially fewer cases and deaths than the lockdown states, even with New York out of the mix....
... Overall, however, the fact that good-sized regions from Utah to Sweden to much of East Asia have avoided harsh lockdowns without being overrun by Covid-19 is notable.
The original response to Covid-19 was driven by an understandable fear of an unknown disease. The epidemiologist Neil Ferguson projected that 2.2million people could die in the US alone, and few world leaders were willing to risk being the one who would allow such grim reaping to occur.
However, as time has passed, new data have emerged. A top-quality team from Stanford University has pointed out that the infection rate for Covid-19 must logically be far higher than the official tested rate, and the fatality rate for the virus could thus be much closer to 0.1 per cent than the 2 to 4 per cent that was initially expected. And empirical analyses of national and regional response strategies, including this one, do not necessarily find that costly lockdowns work better against the virus than social distancing.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/04/22/there-is-no-empirical-evidence-for-these-lockdowns/

(https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/04/22/there-is-no-empirical-evidence-for-these-lockdowns/)
So again, should we act based on raw fears of death?
Or be base our actions real evidence and work on being "safe" and free?
the 2 are not mutually exclusive.

[Drummond]

the 99.x%... yes. the 99.x% who survive.

I didn't think you'd be moved by my comments and i won't do a back and forth with you.

Fair enough.


except to mention the following.

... yeahh ....

And, I won't do a back and forth with you, either.

Despite all the detail you've sent me (a typical Leftie trick, that you do a lot of ... swamp your opponent, in the hope that sheer weariness breaks down that opponent) ... I can still make two perfectly fair countering points.

1. LA Times, the Guardian ... how come you'e reliant on Leftie sources to help you ? [Yes, OK, you did chuck in a Fox News link, but clearly as an afterthought .. and I see contributors here begin to question their Conservative bona fides ... 'Faux News', a comment from just a couple of days back ...]

2. Here's where your argument really breaks down, & you've 'coincidentally' failed to give either so much as a mention:

There are two critically important considerations concerning Covid-19's spread, and how deadly it can be.

One is population density. You keep on citing Sweden as 'proof' that lockdowns are overrated (an irresponsible contention in the extreme, by the way, and completely defying scientific wisdom in the UK's scientific community; but, hey, you know best !!). Have you considered Sweden's population density ? It's very low. Compare how 'thinned out' their 8.9 million people (no, not quite 10 million, as you claimed) is, across their landmass .. compared with a more than sixfold population number in the UK, in a comparable landmass size.

Sweden's done remarkably well, overall, but that's your chief reason for it. Check out the greater population density in Helsinki to the rest of Sweden. Helsinki has a higher infection and death rate.

The other consideration is viral load, another point you choose to not consider at all.

People get differing doses of the virus. A bus driver or nurse will get, certainly potentially, dose exposure after dose exposure after dose exposure. The likelihood of infection therefore becomes far higher for such individuals.

So what happens when someone's caught the virus, then quickly gets another exposure to it ? Is there any body mechanism that says to infection opportunity #2, 'No, bog off, there's an infection here already, so 'no more will be accepted in this body'.. ?

HARDLY ! Because if such a mechanism existed, all we'd need to do is harness it, and hey presto, we'd have our vaccine !!

So, then. Viral loads matter. Load a body with a massive infection load, and you make the infection worse; the body has far more to fight off.

Greater population density, greater viral load. Greater numbers of people infected, again, greater potential for a greater viral load.

Check out two very large cities: London and New York. Great population densities. Enormous potential for viral load swamping. Each have 'intensive' public transport facilities. Each have large hospitals.

And, EACH HAVE HAD VERY HIGH INFECTION RATES, EACH OUTPERFORMING THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNTRIES OVERALL.

Check this out:

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-what-is-viral-load-and-why-does-it-matter-for-covid-19-11963393


According to Dr Edward Parker, a research fellow at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, early reports from China suggest that - when it comes to COVID-19 - the viral load is higher in patients with more severe disease.

This is also the case for viruses such as SARS or the flu.


It is "crucial" for people to limit their exposure to coronavirus, according to Dr Parker.

"The amount of virus we are exposed to at the start of an infection is referred to as the 'infectious dose,'" he said.

"For influenza, we know that that initial exposure to more virus - or a higher infectious dose - appears to increase the chance of infection and illness.

"Studies in mice have also shown that repeated exposure to low doses may be just as infectious as a single high dose.

"So all in all, it is crucial for us to limit all possible exposures to COVID-19, whether these are to highly symptomatic individuals coughing up large quantities of virus or to asymptomatic individuals shedding small quantities.

Note that the importance of viral load is well established with flu ... so this is far more than mere theory. It's scientifically well established.

So you see, it must be considered as the crucial factor that it is.

Apply this, then, to what much of America is about to choose to do, with such irresponsibility.

No lockdown, so, greater numbers of people infecting yet more numbers of people. But with this, the sheer quantity of virus infections will increase the viral loads of many who become infected.

So, not only will more people will become ill, but overall, the illnesses will be worse, therefore, more likely to kill !!

Do you understand, Revelarts ?

Or do you choose not to ?

You create such a concentration of infection that its likelihood of escaping the US is far greater, creating a 'Wuhan on steroids' effect. You create this threat DELIBERATELY.

Worse, though, it adds to the infection pool already existing in the recipient country. This translates into more virus being present, and more infection chances to increase viral loads here, too.

It therefore becomes a more deadly disease, for you, for me, for everyone.

To which, I'll simply say .... 'Gee, thanks !!!'.

It's still 2020, by the way.

[Drummond]

I'll add one further point (Americans won't like this, but it'll be true nonetheless).

If your relaxation of lockdowns, with the massive acceleration of infections it'll create, makes a second pandemic wave all-but-unavoidable .... China can look at what you've done, and say that anyone who wants to hold China to account for the Wuhan coronavirus escape, should do exactly the same to America.

Fact is, you'll lose all moral authority in this matter.

Right this minute, America DOES have the moral high ground. China foisted this pandemic upon us all. For that, it needs to be accountable to all countries its irresponsibility has victimised.

How deservedly will this also apply to America if, in knowing the risks involved, it still creates conditions leading to a second pandemic wave ??

Think about it.

[revelarts]

Ok, yes, Viral load is a thing to be considered.
but I'll just repeat.
99.x% survive.
Stanford University study by Nobel laureate “Death Rate Is Likely Under 0.2%”
MIT Tech Review had to admit that the actual death rate is likely under 0.2%
California Drs, "...you have a 0.03 chance of dying from COVID-19 in the state of California..."
Wilfred Reilly, who is a professor at Kentucky State University. "empirical analyses of national and regional response strategies, including this one, do not necessarily find that costly lockdowns work better against the virus than social distancing. "


Seems reasonable to me to lift lockdowns and use other measures available.
The elderly should generally stay home,
Those with concerns who want to stay home and wash everything they contact and themselves more often should do so.
everyone else should use reasonable and effective precautions and go about their biz.
Avoid dense population areas with high contagion rates.

The data is in, thankfully the models were wrong.

[Drummond]

Ok, yes, Viral load is a thing to be considered.
but I'll just repeat.
99.x% survive.

You're just not listening. Of course, there's no chance you ever will. Go on. Prove me wrong.

How much of your dependence on the '99%+' figure is dependent purely on current conditions ? Where most countries, 'wrongly', are in lockdown ? Where we have a virus that displays extremely similar characteristics, no matter where in the world you are ?

My above argument made no impact on you at all. I say again: you're just not listening.

People have their opinions, and you choose to be led by those opinions which best suit you. For myself, I look at what the world does, and my question is NOT one of 'You're all, every one of you, misguided and wrong, and why won't you depart from your combined wisdom on this matter ?'

But this is your position .. because, again, you're not listening. You are right. Everybody else is wrong.

I offer you another thought you'll equally ignore.

The greater the spread of Covid-19, the greater will be its span of life, which in turn means that, if it has a capacity for mutation, its enhanced life makes it far more likely.

Compare our current problem with that posed by Spanish flu, a century ago, an experience which offered lessons that you will absolutely ignore.

https://www.history.com/news/spanish-flu-second-wave-resurgence


The horrific scale of the 1918 influenza pandemic—known as the "Spanish flu"—is hard to fathom. The virus infected 500 million people worldwide and killed an estimated 20 million to 50 million victims—that’s more than all of the soldiers and civilians killed during World War I combined.

While the global pandemic lasted for two years, a significant number of deaths were packed into three especially cruel months in the fall of 1918. Historians now believe that the fatal severity of the Spanish flu’s “second wave” was caused by a mutated virus spread by wartime troop movements.

When the Spanish flu first appeared in early March 1918, it had all the hallmarks of a seasonal flu, albeit a highly contagious and virulent strain. One of the first registered cases was Albert Gitchell, a U.S. Army cook at Camp Funston in Kansas, who was hospitalized with a 104-degree fever. The virus spread quickly through the Army installation, home to 54,000 troops. By the end of the month, 1,100 troops had been hospitalized and 38 had died after developing pneumonia.

As U.S. troops deployed en masse for the war effort in Europe, they carried the Spanish flu with them. Throughout April and May of 1918, the virus spread like wildfire through England, France, Spain and Italy. An estimated three-quarters of the French military was infected in the spring of 1918 and as many as half of British troops. Yet the first wave of the virus didn't appear to be particularly deadly, with symptoms like high fever and malaise usually lasting only three days. According to limited public health data from the time, mortality rates were similar to seasonal flu.

Reported cases of Spanish flu dropped off over the summer of 1918, and there was hope at the beginning of August that the virus had run its course. In retrospect, it was only the calm before the storm. Somewhere in Europe, a mutated strain of the Spanish flu virus had emerged that had the power to kill a perfectly healthy young man or woman within 24 hours of showing the first signs of infection.

In late August 1918, military ships departed the English port city of Plymouth carrying troops unknowingly infected with this new, far deadlier strain of Spanish flu. As these ships arrived in cities like Brest in France, Boston in the United States and Freetown in west Africa, the second wave of the global pandemic began.

“The rapid movement of soldiers around the globe was a major spreader of the disease,” says James Harris, a historian at Ohio State University who studies both infectious disease and World War I. “The entire military industrial complex of moving lots of men and material in crowded conditions was certainly a huge contributing factor in the ways the pandemic spread.”

From September through November of 1918, the death rate from the Spanish flu skyrocketed. In the United States alone, 195,000 Americans died from the Spanish flu in just the month of October. And unlike a normal seasonal flu, which mostly claims victims among the very young and very old, the second wave of the Spanish flu exhibited what’s called a “W curve”—high numbers of deaths among the young and old, but also a huge spike in the middle composed of otherwise healthy 25- to 35-year-olds in the prime of their life.

“That really freaked out the medical establishment, that there was this atypical spike in the middle of the W,” says Harris.

Not only was it shocking that healthy young men and women were dying by the millions worldwide, but it was also how they were dying. Struck with blistering fevers, nasal hemorrhaging and pneumonia, the patients would drown in their own fluid-filled lungs.

Only decades later were scientists able to explain the phenomenon now known as “cytokine explosion.” When the human body is being attacked by a virus, the immune system sends messenger proteins called cytokines to promote helpful inflammation. But some strains of the flu, particularly the H1N1 strain responsible for the Spanish flu outbreak, can trigger a dangerous immune overreaction in healthy individuals. In those cases, the body is overloaded with cytokines leading to severe inflammation and the fatal buildup of fluid in the lungs.

British military doctors conducting autopsies on soldiers killed by this second wave of the Spanish flu described the heavy damage to the lungs as akin to the effects of chemical warfare.

Harris believes that the rapid spread of Spanish flu in the fall of 1918 was at least partially to blame on public health officials unwilling to impose quarantines during wartime.

What happened once, can happen again.

Guarantee to me that Covid-19 has absolutely no capability of doing what the Spanish flu did. Tell me that it cannot mutate to become far deadlier. Tell me that keeping Covid-19 alive and viable doesn't assist the probability of this occurring.

And tell me (said he, without hope that you'll listen) that you'll consider that what happened once in history, could happen again .. that the lessons of history CAN, in fact, be learned.

Or, DO YOU KNOW BETTER THAN TO LEARN FROM HISTORY, OR THE WORLD'S COMBINED WISDOM ?

Why am I even asking, eh, Revelarts ? H'mm .. ?

[Evmetro]

I'll add one further point (Americans won't like this, but it'll be true nonetheless).

If your relaxation of lockdowns, with the massive acceleration of infections it'll create, makes a second pandemic wave all-but-unavoidable .... China can look at what you've done, and say that anyone who wants to hold China to account for the Wuhan coronavirus escape, should do exactly the same to America.

Fact is, you'll lose all moral authority in this matter.

Right this minute, America DOES have the moral high ground. China foisted this pandemic upon us all. For that, it needs to be accountable to all countries its irresponsibility has victimised.

How deservedly will this also apply to America if, in knowing the risks involved, it still creates conditions leading to a second pandemic wave ??

Think about it.

No country deserves any wave of pandemic. We need to look at the circumstances that would lead to the hypothetical second wave that might occur. While the msm lefty media might suggest that mistakes made were attempts to harm itself, it doesn't mean everyone else would believe that America really wanted to harm itself.

[Drummond]

No country deserves any wave of pandemic. We need to look at the circumstances that would lead to the hypothetical second wave that might occur. While the msm lefty media might suggest that mistakes made were attempts to harm itself, it doesn't mean everyone else would believe that America really wanted to harm itself.

Data is there for everyone to learn from, and there will be more of it, soon. Germany and Japan have tried limited attempts at lockdown easing, but each have found infections rising once more. Spain has just begun its own easing .. around 10 days should be ample to see what that produces.

Of course, the Spanish Flu lesson has existed for an entire century !! It's shocking to see that the lesson to be drawn from it, one in existence for generations, may still not be heeded.

I don't want to be proved right in any of this !! But I think there's a great chance that I will be. I have hopes I'll be allowed to live long enough to see how this all pan out.

[jimnyc]

Everyone has some valid points. And surely there is much to learn about this virus and of course a vaccine hopefully.

But any future changes to make it somehow more deadly aren't guaranteed and actually a guess right now. And thus far, the mortality rate is what it is. Those 2 things stand where they are and really can't be argued.

The 99.x% at this stage is factual. And the rest I think is kinda equivalent with what the flu does and other types of viruses. Lick poles and you may have an issue, you increase odds in a much much denser area. The elderly and babies are high risk, as are the compromised. A great chance of reduction for ones self is simple common sense and using all protections, and added bonus of protecting others. The many things that make the mortality rate higher with this virus are similar with the flu.

But the mortality rate remains extremely low. Of course amplified in denser/larger populations. But it IS more deadly, much more so in many regards. But still not the end of the world. Even in NYC for example, one of the highest infection rates and highest death toll, the mortality rate is .10 That IS much more deadly numbers, but clearly does mean that even in NYC that 99+% will survive. And even Sweden, as everyone knows never locked down, but also now many talk of what a mistake and now it's a horror story - their mortality rate is .12

These numbers suck because we see death, and no death is good, so it sucks. And it's also non-stop news, 24x7, loaded the internet and back, entire countries shut down and all the economical collapse that comes with it - and these numbers simply aren't going to be the end of the world. It's not worth the overreaction, IMO. YES, I'm aware of the at risk folks, we all discussed to death the folks of highest importance. Protections were so so limited and now have gotten so much better, and should continue. Employers need to have plans. But as is the mortality rates are what they are. And we CAN work to reduce that with all the things I have been mentioning. It goes without mentioning that things evolve and we must evolve with it with any changes, and change anything that may not be working. There are no perfect scenarios.

And as for rights, I think most know my stance. I'd do all kinds of things voluntarily to help people, would avoid when sick of course and also stay home when sick. I'd be wearing a mask whether it was now law as it is in NY or not, common sense for me. Not a ton would change other than it's MY choice. I don't need the folks in Washington to tell me what to do or how to use common sense. But everyone is more than welcome to their own opinion and I do believe everyone entitled to do what they believe in as well.

[Evmetro]

Data is there for everyone to learn from, and there will be more of it, soon. Germany and Japan have tried limited attempts at lockdown easing, but each have found infections rising once more. Spain has just begun its own easing .. around 10 days should be ample to see what that produces.

Of course, the Spanish Flu lesson has existed for an entire century !! It's shocking to see that the lesson to be drawn from it, one in existence for generations, may still not be heeded.

I don't want to be proved right in any of this !! But I think there's a great chance that I will be. I have hopes I'll be allowed to live long enough to see how this all pan out.

Are you thinking that lockdowns are meant to actually reduce the eventual number of deaths, or are you thinking that the lockdowns are meant to smooth spikes that might overwhelm some hospitals on the way to an inevitable death count that happens either way?

[Drummond]

Are you thinking that lockdowns are meant to actually reduce the eventual number of deaths, or are you thinking that the lockdowns are meant to smooth spikes that might overwhelm some hospitals on the way to an inevitable death count that happens either way?

A surprising question. Surely, the answer's obvious ?

BOTH is my answer.

Can you not conceive of elderly people who go into lockdown, and because they have, they get to survive where otherwise, they'd have died ?

Here, relatives are barred from visiting each other. Why ? Because, being from different households, one could be visiting another household and introducing infection where it had been absent before.

The same principle applies to friends (how can't it ?). We have the Internet, we have apps and - yes - even telephone conversations that can happen, in lieu of actually meeting up. Why ? To stop infection spreading.

The 'smoothing spikes so as not to overwhelm hospitals' was and is a chief aim of our Government, because otherwise, the surge in infection and greatly increased numbers of sick would've overwhelmed our hospitals.

By and large (with just the one exception I know of) the policy worked well.

But now, America wants to remove lockdown restrictions. I hope your hospitals are ready. I hope ports and airports are ready. Because when it happens, you in America will have a VERY 'jolly time' of it .....

God help you, And, given the worst case scenario ... God help the rest of us, too.

I was going to post this as a gift for Revelarts. But maybe you, Jim and others may enjoy it, too .. ?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtkMBNUvEO8&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR2wod5 AuBgkeZ7ey1BZ-cg0jvTNU3xf9UwpztuMw2VGsBCZNctTJKntNDM

[Drummond]

Ok, yes, Viral load is a thing to be considered.
but I'll just repeat.
99.x% survive.
Stanford University study by Nobel laureate “Death Rate Is Likely Under 0.2%”
MIT Tech Review had to admit that the actual death rate is likely under 0.2%
California Drs, "...you have a 0.03 chance of dying from COVID-19 in the state of California..."
Wilfred Reilly, who is a professor at Kentucky State University. "empirical analyses of national and regional response strategies, including this one, do not necessarily find that costly lockdowns work better against the virus than social distancing. "


Seems reasonable to me to lift lockdowns and use other measures available.
The elderly should generally stay home,
Those with concerns who want to stay home and wash everything they contact and themselves more often should do so.
everyone else should use reasonable and effective precautions and go about their biz.
Avoid dense population areas with high contagion rates.

The data is in, thankfully the models were wrong.

You just can't move beyond that small window of vision you myopically have, to see anything else, can you ?

I have words for you, suggesting concepts, Revelarts. Try them out.

MUTATION.

EVOLUTION.

CHANGE.

PREPAREDNESS.

FORESIGHT.

FUTURE.

Viruses can mutate. Evolve. Change. Preparedness against that possibility is Really A Good Idea. It involves foresight, to prepare for the future.

Do you understand any of this ?

Spanish flu of a century ago did mutate, it did evolve, it did change, and it became far more deadly. People back then, who'd had their mild doses of it during its first wave, no doubt thought much as you do.

BUT THAT SECOND AND MUCH DEADLIER WAVE HAPPENED, ALL THE SAME.

Revelarts ... explain to me why you absolutely refuse to learn from history. Also, if you can, explain how you know that Covid-19 cannot possibly mutate. And how, even, an abandonment of lockdown procedures this early on won't bring mass suffering and death with it ?

Tell me, why do countries have armies, armed forces ? Why bother ? Is it because riding around in tanks is fun ? Flying military jets, likewise, fun ? Bombing things, is fun ? Firing missiles, is A Jolly Thing To Do ?

Or, could it be that nations prepare against aggressors from abroad ? They have foresight to consider that invasive actions could happen.

Some of those nations have no experience of invasions. But, they take precautions, guarding against the possibility.

In your world, revelarts, was NATO a thoroughly stupid thing to set up, and to be a part of ? Did you always consider it to be completely illogical ?

I'm wondering if, in your world, Hitler never existed ? Would you, as President, have invited him over for tea and frankfurters, and been surprised when he turned up with his Thoroughly Illogical Panzer units, and U-boats ? Would he have astounded you with his cry of 'Howdy Doody, Schweinhund, do hast been invaded, und by ze weg, ich kann do you a great deal on zese jackboots that my friend Heidi can make for a knockdown price, begorrah' .. ?

You will never have known invasion. Therefore, in your world, you can neither conceive of it, nor prepare for it. The Spanish Flu happened in a different world of 100 years ago. The 2nd World War never impinged on your own cozy world, Revelarts. So, no lessons to be learned, there, then.

You see only what you want to see.

So That's All OK, then.

[Evmetro]

A surprising question. Surely, the answer's obvious ?

BOTH is my answer.

Can you not conceive of elderly people who go into lockdown, and because they have, they get to survive where otherwise, they'd have died ?

Here, relatives are barred from visiting each other. Why ? Because, being from different households, one could be visiting another household and introducing infection where it had been absent before.

The same principle applies to friends (how can't it ?). We have the Internet, we have apps and - yes - even telephone conversations that can happen, in lieu of actually meeting up. Why ? To stop infection spreading.

The 'smoothing spikes so as not to overwhelm hospitals' was and is a chief aim of our Government, because otherwise, the surge in infection and greatly increased numbers of sick would've overwhelmed our hospitals.

By and large (with just the one exception I know of) the policy worked well.

But now, America wants to remove lockdown restrictions. I hope your hospitals are ready. I hope ports and airports are ready. Because when it happens, you in America will have a VERY 'jolly time' of it .....

God help you, And, given the worst case scenario ... God help the rest of us, too.

I was going to post this as a gift for Revelarts. But maybe you, Jim and others may enjoy it, too .. ?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtkMBNUvEO8&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR2wod5 AuBgkeZ7ey1BZ-cg0jvTNU3xf9UwpztuMw2VGsBCZNctTJKntNDM
This is interesting to me, since I have never encountered anybody who thought that the eventual number of deaths was inevitable regardless of lockdowns, but also that the number of deaths would be reduced because of lockdowns.

[revelarts]

You just can't move beyond that small window of vision you myopically have, to see anything else, can you ?
I have words for you, suggesting concepts, Revelarts. Try them out.
MUTATION.
EVOLUTION.
CHANGE.
PREPAREDNESS.
FORESIGHT.
FUTURE.
Viruses can mutate. Evolve. Change. Preparedness against that possibility is Really A Good Idea. It involves foresight, to prepare for the future.
Do you understand any of this ?
Spanish flu of a century ago did mutate, it did evolve, it did change, and it became far more deadly. People back then, who'd had their mild doses of it during its first wave, no doubt thought much as you do.
BUT THAT SECOND AND MUCH DEADLIER WAVE HAPPENED, ALL THE SAME.
Revelarts ... explain to me why you absolutely refuse to learn from history. Also, if you can, explain how you know that Covid-19 cannot possibly mutate. And how, even, an abandonment of lockdown procedures this early on won't bring mass suffering and death with it ?
Tell me, why do countries have armies, armed forces ? Why bother ? Is it because riding around in tanks is fun ? Flying military jets, likewise, fun ? Bombing things, is fun ? Firing missiles, is A Jolly Thing To Do ?
Or, could it be that nations prepare against aggressors from abroad ? They have foresight to consider that invasive actions could happen.
Some of those nations have no experience of invasions. But, they take precautions, guarding against the possibility.
In your world, revelarts, was NATO a thoroughly stupid thing to set up, and to be a part of ? Did you always consider it to be completely illogical ?
I'm wondering if, in your world, Hitler never existed ? Would you, as President, have invited him over for tea and frankfurters, and been surprised when he turned up with his Thoroughly Illogical Panzer units, and U-boats ? Would he have astounded you with his cry of 'Howdy Doody, Schweinhund, do hast been invaded, und by ze weg, ich kann do you a great deal on zese jackboots that my friend Heidi can make for a knockdown price, begorrah' .. ?
You will never have known invasion. Therefore, in your world, you can neither conceive of it, nor prepare for it. The Spanish Flu happened in a different world of 100 years ago. The 2nd World War never impinged on your own cozy world, Revelarts. So, no lessons to be learned, there, then.
You see only what you want to see.
So That's All OK, then.

OK , Drummond I really didn't want to get into a back and forth over the issue. but you called me out sooo.

Yes, I did read all your post. and i've taken note of the facts you presented.
However at this point I don't see those factors as as overriding concerns over the pass 3-4 months. Or the basic numbers on hand at this point.
the past 3 - 4 months of real actions by the virus and reactions of the medical community and the world has given us some real data to work with.
And based on what we see RIGHT NOW, I don't see any reason why we should lock-down most, if any nations.

What you seem to be emphasizing is the fact of what MIGHT happen.
OK sure, it Might, but as you said, I hope you're wrong.
And at this point no ones pointed toward any hard evidence of HUGE spikes in deaths or even overrun health systems after tentatively or completely lifting lockdowns.
Or after never having lockdowns.
And the death rate still seems to be a bit higher or the same level as the flu... which we've lived with our whole lives... without draconian measures BTW.

It's my considered opinion based on all the facts at hand that ... at this point... that we should not act on our worse fears. The predictions thankfully were extreme.
And If things continue in this vein (If not for the very real deaths) we could almost look at it like most conservative view the climate change hype. Claims that the seas will swallow up Great Britain and Florida, And drought, floods, fires, monster hurricanes, extinction and DEATH will take us all.. and the children! The gov't experts have spoken and given recommendations like closing most biz, oil and coal plants, and stop having children . Should the people just OBEY? becasue it MIGHT happen! Shouldn't we prepare!?! If we don't do what the experts say we will all die.. in 5.. 10 ..20 years.. how dare you?!

Sorry. with covid1984 and Climate change there's other info on the table that indicates things are probably not as horrific as predicted
AND that the solutions proposed may not be the best or the ONLY remedies.
However, Covid 1984 is obviously not a hard comparison to the much more overblown 'climate change' hype.
And, as you mentioned, there's a very REAL likelihood of Covid1984 mutations/change etc. HOWever it's not very likely to mutate into a strain that 5, 10, 20, 50 times more virulent. why should we assume the worse? The Flu mutates every year but the range of mutation is NOT extreme. We have 100+ years of hard evidence of that fact.
And looking at the recommended medical protocol we also can predict the dire situation if the world economies are shutdown indefinitely.
It doesn't take an economic or medical degree to predict that. World wide economic depression. We've had those before too.
And it's a SURE thing if lock-downs continue indefinitely.

But i'm curious Drummond, I'm not sure if you've mentioned your view here, but based on your high concerns of mass death and your faith in the lockdown protocols, I'd assume that you want the lockdowns to be indefinite. At the least, lasting longer than the one month+ many have held so far... to protect people.

So Drummond how much longer do you recommend the world should stay home?
1 more month, 2 more, the rest of the year? Until the gov't's gives us permission?
And how are people supposed to be housed, eat etc without working for those periods?

And what's the level of risk of death that's acceptable in your view before lockdowns should be lifted .1%,.05%, .01%, Zero?
And if that's the case should we do the same to deal with the regular Flu as well?
What about banning certain foods, we know diet is a MAJOR factor in most deaths in the west. shouldn't the gov't Force us to eat better to save lives?
How many people are you willing to let die?
I'm not making joke here. laws for banning various foods have been proposed and made law ...by the left. In an attempt o save us all.
the real question is are we all wards of the State or are we genuinely sovereign human beings. With some real level of freedom of choice and volitional control over the amount of risk we're willing to take in living in this wonderful and dangerous world.

I for one am not willing to hide in my house afraid of a virus that 99.X% of people survive.
And i don't believe the U.S. gov't has the right to confine me to my home over it.
They are given authority "by the people" in this country. And we never granted that particular authority to them.
The gov't is not our King, our boss, our father, our mother or babysitters.
We elect them to MANAGE certain items not to RULE.

DOH.. OK ... sorry you got me ranting...
Anyway.
I think we disagree Drummond and i suspect we're both happy that the other is not the President or Prime Minister.
I hope you stay well

[Drummond]

OK , Drummond I really didn't want to get into a back and forth over the issue. but you called me out sooo.

Yes, I did read all your post. and i've taken note of the facts you presented.
However at this point I don't see those factors as as overriding concerns over the pass 3-4 months. Or the basic numbers on hand at this point.
the past 3 - 4 months of real actions by the virus and reactions of the medical community and the world has given us some real data to work with.
And based on what we see RIGHT NOW, I don't see any reason why we should lock-down most, if any nations.

What you seem to be emphasizing is the fact of what MIGHT happen.
OK sure, it Might, but as you said, I hope you're wrong.
And at this point no ones pointed toward any hard evidence of HUGE spikes in deaths or even overrun health systems after tentatively or completely lifting lockdowns.
Or after never having lockdowns.
And the death rate still seems to be a bit higher or the same level as the flu... which we've lived with our whole lives... without draconian measures BTW.

It's my considered opinion based on all the facts at hand that ... at this point... that we should not act on our worse fears. The predictions thankfully were extreme.
And If things continue in this vein (If not for the very real deaths) we could almost look at it like most conservative view the climate change hype. Claims that the seas will swallow up Great Britain and Florida, And drought, floods, fires, monster hurricanes, extinction and DEATH will take us all.. and the children! The gov't experts have spoken and given recommendations like closing most biz, oil and coal plants, and stop having children . Should the people just OBEY? becasue it MIGHT happen! Shouldn't we prepare!?! If we don't do what the experts say we will all die.. in 5.. 10 ..20 years.. how dare you?!

Sorry. with covid1984 and Climate change there's other info on the table that indicates things are probably not as horrific as predicted
AND that the solutions proposed may not be the best or the ONLY remedies.
However, Covid 1984 is obviously not a hard comparison to the much more overblown 'climate change' hype.
And, as you mentioned, there's a very REAL likelihood of Covid1984 mutations/change etc. HOWever it's not very likely to mutate into a strain that 5, 10, 20, 50 times more virulent. why should we assume the worse? The Flu mutates every year but the range of mutation is NOT extreme. We have 100+ years of hard evidence of that fact.
And looking at the recommended medical protocol we also can predict the dire situation if the world economies are shutdown indefinitely.
It doesn't take an economic or medical degree to predict that. World wide economic depression. We've had those before too.
And it's a SURE thing if lock-downs continue indefinitely.

But i'm curious Drummond, I'm not sure if you've mentioned your view here, but based on your high concerns of mass death and your faith in the lockdown protocols, I'd assume that you want the lockdowns to be indefinite. At the least, lasting longer than the one month+ many have held so far... to protect people.

So Drummond how much longer do you recommend the world should stay home?
1 more month, 2 more, the rest of the year? Until the gov't's gives us permission?
And how are people supposed to be housed, eat etc without working for those periods?

And what's the level of risk of death that's acceptable in your view before lockdowns should be lifted .1%,.05%, .01%, Zero?
And if that's the case should we do the same to deal with the regular Flu as well?
What about banning certain foods, we know diet is a MAJOR factor in most deaths in the west. shouldn't the gov't Force us to eat better to save lives?
How many people are you willing to let die?
I'm not making joke here. laws for banning various foods have been proposed and made law ...by the left. In an attempt o save us all.
the real question is are we all wards of the State or are we genuinely sovereign human beings. With some real level of freedom of choice and volitional control over the amount of risk we're willing to take in living in this wonderful and dangerous world.

I for one am not willing to hide in my house afraid of a virus that 99.X% of people survive.
And i don't believe the U.S. gov't has the right to confine me to my home over it.
They are given authority "by the people" in this country. And we never granted that particular authority to them.
The gov't is not our King, our boss, our father, our mother or babysitters.
We elect them to MANAGE certain items not to RULE.

DOH.. OK ... sorry you got me ranting...
Anyway.
I think we disagree Drummond and i suspect we're both happy that the other is not the President or Prime Minister.
I hope you stay well

I don't think I need add much at all. You're doing such a good job of making my case for me.

All you've done in this last post is to confirm what I've said.

You are not minded to learn from history .. so, are we doomed to repeat it ? Have we really learned so little from a century ago ?

You HOPE that things don't get worse. What will you do to help ensure they don't ?

NOTHING AT ALL.

For your information, but of course, I don't want to see lockdowns be indefinite. We'd have to say goodbye to modern societies altogether in that scenario .. which would create its own suffering and death. But, to work to lift restrictions, with death tolls still increasing by the many hundreds each DAY, is madness. It's asking for trouble.

Germany tried lifting restrictions. The infection rate there promptly shot up. The same in Japan. Spain's now followed suit, and we'll need 7-10 days to see if Spain suffers the same fate (I think it extremely likely).

But, hey ... never mind. Doesn't matter to you, does it ? Countries keep proving that lifting restrictions only helps Covid-19 out ... you'll take no notice. You'll do what you want to do, regardless of what those examples will teach you. That, Revelarts, is the real truth. What you don't want to know .. you won't.

The question is ... how many who do what you do, will end up FORCING YOUR FATE, ON US ALL.

I hope I stay well, too.

I hope I'll be able to choose to.

What odds do you give me that I'll have that choice ?

P.S ....

Oh, and this 'Covid 1984' nonsense of yours, that you're still persisting with. Is it your way of confirming that you're so set on only seeing your own reality, that you absolutely EVEN refuse to acknowledge what YEAR it is ??

Please tell me that I won't have a second wave of a pandemic foisted on me by madmen.

Prove that Covid existed in 1984. DO IT. Otherwise, STOP THE NONSENSE.

[Black Diamond]

I don't think I need add much at all. You're doing such a good job of making my case for me.

All you've done in this last post is to confirm what I've said.

You are not minded to learn from history .. so, are we doomed to repeat it ? Have we really learned so little from a century ago ?

You HOPE that things don't get worse. What will you do to help ensure they don't ?

NOTHING AT ALL.

For your information, but of course, I don't want to see lockdowns be indefinite. We'd have to say goodbye to modern societies altogether in that scenario .. which would create its own suffering and death. But, to work to lift restrictions, with death tolls still increasing by the many hundreds each DAY, is madness. It's asking for trouble.

Germany tried lifting restrictions. The infection rate there promptly shot up. The same in Japan. Spain's now followed suit, and we'll need 7-10 days to see if Spain suffers the same fate (I think it extremely likely).

But, hey ... never mind. Doesn't matter to you, does it ? Countries keep proving that lifting restrictions only helps Covid-19 out ... you'll take no notice. You'll do what you want to do, regardless of what those examples will teach you. That, Revelarts, is the real truth. What you don't want to know .. you won't.

The question is ... how many who do what you do, will end up FORCING YOUR FATE, ON US ALL.

I hope I stay well, too.

I hope I'll be able to choose to.

What odds do you give me that I'll have that choice ?

P.S ....

Oh, and this 'Covid 1984' nonsense of yours, that you're still persisting with. Is it your way of confirming that you're so set on only seeing your own reality, that you absolutely EVEN refuse to acknowledge what YEAR it is ??

Please tell me that I won't have a second wave of a pandemic foisted on me by madmen.

Prove that Covid existed in 1984. DO IT. Otherwise, STOP THE NONSENSE.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four

[Evmetro]

Drummond, something about your beliefs about covid 1984 is not adding up. Have a look at what I asked you in post 44:


Are you thinking that lockdowns are meant to actually reduce the eventual number of deaths, or are you thinking that the lockdowns are meant to smooth spikes that might overwhelm some hospitals on the way to an inevitable death count that happens either way?

You replied in post 45 that you believe both to be true. Obviously, you can't really have it both ways, but I am curious. If you believe the number of eventual number of deaths is the same regardless of if there are lockdowns or not, why have lockdowns at all when hospitals are not overwhelmed with a spike? Also, how can you believe that the number of eventual deaths will be the same, regardless of if there are lock downs or not, but also believe that there will be fewer deaths if there are lockdowns?

[Drummond]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four

What about it ?

I'm well aware of Orwell's book 'Nineteen Eighty=Four' (indeed, his title had the year referred to in words and not figures, didn't it ?).

But what does this have to do with a virus in the world in 2020 ??

Orwell doesn't address 2020 (I don't think?) in in his book.

Orwell's book concentrated on a power-mad regime that distorted or rewrote history according to its whim.

AH. GOT IT.

I think I understand.

Are you saying that the Spanish flu never existed, that I'm rewriting history, to try and bolster my case ?

Well, sorry. I'm not. The history I've been discussing, happened. And we do need to learn from it.

Unfortunately, Revelarts is too locked into what he wants to believe, to accept anything that may counter it. Indeed, like any good Leftie, he insists upon only seeing existence in terms he's preferred. He'll cherrypick what may support him. He'll completely reject anything not preferred.

When I next post directly to him, I'm going to try and get him to admit that it's really 2020. I don't know if I can do it, but, I'll try.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Wish me luck with my endeavour !!!

[Drummond]

This is interesting to me, since I have never encountered anybody who thought that the eventual number of deaths was inevitable regardless of lockdowns, but also that the number of deaths would be reduced because of lockdowns.

How bizarre: neither have I. What are you talking about ??

The eventual number of deaths is not inevitable .. indeed, we can do a lot to save life. In the absence of a vaccine, our chief weapon IS that of lockdowns.

Where have I said otherwise ? Evmetro, you're good at getting messages from text that were never intended, aren't you ?

Allow me to try out a bit of logic with you.

Imagine, if you will, that I'm a 70 year old in lockdown. I'm getting no visitors who can breathe virus all over me. I'm not venturing out, risking encounters where the same can happen.

So tell me. If I persist in being in lockdown, do I save my life ? If I venture out into a pandemic-ridden world, where the people may carry infection and pass it on to me, do I throw my life away ?

I'm not guaranteed to die, true. But the likelihood of it is a lot greater, if I breach that lockdown of mine.

Since my death from Covid-19 would not be inevitable, that's the first part of your contention disproved. Since I save my life by avoiding infection by keeping rigidly to a lockdown, that's the second part of your contention disproved when linked to the first part, as you've tried to do.

Now, I invite you to NOT copy Revelarts, and instead absorb the logic of what I'm telling you. Will you do that ?

Here's hoping.

[Drummond]

I don't think I need add much at all. You're doing such a good job of making my case for me.

All you've done in this last post is to confirm what I've said.

You are not minded to learn from history .. so, are we doomed to repeat it ? Have we really learned so little from a century ago ?

You HOPE that things don't get worse. What will you do to help ensure they don't ?

NOTHING AT ALL.

For your information, but of course, I don't want to see lockdowns be indefinite. We'd have to say goodbye to modern societies altogether in that scenario .. which would create its own suffering and death. But, to work to lift restrictions, with death tolls still increasing by the many hundreds each DAY, is madness. It's asking for trouble.

Germany tried lifting restrictions. The infection rate there promptly shot up. The same in Japan. Spain's now followed suit, and we'll need 7-10 days to see if Spain suffers the same fate (I think it extremely likely).

But, hey ... never mind. Doesn't matter to you, does it ? Countries keep proving that lifting restrictions only helps Covid-19 out ... you'll take no notice. You'll do what you want to do, regardless of what those examples will teach you. That, Revelarts, is the real truth. What you don't want to know .. you won't.

The question is ... how many who do what you do, will end up FORCING YOUR FATE, ON US ALL.

I hope I stay well, too.

I hope I'll be able to choose to.

What odds do you give me that I'll have that choice ?

P.S ....

Oh, and this 'Covid 1984' nonsense of yours, that you're still persisting with. Is it your way of confirming that you're so set on only seeing your own reality, that you absolutely EVEN refuse to acknowledge what YEAR it is ??

Please tell me that I won't have a second wave of a pandemic foisted on me by madmen.

Prove that Covid existed in 1984. DO IT. Otherwise, STOP THE NONSENSE.

Revelarts, this is for you.

I've asked you to prove to me that Covid existed in 1984. You've failed to.

All well and good.

It's been suggested (or, I think it has !) that your reference refers to a certain book written by Orwell.

Well .. that's bizarre.

Nineteen Eighty-Four was about a twisted world, in which those in charge were power-freaks, who changed everyone's perception of history as they saw fit .. indeed, they actively rewrote it whenever they chose to. It was a book about tyranny and total control. You believed what authority told you without question, not because it was true, but because they wanted you to.

What it was not about, was a virus that the world suffers in 2020. It wasn't even about a virus sweeping the world in 1984.

I hope you understand that.

I hope you also understand that news of the virus's existence, and its ability to harm, isn't fictional.

THIS, REVELARTS, IS NOT ANYTHING TO DO WITH A CONSPIRACY THEORY. RATHER, IT'S ABOUT REALITY.

So, then. This all leaves me with one task. I ask that you meet it. Crazily, I have to ask you this:

PLEASE ADMIT THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY LIVING IN THE YEAR 2020 !!!

[jimnyc]

Fwiw....

covid has been around a long long time, short for corona viruses. This one is Covid-19. Corona viruses themselves have been around for centuries. Sars and Mers were corona viruses, for example.

And 1984 is a reference to what Rev thinks a part may be happening today, or similarities. So he's adding that to Covid. He's not saying it was from 1984. I believe it's a play on for effect.

[Drummond]

Fwiw....

covid has been around a long long time, short for corona viruses. This one is Covid-19. Corona viruses themselves have been around for centuries. Sars and Mers were corona viruses, for example.

And 1984 is a reference to what Rev thinks a part may be happening today, or similarities. So he's adding that to Covid. He's not saying it was from 1984. I believe it's a play on for effect.

So, he's just chasing the latest of his conspiracy theories ??

Either he IS referring to one existing from 1984, and somehow thinks it's linked to Covid-19, or, he's chasing a mishmash of associations of his own invention.

I suggest that none of this is at all helpful when considering a real, deadly world emergency, which the US may make even worse !!!

[Drummond]

Revelarts ... enjoy ! Proof that people who think like you exist on my side of the Pond.

Unfortunately, though, all they seem good for is causing distress.

But enough from me. See this for yourself:

https://metro.co.uk/2020/05/02/anger-graffiti-no-coronavirus-12644221/?ito=article.mweb.share.top.link&fbclid=IwAR1eyW2_ght-tGdFXzWAOMGhnXA4mOBYn_myCYDMzUHdrWRoiGagHpKWmAg


‘Insensitive’ graffiti which has appeared in Devon with slogans denying the existence of coronavirus has caused anger. The phrases ‘Covid = lies’ and ‘Hospitals are empty’ have appeared in Exeter’s Quayside area, causing upset among residents whose families are working on the frontline during the pandemic.

The pictures were taken by Alphington resident Aled Davies, who spotted at least 10 new graffiti vandalism spots all on the same Covid-denial theme while taking his daily exercise yesterday. Retired operations manager Mr Davies said: ‘It’s insensitive, especially to people like myself who are an NHS family – my wife works at the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, my daughter is a district nurse and even my granddaughter, who is only 17, is working at a care home where there is Covid-19.’

Mr Davies says he walks along the quayside daily and the vandals struck some time between Thursday and Friday. He said: ‘All three of the historic millstones have been graffiti’d. There’s lots on the pavement walkways and some on the walls – at least 10 different places altogether. ‘I have a huge bugbear about graffiti but this has really got my back up.’

Mr Davies said Rougemont Castle is a ‘national treasure’ and the graffiti there is ruining the park: ‘I was the vice-chair of an Exeter tidy group and it makes me angry that we have to waste so much money cleaning it up. ‘But this is on a whole different level. I thought, ‘Hang on a minute – are people really dropping down to this level?’ with Covid-19. It’s just awful.’ Another slogan says ‘Covid = 1984’ in reference to George Orwell’s dystopian novel in which the country is ruled by an all-powerful party in a nightmare future where the public does not know the truth. Conspiracy theorists who include climate science deniers, anti-5G protesters and Covid-19 deniers are spreading online disinformation to downplay the seriousness of the pandemic and push to end social distancing, according to new analysis.


12564

12565

You must feel proud, Revelarts. People such as you are causing distress to our citizens, and are committing vandalism to push their conspiracy theory madness.

[jimnyc]

So, he's just chasing the latest of his conspiracy theories ??

Either he IS referring to one existing from 1984, and somehow thinks it's linked to Covid-19, or, he's chasing a mishmash of associations of his own invention.

I suggest that none of this is at all helpful when considering a real, deadly world emergency, which the US may make even worse !!!

I believe it's about censorship and tyranny and such discussed in 1984 and now playing out in many aspects. So folks are pointing out similarities. But in no way about a connection to the actual illness and the date. A prediction of tyranny and censorship if you will, so mix together the mish mash as you put it. Not really his own invention, it's all over out there already.

Fwiw, there IS a level of censorship happening on ALL the social media outlets in discussing this and going against what WHO claims right now, which we all know is BS. Then folks think some of the orders are going too far. For example, no work and all the closings folks are taking in some areas, but then the added bonuses that we discussed, as in simply leaving your house, walking your dog, or walking 40 feet across the road to the park with your 5 year old and getting arrested or fined. Many rightfully see some of these actions as too far, abuses, tyranny. One can debate the shut downs, and maybe even entering certain places, but walking a dog? A park across your street? Too much.

So hence the covid1984 from him. Conspiracy theory? To an extent talking of movies and making them for real, but to state similarities does work in my opinion, especially in the 2 I just pointed out. And those 2 alone are more than enough to piss off more than half of the nation.

[jimnyc]

You must feel proud, Revelarts. People such as you are causing distress to our citizens, and are committing vandalism to push their conspiracy theory madness.

The movie, talk of it and how many people involved and such is a HUGE amount. Hardly anything to even remotely blame on Rev. He comes here speaking and standing up for what he believes in and things he reads about and watches just like the rest of us. But it's not like he's somehow responsible for graffiti, for something traveling, for another's distress. He didn't vandalize anything nor in any fashion encouraged something like that.

That movie was worldwide and a long long time ago now. Anytime a government seems to go too far with rights, people will often refer back to the various abuses pointed out and predicted. Happens in more than the USA.

But to vilify Rev, to somehow push that on him in ANY way, is wrong IMO. Kinda like 9/11 conspiracies that were and still are around. Far from just Americans that talk about such things. And people such as him as you state... I wouldn't equate him to others without knowing one another. From what little I know, which was for a long time now, I would be willing to bet that Rev would never vandalize at all. Protest, YES, break laws like that? No way.

[Evmetro]

How bizarre: neither have I. What are you talking about ??

The eventual number of deaths is not inevitable .. indeed, we can do a lot to save life. In the absence of a vaccine, our chief weapon IS that of lockdowns.

Where have I said otherwise ? Evmetro, you're good at getting messages from text that were never intended, aren't you ?

Allow me to try out a bit of logic with you.

Imagine, if you will, that I'm a 70 year old in lockdown. I'm getting no visitors who can breathe virus all over me. I'm not venturing out, risking encounters where the same can happen.

So tell me. If I persist in being in lockdown, do I save my life ? If I venture out into a pandemic-ridden world, where the people may carry infection and pass it on to me, do I throw my life away ?

I'm not guaranteed to die, true. But the likelihood of it is a lot greater, if I breach that lockdown of mine.

Since my death from Covid-19 would not be inevitable, that's the first part of your contention disproved. Since I save my life by avoiding infection by keeping rigidly to a lockdown, that's the second part of your contention disproved when linked to the first part, as you've tried to do.

Now, I invite you to NOT copy Revelarts, and instead absorb the logic of what I'm telling you. Will you do that ?

Here's hoping.

Here is what I asked you. It was simply a question to help me understand your posts. Just a question.


Are you thinking that lockdowns are meant to actually reduce the eventual number of deaths, or are you thinking that the lockdowns are meant to smooth spikes that might overwhelm some hospitals on the way to an inevitable death count that happens either way?

You replied in post 45 that you believe both to be true. Obviously, you can't really have it both ways, but I am curious. If you believe the number of eventual number of deaths is the same regardless of if there are lockdowns or not, why have lockdowns at all when hospitals are not overwhelmed with a spike? Also, how can you believe that the number of eventual deaths will be the same, regardless of if there are lock downs or not, but also believe that there will be fewer deaths if there are lockdowns?

[Drummond]

I believe it's about censorship and tyranny and such discussed in 1984 and now playing out in many aspects. So folks are pointing out similarities.

Actually, no. They're letting their imaginations get the better of them.

WHAT censorship, WHAT tyranny ? Authorities are aware of Covid-19. They act to protect the general public from its effects (at least, on my side of the Pond, they do !). For this, they must be met with suspicion, conspiracy theories, activism leading to vandalism and more ?


But in no way about a connection to the actual illness and the date. A prediction of tyranny and censorship if you will, so mix together the mish mash as you put it.

Not a prediction, but an invention.


Not really his own invention, it's all over out there already.

I think I take your point. Revelarts being misled by a fringe group of nutters ?

Yes, it is out there already. We have the graffiti to prove it, and the upset it's caused to a decent community.


Fwiw, there IS a level of censorship happening on ALL the social media outlets in discussing this and going against what WHO claims right now, which we all know is BS.

Sure it's not just propagandising ? People jockeying to get propagandist advantage ?


Then folks think some of the orders are going too far. For example, no work and all the closings folks are taking in some areas, but then the added bonuses that we discussed, as in simply leaving your house, walking your dog, or walking 40 feet across the road to the park with your 5 year old and getting arrested or fined. Many rightfully see some of these actions as too far, abuses, tyranny. One can debate the shut downs, and maybe even entering certain places, but walking a dog? A park across your street? Too much.

I can't speak for America, but in the UK, dog-walking is permitted !! As for the rest, the less close contact there is, physically, the less of a chance the virus has to spread. Those who came up with rules, then applied them, intended to save lives and keep people healthy. Their thanks ? Ungrateful individuals attack them for it.

Can you really not see how disgusting that is ?


So hence the covid1984 from him. Conspiracy theory? To an extent talking of movies and making them for real, but to state similarities does work in my opinion, especially in the 2 I just pointed out. And those 2 alone are more than enough to piss off more than half of the nation.

But this comes out of peoples' imaginations. People kicking out at authority, just because it dares to BE authority ... that's the truth of it.

It all comes across to me as rather juvenile .. the example of a kid who's been restrained for his own good, but who now wants to rush across a very busy street, and play with traffic he's oblivious to, OUT OF WILFUL CHOICE, in the chosen belief that reaching the other side outweighs all the dangers in the way.

But, perhaps the parent really did know better ?

No ?

[Evmetro]

Revelarts, the use of the term "covid 1984" made sense to me immediately when I read it, and I chuckled when I read it. Because of the huge threat to my constitutional rights with these lockdowns, the meaning of covid 1984 was immediately self evident. I have not seen ANYTHING in your posts that suggest that you think or are implying that this is the year 1984. I'll probably hijack the covid 1984 rhetoric that you have used here for my own recreational use.

[jimnyc]

Actually, no. They're letting their imaginations get the better of them.

WHAT censorship, WHAT tyranny ? Authorities are aware of Covid-19. They act to protect the general public from its effects (at least, on my side of the Pond, they do !). For this, they must be met with suspicion, conspiracy theories, activism leading to vandalism and more ?

Yes. I already pointed it out and it's indisputable fact. If folks write one thing or post an article, and it's repeatedly deleted, or banned, THAT is censorship. Worse if members are banned for daring to post information only, contrary to what another believes. It's happening on Youtube, Facebook, Twitter.... and more. Censorship to the T.

Same with tyranny. Not as in war time stuff, but look at the definition and it also fits to the T with MUCH of what some governors are pulling here in the USA.

"oppressive power exerted by the government" - IMO, definitely seeing some of that to an extent in a few states.

"a rigorous condition imposed by some outside agency or force" - this one much more so even. And the conditions that many are imposing go against our laws and our constitution. It's that simple. For here in the USA, some of the actions are actions of tyranny. Maybe elsewhere such actions by social media is normal or allowable. Much more so in China. Here, we all have the freedom of speech. And we have laws and we have due process. When they just make up orders, with no basis in law or precedent, that's a form of tyranny.

You still see authority as more important than rights, even such rights as freedom of speech. And more than free to disagree, but here in America freedom of speech is one of our most important principles that should and and WILL NOT be taken away.

Suspicion by some I see. And even some connections would be a conspiracy theory. But any so called activism leading to any laws being broken - simply not something that can be placed on Rev. MOST in fact out there will often protest and/or have their theories heard whether found believable or not, but only a select few a-holes out there go further into unlawful territory. That ain't Rev.

[jimnyc]

Revelarts, the use of the term "covid 1984" made sense to me immediately when I read it, and I chuckled when I read it. Because of the huge threat to my constitutional rights with these lockdowns, the meaning of covid 1984 was immediately self evident. I have not seen ANYTHING in your posts that suggest that you think or are implying that this is the year 1984. I'll probably hijack the covid 1984 rhetoric that you have used here for my own recreational use.

I saw the connection too, both between the movie, and how because so due to censorship taking place and some abusive orders out there. I have no idea how things went south from there or off track from there. Seemed to me no more than a movie connection of sorts. Like me talking about anything in politics and then how it reminds me of such and such a movie. Or the plot of such a movie.

But the coronas in general were around long before 1984 and here now as we know.

Hell, I had someone mention a lysol bottle or another disinfect bottle, and it mentioned corona viruses and killing them. Because of that, folks thought it meant somehow it was around previously and/or known about or different stories. Nope, just a generic term is all. Hell, our sun is a corona.

[Drummond]

The movie, talk of it and how many people involved and such is a HUGE amount. Hardly anything to even remotely blame on Rev. He comes here speaking and standing up for what he believes in and things he reads about and watches just like the rest of us. But it's not like he's somehow responsible for graffiti, for something traveling, for another's distress. He didn't vandalize anything nor in any fashion encouraged something like that.

Not personally he didn't, no. But the British example is one of where people who think like him turn to criminality to make their 'point'. It's destructive, both in terms of damage done to property, along with the reinvention of reality from 'people' who'd prefer that citizens turned against those who were protecting them from harm.


That movie was worldwide and a long long time ago now.

... and, irrelevant to today's reality.

Covid-19 is not an invention. It exists. It does harm. Sometimes, it kills. Authroities act to protect the public from that harm. So, let's treat them with the utmost suspicion for it, shall we, and bite the hand that's protecting us ?

Yeah. Why not. What price decency and gratitude, eh ?


Anytime a government seems to go too far with rights, people will often refer back to the various abuses pointed out and predicted. Happens in more than the USA.

Except possibly in Wuhan, I don't think it's happened over Covid-19. All that's happened on your side of the Pond is evidence of lack of gratitude for well-meaning protective actions.


But to vilify Rev, to somehow push that on him in ANY way, is wrong IMO.

Really ? He'd bite the hand that protects him. He'd encourage others to do the same. For what, his love of conspiracy theories ??


Kinda like 9/11 conspiracies that were and still are around.

Did Revelarts buy into any, propagate any ?


From what little I know, which was for a long time now, I would be willing to bet that Rev would never vandalize at all. Protest, YES, break laws like that? No way.

Perhaps he just prefers to vandalise others' beliefs in protective, well-meaning authorities. 'Perhaps' he'd argue in favour of conditions that encourage a pathogen to do its worst ? Perhaps success in all of that would translate, one day, into a second wave of the pandemic, killing HOW any additional people ?

Do you see no vandalism in any of that ?

Give me a choice between a stone wall with writing on it, and a global pandemic killing more thousands of people. Guess which act of vandalism I'd prefer to see !!

[Evmetro]

Yes. I already pointed it out and it's indisputable fact. If folks write one thing or post an article, and it's repeatedly deleted, or banned, THAT is censorship. Worse if members are banned for daring to post information only, contrary to what another believes. It's happening on Youtube, Facebook, Twitter.... and more. Censorship to the T.

Same with tyranny. Not as in war time stuff, but look at the definition and it also fits to the T with MUCH of what some governors are pulling here in the USA.

"oppressive power exerted by the government" - IMO, definitely seeing some of that to an extent in a few states.

"a rigorous condition imposed by some outside agency or force" - this one much more so even. And the conditions that many are imposing go against our laws and our constitution. It's that simple. For here in the USA, some of the actions are actions of tyranny. Maybe elsewhere such actions by social media is normal or allowable. Much more so in China. Here, we all have the freedom of speech. And we have laws and we have due process. When they just make up orders, with no basis in law or precedent, that's a form of tyranny.

You still see authority as more important than rights, even such rights as freedom of speech. And more than free to disagree, but here in America freedom of speech is one of our most important principles that should and and WILL NOT be taken away.

Suspicion by some I see. And even some connections would be a conspiracy theory. But any so called activism leading to any laws being broken - simply not something that can be placed on Rev. MOST in fact out there will often protest and/or have their theories heard whether found believable or not, but only a select few a-holes out there go further into unlawful territory. That ain't Rev.
Very well written.

I have encountered others who are oblivious to the censorship and tyranny that we are seeing. I suspect many are oblivious because the news is covered by media sources that are outside their media intake. News and propaganda comes from a very broad spectrum of bias, but many only consume what they like to hear. There may also be some differences in freedom valuee in USA vs UK, but I think the same news and propaganda is available to each.

[Drummond]

Revelarts, the use of the term "covid 1984" made sense to me immediately when I read it, and I chuckled when I read it. Because of the huge threat to my constitutional rights with these lockdowns, the meaning of covid 1984 was immediately self evident. I have not seen ANYTHING in your posts that suggest that you think or are implying that this is the year 1984. I'll probably hijack the covid 1984 rhetoric that you have used here for my own recreational use.

May I suggest that your recreational use of the 'Covid 1984' legend does not extend to acts of vandalism against property, the likes of which we've seen in England ?

Face the truth. The 'sense' you saw in the term 'covid 1984' sprang purely from your imagination. The fictional world of Orwell's 1984 does not exist today. Any perception that it may is an act of invention, and worse, one meant to undermine the good intentions of those seeking to protect us from harm.

As for your Constitution ... I must ask you why its adherence has to translate into acts which threaten the world with a second pandemic.

I'd also ask you:

1. Refer me to any reference at all which the Constitution makes to pandemics. Where does it make provision for them ? Does it offer advice or issue any decree about how to meet the reality of one ?

2. Did those who wrote your Constitution, mean the document to act as a blueprint for the throwing away of life in the face of one ?

3. Does your Constitution encourage global pandemics ? AT ALL ?

As I've argued before, reality is there, it is the ultimate arbiter of fate, and there's nothing written into the physical laws of the Universe that is subservient to your Constitution. If you think otherwise, show me (a) that Covid-19 will defer to it, will respect it, and (b) that faith in the Constitution will protect life in the face of it.

[Drummond]

Very well written.

I have encountered others who are oblivious to the censorship and tyranny that we are seeing. I suspect many are oblivious because the news is covered by media sources that are outside their media intake. News and propaganda comes from a very broad spectrum of bias, but many only consume what they like to hear. There may also be some differences in freedom valuee in USA vs UK, but I think the same news and propaganda is available to each.

If you want to stick with this rhetoric, I'll ask you to back it up.

You allege 'censorship and tyranny'. PROVE IT. I want clear proof from you of tyranny, clear proof of censorship in the service of that tyranny.

Let's see if you can translate what you allege - and what you imagine - into proof that it's all real.

Go to it. Prove your case.

[Evmetro]

May I suggest that your recreational use of the 'Covid 1984' legend does not extend to acts of vandalism against property, the likes of which we've seen in England ?

Face the truth. The 'sense' you saw in the term 'covid 1984' sprang purely from your imagination. The fictional world of Orwell's 1984 does not exist today. Any perception that it may is an act of invention, and worse, one meant to undermine the good intentions of those seeking to protect us from harm.

As for your Constitution ... I must ask you why its adherence has to translate into acts which threaten the world with a second pandemic.

I'd also ask you:

1. Refer me to any reference at all which the Constitution makes to pandemics. Where does it make provision for them ? Does it offer advice or issue any decree about how to meet the reality of one ?

2. Did those who wrote your Constitution, mean the document to act as a blueprint for the throwing away of life in the face of one ?

3. Does your Constitution encourage global pandemics ? AT ALL ?

As I've argued before, reality is there, it is the ultimate arbiter of fate, and there's nothing written into the physical laws of the Universe that is subservient to your Constitution. If you think otherwise, show me (a) that Covid-19 will defer to it, will respect it, and (b) that faith in the Constitution will protect life in the face of it.
I am quite confident that the book was indeed fiction. The comparison of the fiction book to the current political landscape is entertainment.

[jimnyc]

I hate to say this, but also a fact, one of which folks can lookup the word "vilify" to verify. It's long been a tactic of lefties to start vilifying their opponent. Our media and democrats are living proof of that, and did it non-stop as I pointed them out, and still do. Hence the deplorables, racists, xenophobes & all the other names applied to people they never met in their lives and all they know about them is they voted Trump, not a thing more.

And I've seen many do so on my old board and on this one. Where the poster gets vilified, or the writer, or the source, or anything other than facts and opinions.

But I just truly believe in this case it's not fitting of Rev. He simply is passionate. He has spoken of the movie in the past I believe. He's posted of what he thinks is the censorship and what he sees as abuses going too far - and simply changes the name of the virus as a reflection of that. Kinda like how Trump just did the Concast instead of Comcast, and MSDNC instead of MSNBC. Kinda his opinion, and their actions, and their ties and how they are lefties, made the connection between their names and either conning people or the democrat national committee.

I Posted MANY MANY articles and events of things getting deleted on ALL the social media outlets. Things being labeled as untrue, unproven or anything other than what the person posting it is saying themselves. This is censorship, and there has been tons of it, and tons more.

I posted many many many events of both governors and police taking actions too far. I posted various definitions of what tyranny means. Giving out orders that don't exist and one literally does not have the authority to bark out - and then people getting fined - or threatened with jail - for taking a short walk, walking their dog, playing with their child, purchasing seeds to grow their own food since they are broke and the list is endless. These ARE going too far in our country and is a form of tyranny, whether other countries see it that way or not. We are pretty knowledgeable about what our freedoms are and what powers our leaders have.

And again, I have posted these things happening over and over and over again. It's indisputable.

So if someone wants to claim it never happened from another countries perspective, so be it. But here in America - it's a FACT that things are being censored, and abuses happening.

And as for proving it, no need to, one can easily go down the current events and political sections and just sort them by what I posted myself, as I posted endless amounts of both. I tried to post any important aspect I saw from any POV to the best I could.

[Drummond]

Yes. I already pointed it out and it's indisputable fact. If folks write one thing or post an article, and it's repeatedly deleted, or banned, THAT is censorship.

I can actually think of an example, I must admit. David Icke ... an ex-BBC sports commentator. A long time ago, he became deranged. Calling himself 'The Godhead'. Alleging that the world was run by lizard-like creatures in disguise, some of their number including members of the Royal Family. He's argued that 5G may spread Covid-19 (in fact he may have originated that nonsense).

YES. He's been censored. He's banned from spreading his insane poison on Facebook and YouTube. Now .. are you arguing that none of his material should've been removed ?


Worse if members are banned for daring to post information only, contrary to what another believes. It's happening on Youtube, Facebook, Twitter.... and more. Censorship to the T.

Yes .. David Icke wouldn't hesitate to agree with you, Jim.


Same with tyranny. Not as in war time stuff, but look at the definition and it also fits to the T with MUCH of what some governors are pulling here in the USA.

I think that's a bit harsh. Georgia's Governor may be threatening thousands with needless death, but is he being tyrannical about it ?

Actually, on reflection, you're right !! He's invoking a tyranny of people having fresh reason to fear for their lives.

OK. Point taken.


"oppressive power exerted by the government" - IMO, definitely seeing some of that to an extent in a few states.

See above !


"a rigorous condition imposed by some outside agency or force" - this one much more so even.

To the UK, the US qualifies as an 'outside agency or force'. The rigorous condition it may manage to impose on us in months to come is, perhaps, a second wave of Covid-19.

Does it get any more 'rigorous' than that ? Well ... I suppose so. It might be bubonic plague, instead. Or maybe being nuked would be more 'rigorous' a method of meting out of death.

But for now, 'Covid-19' will do nicely.

Thanks very much.


And the conditions that many are imposing go against our laws and our constitution. It's that simple.

We in the UK don't have your Constitution. But we do have the benefit of American generosity. You'll fight for your Constitutional rights. These will overturn the 'tyranny' of those trying to keep you alive, whose efforts you fail to respect. In fighting them, you'll create conditions threatening a 'Wuhan on steroids'. American generosity will extend this to the wider world.

The wider world doesn't have your Constitution. However, we will be 'beneficiaries' of it, won't we ?

Thank you VERY much. Most kind.


For here in the USA, some of the actions are actions of tyranny. Maybe elsewhere such actions by social media is normal or allowable. Much more so in China. Here, we all have the freedom of speech. And we have laws and we have due process. When they just make up orders, with no basis in law or precedent, that's a form of tyranny.

So, for you, a 'State of Emergency', along with emergency powers to meet it ... America has no such thing ?

Is that the problem, that you've no concept of an emergency ? Do you not recognise a global pandemic as one ? Do you think it's not something to be tackled, or if need be, adapted to ?

Are you telling me that Boris Johnson's acts of protection can have no equivalent in America ? His efforts to protect us are a 'tyranny' .. ?


You still see authority as more important than rights, even such rights as freedom of speech.

Not quite fair. I say that with freedom, comes responsibility. In the UK, we employ it responsibly, according to social need. If we face an emergency requiring adaptation, well, then, we adapt !


And more than free to disagree, but here in America freedom of speech is one of our most important principles that should and and WILL NOT be taken away.

This comes close to being disingenuous. The issue is not one of silencing you. It is one of protecting you.

Adopting a 'freedom of speech' argument to fight those seeking only to safeguard life and limb, is disgracefully abusive of those whose only crime has been to mean you well.

Or do you really, seriously, not see that ?

Jim, there's a real world out there. Why not adapt to its reality ? And if you'd rather not, what weapons do you have to fight and overcome it ?

A vaccine, perhaps ? A cure ?

[Evmetro]

May I suggest that your recreational use of the 'Covid 1984' legend does not extend to acts of vandalism against property, the likes of which we've seen in England ?

Face the truth. The 'sense' you saw in the term 'covid 1984' sprang purely from your imagination. The fictional world of Orwell's 1984 does not exist today. Any perception that it may is an act of invention, and worse, one meant to undermine the good intentions of those seeking to protect us from harm.

As for your Constitution ... I must ask you why its adherence has to translate into acts which threaten the world with a second pandemic.

I'd also ask you:

1. Refer me to any reference at all which the Constitution makes to pandemics. Where does it make provision for them ? Does it offer advice or issue any decree about how to meet the reality of one ?

2. Did those who wrote your Constitution, mean the document to act as a blueprint for the throwing away of life in the face of one ?

3. Does your Constitution encourage global pandemics ? AT ALL ?

As I've argued before, reality is there, it is the ultimate arbiter of fate, and there's nothing written into the physical laws of the Universe that is subservient to your Constitution. If you think otherwise, show me (a) that Covid-19 will defer to it, will respect it, and (b) that faith in the Constitution will protect life in the face of it.

I do not have a one post reply available that would substitute the broader media and propaganda spectrum that is required for you to understand all of the information that you are missing. If you truly wish to understand what censorship and tyranny are occurring, you will need to temporarily step away from your beliefs, ideology, and resentment of me, in order to conduct an objective investigation into the notion that this really is occurring. In order to conduct an objective investigation into the truth, your goal needs to be finding the real truth, even if it isn't what you want or suspect it to be.

Start by typing relevant words into your search engine, such as "coronavirus censorship." When the results come up, don't just read results that back up your subjective beliefs, make sure to study results that are the opposite as well. I like to make attempts to prove my political opponents to be correct when I do my research.

Be aware that there is a very broad spectrum of news and propaganda available. It is unlikely that any of us will ever know the real truth about the political landscape, so the best we can do is to triangulate the "most likely" truth from this broad spectrum. Some of the greatest clues can be found by studying media sources that do not align with our beliefs. Study any and all sources, and do not dismiss any sources on the basis that you think they are dishonest or fake news. Remember that you can't trust ANY sources, and that they can ALL be used in your search for the truth.

[Drummond]

I am quite confident that the book was indeed fiction.

Not me. I'm 100% certain it's fiction.


The comparison of the fiction book to the current political landscape is entertainment.

It's a bit more than that.

I don't think that graffiti vandals in England did their damage from a motivation of wanting to entertain the village in question.

Those of you in the US who 'entertain' in that fashion, actually do it not to entertain, but to change thinking. Suddenly, acts of care are turned into a perception of deserving only resistance, on the basis of seeing them as something deserving only of villification.

Well, OK. Some might think that villification is entertainment.

Perhaps you have a point.

[jimnyc]

I can actually think of an example, I must admit. David Icke ... an ex-BBC sports commentator. A long time ago, he became deranged. Calling himself 'The Godhead'. Alleging that the world was run by lizard-like creatures in disguise, some of their number including members of the Royal Family. He's argued that 5G may spread Covid-19 (in fact he may have originated that nonsense).

YES. He's been censored. He's banned from spreading his insane poison on Facebook and YouTube. Now .. are you arguing that none of his material should've been removed ?

We have freedom of speech here in the USA. We have all kinds of idiotic information on youtube and then some. Including a shitload about 5g, and that's on all the media too. Why the hell should things be removed? ALL Americans have rights and due process.

Ask yourself a simple question in America - is it against the law and can you show me WHERE? If not, it's legal. Even conspiracy theories and things that are crazy to others. Is it illegal for someone to believe 5g is responsible for this, however retarded that is? By all means, if he works somewhere and does so on others time or prints things like that using the media or whatever - fire him. Fire him if he's a commentator. But you can't ban someone from their beliefs. And when that person goes home and hops on social media or starts talking to his family and friends, you can't stop that either. Not here in the USA. And yes, if you live in the USA, we would all agree and fight for that persons rights the same as anyone else.

Now, IF such a person encourages burning anything or anything illegal, then it should be removed and is likely or could be illegal.

I went onto next once accusing a governor of killing people or wanting to do so - when he has a responsibility to those people and to defend rights as well. Well, no need to rehash it. Ain't much different, or really different at all, than the folks on our MSM trying to put blood on Trump's hands from the get go, that he's responsible for 50,000+ deaths, over and over all kinds of different ways of blaming him. Doesn't matter if its in response to how he handled anything at all, or how he defends rights and liberties, gun rights & so much more. And the MSM is not only wrong in trying to blame him for every death that has taken place in America, that's irresponsible of them to blame him for deaths.

We ain't under martial law, and I can't imagine that either would go over well with the people who know they have rights.

[jimnyc]

Very well written.

I have encountered others who are oblivious to the censorship and tyranny that we are seeing. I suspect many are oblivious because the news is covered by media sources that are outside their media intake. News and propaganda comes from a very broad spectrum of bias, but many only consume what they like to hear. There may also be some differences in freedom valuee in USA vs UK, but I think the same news and propaganda is available to each.

Well, no other country on earth enjoys the freedoms that we do! So the small forms of tyranny we see and the types of censorship we are seeing - is something that many just shrug their shoulders at in other countries. Folks can't understand why we would fight for these things in the midst of something like this. And yeah, the leftist take on this, the fear level and the lack of telling a single thing positive out there - seems to be more of the norm on much media, considering so much of it is leftist!

[Drummond]

I do not have a one post reply available that would substitute the broader media and propaganda spectrum that is required for you to understand all of the information that you are missing. If you truly wish to understand what censorship and tyranny are occurring, you will need to temporarily step away from your beliefs, ideology, and resentment of me, in order to conduct an objective investigation into the notion that this really is occurring. In order to conduct an objective investigation into the truth, your goal needs to be finding the real truth, even if it isn't what you want or suspect it to be.

Very well, I'm taking up your challenge. Show me your 'truth', and your 'proof' of your claims of 'tyranny'.

Go on. Let's see you do it.


Start by typing relevant words into your search engine, such as "coronavirus censorship." When the results come up, don't just read results that back up your subjective beliefs, make sure to study results that are the opposite as well. I like to make attempts to prove my political opponents to be correct when I do my research.

No. Don't be lazy. You have your case to make ? Then, MAKE IT.


Be aware that there is a very broad spectrum of news and propaganda available. It is unlikely that any of us will ever know the real truth about the political landscape, so the best we can do is to triangulate the "most likely" truth from this broad spectrum.

Translation: error is very possible. This gets back to a previous debate. You need to be very sure of your ability to sift properly and get to the truth you seek. You could get it wrong. A piece of propaganda might be believed, and in the believing, might change your ability to perceive the real truth, when you're staring it in the face.


Some of the greatest clues can be found by studying media sources that do not align with our beliefs. Study any and all sources, and do not dismiss any sources on the basis that you think they are dishonest or fake news. Remember that you can't trust ANY sources, and that they can ALL be used in your search for the truth.

Nope.

You might take a lie to be truth. Eventually, the corrupting effect of the lie might cause you to disbelieve all truth that defies the lie.

No, Evmetro .... make your case. I'm issuing that challenge.

[revelarts]

Fwiw....
covid has been around a long long time, short for corona viruses. This one is Covid-19. Corona viruses themselves have been around for centuries. Sars and Mers were corona viruses, for example.
And 1984 is a reference to what Rev thinks a part may be happening today, or similarities. So he's adding that to Covid. He's not saying it was from 1984. I believe it's a play on for effect.


So, he's just chasing the latest of his conspiracy theories ??
Either he IS referring to one existing from 1984, and somehow thinks it's linked to Covid-19, or, he's chasing a mishmash of associations of his own invention.
I suggest that none of this is at all helpful when considering a real, deadly world emergency, which the US may make even worse !!!



Jimmy pretty well summed it up Drummond.
and sadly Covid19 is very real.
But i've added '84' because of the "1984"(book) like measures taken and proposed to supposedly deal with it.

Here are few similarities:
• 1984 was in a constant state of war, with a tally of the dead given daily.
• they all watched view screens and vented with a "2 minute hate" at the enemy trying to kill them.
• Like in the book, New York and elsewhere have encourage people to snitch to the authorities on those who didn't obey the state edicts large or small.
• Several experts and leaders in nations around the world have proposed and begun to implement tracking devices to mark those who are cleared for work and travel by the gov't..
• the major Media and internet search giants ARE in fact outright censoring and "memory holing" (1984) information from Doctors and experts who do not align with the W.H.O. and "party" (1984) gov't officials.
With some local news reports literally being striped from youtube. (memory holed)
• Some of those wanting to protest trying to post info about plans on major Web platforms are banned or their post removed. Is it really far fetched to think that those people are also flagged by officials ("the party").
• People in the U.S. and other free countries have been stopped, handcuffed, arrested, fined, by police from doing various normal things WHILE SOCIAL DISTANCING. Often asked for ID, official docs or info to prove that their travel (or leisure) is "essential" or authorized by the "the party" I mean the Gov't..
(in 1 case overseas, which is an obvious outlier, a young man was shot in the stomach for not being at home... shot to keep him safe from the virus right?)

• Then there are elements of the setting of 1984, obviously not set up by covid19 problem, but was already a feature of modern life. Things kind of fantastic and politically unthinkable in 1948 when Orwell the wrote the book. The fact that a large percentage of us have cameras in our homes. 2 way viewers. And in many cases the built-in cameras on laptops and televisions can... and have... been turned on without permission of the homeowners by hackers and biz and gov't officials from the local to national levels. Not to mention Alexa and it's like. It's constantly on, open to amazon which has open connections to the CIA and it owns the Washington Post.
Add to that we've learned of the past 20+ years that Bush and Obama have had the NSA track and store all Americans phone, email and internet communications... for our safety.

the Covid19 situation has been used (wittingly and unwittingly IMO) to bring us all closer to a world similar in some respects to the world described in 1984.
One of the major elements for me is the question of whose in control. In the US the people are imagined to be in control of the gov't. In 1984 it's the Gov't that is in complete control. And people are either part of "the Party" control system. Or blindly believe the contradictory and changing info of the "the party". Or suspect/know most of it is BS and live in fear of it. And the gov't wants people to "Love" it. Love it's benevolent control and watchful eye.
Yes, it's FAR more extreme in the book than what we have now. But I'm not interested in getting ANY closer to it.
IMO it's to close already. I hope you don't want to embrace any part of 1984 style gov't .. it was socialist you know.

But I suspect you disagree with my points of comparison.
no worries man.
I think they are valid and people should consider them as we move forward.



BTW please read my signature quotes below.

[Drummond]

Well, no other country on earth enjoys the freedoms that we do! So the small forms of tyranny we see and the types of censorship we are seeing - is something that many just shrug their shoulders at in other countries. Folks can't understand why we would fight for these things in the midst of something like this. And yeah, the leftist take on this, the fear level and the lack of telling a single thing positive out there - seems to be more of the norm on much media, considering so much of it is leftist!

I think that the real truth is that you see any powerful authority, when it exercises that authority, as a tyranny. You don't conceive of it as any possible source of good, only of evil.

Yours is the equivalent of a child rebelling against a parent, and then wanting to play with traffic that you choose not to fully understand the harmful nature of. Fact ... Covid-19 will not be constrained by your Constitution, it'll do you no favours in the face of it. It presents you with a reality you're not fully meeting in ITS OWN terms, preferring instead to imagine that yours override reality itself.

We are different, here in the UK. We've assessed what Covid-19 is, and what steps must be taken in the face of it. If wisdom exists in the protective authority exercised, we respect it, we defer to it. We put logic and realism above any need to rebel, and we are free to see benign authority for what it is, and to respect and appreciate it accordingly.

Here's an example of Brits facing reality:

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/fearful-britons-remain-strongly-opposed-195131272.html


Fewer than one in five of the British public believe the time is right to consider reopening schools, restaurants, pubs and stadiums. The findings, in a new poll for the Observer, suggest Boris Johnson will struggle to convince people to return their lives to normal if he tries to ease the lockdown soon.

The poll by Opinium, taken between Wednesday and Friday last week, found 17% of people think the conditions have been met to consider reopening schools, against 67% who say they have not been, and that they should stay closed.

Realism, versus the need to rebel against authority, in action, Jim.

[Evmetro]

Very well, I'm taking up your challenge. Show me your 'truth', and your 'proof' of your claims of 'tyranny'.

Go on. Let's see you do it.



No. Don't be lazy. You have your case to make ? Then, MAKE IT.



Translation: error is very possible. This gets back to a previous debate. You need to be very sure of your ability to sift properly and get to the truth you seek. You could get it wrong. A piece of propaganda might be believed, and in the believing, might change your ability to perceive the real truth, when you're staring it in the face.



Nope.

You might take a lie to be truth. Eventually, the corrupting effect of the lie might cause you to disbelieve all truth that defies the lie.

No, Evmetro .... make your case. I'm issuing that challenge.
Lol, if I could offer up a sentence or two on a political board that would substitute for reading a broader spectrum of news and propaganda, I'd probably use this superpower to help people skip college and go straight to doing surgery on people.

Your response to post 60 is a picture worth a thousand words.

Covid 1984! Woo hoo!

[Evmetro]

Just for fun, I typed "coronavirus 1984" into google to see some of comparisons that people have made between the two. Google did not have any 1984 comparisons to our current lockdowns and covid politics, even though we have all seen many. Next, I went to Bing and did the same search. Bing had relevant comparisons, google did not. Kinda reminds me of the Orwell book....

[Black Diamond]

What about it ?

I'm well aware of Orwell's book 'Nineteen Eighty=Four' (indeed, his title had the year referred to in words and not figures, didn't it ?).

But what does this have to do with a virus in the world in 2020 ??

Orwell doesn't address 2020 (I don't think?) in in his book.

Orwell's book concentrated on a power-mad regime that distorted or rewrote history according to its whim.

AH. GOT IT.

I think I understand.

Are you saying that the Spanish flu never existed, that I'm rewriting history, to try and bolster my case ?

Well, sorry. I'm not. The history I've been discussing, happened. And we do need to learn from it.

Unfortunately, Revelarts is too locked into what he wants to believe, to accept anything that may counter it. Indeed, like any good Leftie, he insists upon only seeing existence in terms he's preferred. He'll cherrypick what may support him. He'll completely reject anything not preferred.

When I next post directly to him, I'm going to try and get him to admit that it's really 2020. I don't know if I can do it, but, I'll try.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Wish me luck with my endeavour !!!

He calls it that because he thinks the govt is overreaching. He knows what year it is.

[Drummond]

Jimmy pretty well summed it up Drummond.
and sadly Covid19 is very real.
But i've added '84' because of the "1984"(book) like measures taken and proposed to supposedly deal with it.

Yes. You've mixed reality with fiction. Exactly.

Here are few similarities:


1984 was in a constant state of war, with a tally of the dead given daily.

See above.


they all watched view screens and vented with a "2 minute hate" at the enemy trying to kill them.

You think that motivation to combat Covid-19 shouldn't exist ?


Like in the book, New York and elsewhere have encourage people to snitch to the authorities on those who didn't obey the state edicts large or small.

Conversely, do those who, through their irresponsibility, escape the consequences of their actions ?


Several experts and leaders in nations around the world have proposed and begun to implement tracking devices to mark those who are cleared for work and travel by the gov't

This needs an alternative ?

How about snitching ?

Whoops. Maybe not. OK ... what's your alternative ? Just risking the eventuality of disease and death ?


the major Media and internet search giants ARE in fact outright censoring and "memory holing" (1984) information from Doctors and experts who do not align with the W.H.O. and "party" (1984) gov't officials.

Examples ?


With some local news reports literally being striped from youtube. (memory holed). Some of those wanting to protest trying to post info about plans on major Web platforms are banned or their post removed. Is it really far fetched to think that those people are also flagged by officials ("the party").

Let me introduce you to David Icke. You may care to know that 'The Inner Party' is populated by lizards We know this, because Icke assures us that it is so.


People in the U.S. and other free countries have been stopped, handcuffed, arrested, fined, by police from doing various normal things WHILE SOCIAL DISTANCING. Often asked for ID, official docs or info to prove that their travel (or leisure) is "essential" or authorized by the "the party" I mean the Gov't.

So, OK, you hate authority ? I'm getting a small, barely perceptible hint that you just MIGHT have a problem with authority.

Nonessential travel is forbidden under lockdown rules. From the example you've given, your police were merely doing their duty, and safeguarding life by so doing. Good for them. Good for all of you.


(in 1 case overseas, which is an obvious outlier, a young man was shot in the stomach for not being at home... shot to keep him safe from the virus right?)

No. To safeguard others, from the infection risk he posed. Either he was carrying infection, or, by his actions, risking getting an infection, which he would've then passed on.

Had he behaved responsibly instead, he'd be alive today.


Then there are elements of the setting of 1984, obviously not set up by covid19 problem, but was already a feature of modern life. Things kind of fantastic and politically unthinkable in 1948 when Orwell the wrote the book. The fact that a large percentage of us have cameras in our homes. 2 way viewers. And in many cases the built-in cameras on laptops and televisions can... and have... been turned on without permission of the homeowners by hackers and biz and gov't officials from the local to national levels. Not to mention Alexa and it's like. It's constantly on, open to amazon which has open connections to the CIA and it owns the Washington Post.
Add to that we've learned of the past 20+ years that Bush and Obama have had the NSA track and store all Americans phone, email and internet communications... for our safety.

So, basically, we need to uninvent today's technology, yes ? Involving what consequences ? Loss of jobs, industries, the police robbed of crimefighting tools ?

Safeguards can be built into technology. Ah, but then, who'd be governing those safeguards, and maybe those doing so, would themselves have too much power ?

Revelarts ... no matter what was done, no matter what the consequences to crimefighting and job losses, you'd never be satisfied. Fighting phantoms of your own invention.


One of the major elements for me is the question of whose in control. In the US the people are imagined to be in control of the gov't. In 1984 it's the Gov't that is in complete control. And people are either part of "the Party" control system. Or blindly believe the contradictory and changing info of the "the party". Or suspect/know most of it is BS and live in fear of it. And the gov't wants people to "Love" it. Love it's benevolent control and watchful eye.

Illustrates my point, doesn't it ? You would NEVER be satisfied that things were OK. Your conspiracy theories, your suspicions, would never go away.

Short of 'uninvention', there's no answer to this. If one was applied, you'd then be SUSPECTING that something was going on, unseen.


Yes, it's FAR more extreme in the book than what we have now. But I'm not interested in getting ANY closer to it.
IMO it's to close already.

Exactly. Uninventing technology has to be your approach.


I hope you don't want to embrace any part of 1984 style gov't .. it was socialist you know.

No. It never existed. At all.

Your fevered conspiracy-theorising, so much of it based on fantasy, has one very easy answer. Simply, you make sure that the brand of thinking that would abuse technology is never voted for. And, yes, that means keeping Socialists out of power.

Make sure that you do.

Job done !

[Black Diamond]

I think that the real truth is that you see any powerful authority, when it exercises that authority, as a tyranny. You don't conceive of it as any possible source of good, only of evil.

Yours is the equivalent of a child rebelling against a parent, and then wanting to play with traffic that you choose not to fully understand the harmful nature of. Fact ... Covid-19 will not be constrained by your Constitution, it'll do you no favours in the face of it. It presents you with a reality you're not fully meeting in ITS OWN terms, preferring instead to imagine that yours override reality itself.

We are different, here in the UK. We've assessed what Covid-19 is, and what steps must be taken in the face of it. If wisdom exists in the protective authority exercised, we respect it, we defer to it. We put logic and realism above any need to rebel, and we are free to see benign authority for what it is, and to respect and appreciate it accordingly.

Here's an example of Brits facing reality:

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/fearful-britons-remain-strongly-opposed-195131272.html



Realism, versus the need to rebel against authority, in action, Jim.
The Constitution vs the Crown.

[revelarts]

Yes. You've mixed reality with fiction. Exactly.
Here are few similarities:

See above.
You think that motivation to combat Covid-19 shouldn't exist ?
Conversely, do those who, through their irresponsibility, escape the consequences of their actions ?
This needs an alternative ?
How about snitching ?
Whoops. Maybe not. OK ... what's your alternative ? Just risking the eventuality of disease and death ?
Examples ?
Let me introduce you to David Icke. You may care to know that 'The Inner Party' is populated by lizards We know this, because Icke assures us that it is so.
So, OK, you hate authority ? I'm getting a small, barely perceptible hint that you just MIGHT have a problem with authority.
Nonessential travel is forbidden under lockdown rules. From the example you've given, your police were merely doing their duty, and safeguarding life by so doing. Good for them. Good for all of you.
No. To safeguard others, from the infection risk he posed. Either he was carrying infection, or, by his actions, risking getting an infection, which he would've then passed on.
Had he behaved responsibly instead, he'd be alive today.
So, basically, we need to uninvent today's technology, yes ? Involving what consequences ? Loss of jobs, industries, the police robbed of crimefighting tools ?
Safeguards can be built into technology. Ah, but then, who'd be governing those safeguards, and maybe those doing so, would themselves have too much power ?
Revelarts ... no matter what was done, no matter what the consequences to crimefighting and job losses, you'd never be satisfied. Fighting phantoms of your own invention.
Illustrates my point, doesn't it ? You would NEVER be satisfied that things were OK. Your conspiracy theories, your suspicions, would never go away.
Short of 'uninvention', there's no answer to this. If one was applied, you'd then be SUSPECTING that something was going on, unseen.
Exactly. Uninventing technology has to be your approach.
No. It never existed. At all.
Your fevered conspiracy-theorising, so much of it based on fantasy, has one very easy answer. Simply, you make sure that the brand of thinking that would abuse technology is never voted for. And, yes, that means keeping Socialists out of power.
Make sure that you do.
Job done !

Wow. i mean wow.

looks like you really do love Big Brother.

[Drummond]

Lol, if I could offer up a sentence or two on a political board that would substitute for reading a broader spectrum of news and propaganda, I'd probably use this superpower to help people skip college and go straight to doing surgery on people.

I'll take that as a cop-out response, then ... of you not meeting a challenge.

Highly understandable.


Covid 1984! Woo hoo!

Propagandist association, encouraged for effect. Bring on the applauding Lefties !

[jimnyc]

Still on have a case about censorship to prove it, still. I have posted RIGHT HERE no less than at least 20 of them over time, likely many more articles about such. Anyone who didn't read them, didn't want to read them or didn't bother to dispute any of it, not my issue. Facts are facts and I hardly need anyone on the board here to enjoy it or agree with it to make it fact. If someone's perspective that doesn't live here states so, it's from the perspective of someone that doesn't live here and hasn't fully enjoyed total freedom and isn't having that taken away from them. But any claims of censorship not happening is simply wrong. It's happened. Non-stop. From ALLLLLLLL the places I mentioned already and more. Nothing left to prove on that, absolutely nothing. Don't like someone's opinion and you delete it? That's censorship, and no excuses change that. Sure, folks can think of extravagant examples as to things that should be deleted - but if it's not illegal, it shouldn't be censored in any way shape or form. No more than if someone is on Facebook and writes "I think this virus was maybe leaked from China on purpose, IMO" - and it gets deleted - THAT IS CENSORSHIP. If someone writes that WHO lied and covered for China as to human to human transmission, and they delete such, THAT IS CENSORSHIP. If someone posts an article about a woman being interviewed who works at WHO, and she's a high ranking woman, and she admits as much, and someone simply posts the article, and they delete it - THAT IS CENSORSHIP.

[Drummond]

Wow. i mean wow.

looks like you really do love Big Brother.

Heh heh. That's the best you can do ?

Big Brother DOES NOT EXIST.

Try to comprehend that.

But, there's a real world that does. Currently, it's infected by a disease. A disease that'll only be combatted if the will exists to do so.

I'm increasingly getting the impression that it doesn't.

[jimnyc]

The Constitution vs the Crown.

I wont even address the comparisons or lack thereof.

The left here in America likes to have their own constitutional rights - but if it's a conservative issue or guns - then it's a piece of parchment, outdated and other crap. They like to dismiss rights when it helps them, but sure do enjoy them as much as others.

I can speak for myself on this - the constitution / bill of rights is not for sale, not for sale to be changed nor to be dismissed. EVERY military person I know and those who have died, all say the same thing, I fought for those very rights. I will not let rights quietly go by. I refuse to sit quietly if they are abused. And I would fight for any of them if it were necessary. Anyone trying to instantly go to the extremes and tell me it's a death sentence, I'm killing people, blood on my hands, I don't know how to use common sense, that I am too stupid to wear a mask. That someone else's job is essential and the money they feed their families with is essential, but mine is not. Not buying into it.

[revelarts]

Heh heh. That's the best you can do ?
Big Brother DOES NOT EXIST.
Ok, so we should all listen to our real Gov'ts officials and obey them completely and without question.
As long as they aren't "liberal".
Have i got that right now?

[Drummond]

Still on have a case about censorship to prove it, still. I have posted RIGHT HERE no less than at least 20 of them over time, likely many more articles about such. Anyone who didn't read them, didn't want to read them or didn't bother to dispute any of it, not my issue. Facts are facts and I hardly need anyone on the board here to enjoy it or agree with it to make it fact. If someone's perspective that doesn't live here states so, it's from the perspective of someone that doesn't live here and hasn't fully enjoyed total freedom and isn't having that taken away from them. But any claims of censorship not happening is simply wrong. It's happened. Non-stop. From ALLLLLLLL the places I mentioned already and more. Nothing left to prove on that, absolutely nothing. Don't like someone's opinion and you delete it? That's censorship, and no excuses change that. Sure, folks can think of extravagant examples as to things that should be deleted - but if it's not illegal, it shouldn't be censored in any way shape or form. No more than if someone is on Facebook and writes "I think this virus was maybe leaked from China on purpose, IMO" - and it gets deleted - THAT IS CENSORSHIP. If someone writes that WHO lied and covered for China as to human to human transmission, and they delete such, THAT IS CENSORSHIP. If someone posts an article about a woman being interviewed who works at WHO, and she's a high ranking woman, and she admits as much, and someone simply posts the article, and they delete it - THAT IS CENSORSHIP.

What's disturbing in all of this is a complete lack of recognition that an altered reality needs an altered response to it, something tailor-made to meet it in the most effective way possible.

I wonder what the extent here is of your kidding yourself.

In wartime ... does no censorship ever exist ? If you had troop movements going on, for example, and it'd benefit an opponent enormously to have details about them, would nobody in America see the sense in censoring any information that might leak out about them ? Did soldiers writing home, never have their letters censored ?

During the Falklands conflict, we had daily media reports delivered about it. But we knew that they were subject to censorship, to make sure that no information beneficial to an enemy was ever broadcast.

We all knew it was happening We all approved. Why ?

BECAUSE WE ADAPTED TO THE REALITY IN PLAY.

Our authorities did what they had to do, in the service of adapting to the reality of that conflict.

Now, today, we've got something a lot more serious on our hands .. a virus that's very infectious, and which kills. Now, is this one reality that we are WRONG to adapt to ? Is this something which does not require authoritative advice, control, legislation passed to combat it ?

We in the UK see a need for effective action. We are, by and large, realists. A reality exists requiring adaptation to it. So, we adapt.

But why do Americans refuse to make the same adaptation ?

Is it a death wish ?

I've had the saying 'Liberty or Death' quoted at me. This suggests that it might be, in fact, exactly that.

Germany and Japan have both tried opening up after lockdown. Both have seen spikes in infection. Both have re-instituted lockdowns. The American wish to learn, and adapt, is .... where ?

I'm not seeing any.

Will Spain follow suit, if its own lockdown relaxation goes the same way ? I believe I can promise you that it will.

All of these countries adapt to the reality they're presented with. Their populations don't say 'How dare you keep us locked down, helping us to survive'. No, they accept the reality of their situation.

But, it seems, America will not.

Very well.

If you do cause a second pandemic wave, will you cease to hold China to account for its own causing of a pandemic ? Or, will your own pandemic carry with it some expectation that it's morally superior ?

Both will kill in great numbers. Where's the superiority ? You will KNOW, if you release that pandemic, what you're unleashing.

Tell me. Will you regret doing so ? Will you ponder the thought that China, in those specific circumstances, might not any longer merit your castigation of them ?

I think I know the answers to those questions, but I'll hold fire. Folks, you tell me what you think the answers are.

[Drummond]

Ok, so we should all listen to our real Gov'ts officials and obey them completely and without question.
As long as they aren't "liberal".
Have i got that right now?

Yes, I think that's reasonable.

Put it this way. You've got the choice of trusting a Right wing Government, versus trusting a Left wing one.

I for one would trust a Left wing Government about as far as I could throw it. Right wing Governments ... a wholly different kettle of fish.

We have Boris Johnson heading our own Government. I completely trust him. I've no basis whatever for not doing so.

So, if he orders a lockdown, as he has, I'll trust his judgement. He passes laws to facilitate that order.. I'm fine with them, and will obey them to the letter.

You see, I trust my Government's motivations. They're doing their best for me. I know this. I trust this. No rebelling out of spite for me, thanks very much !! I've no wish either to harm my interests, nor those of my fellow citizens.

Your country, by contrast, threatens us, in the name of 'Freedom' and 'Liberty', to increase the chances of the globe suffering a second pandemic wave.

Should we be grateful ? Should we see YOUR system, as superior to ours ?

On what basis ?

Your drive for freedom threatens a very dire outcome. My 'Big Brother' Administration (a ridiculous assertion) does nothing of the kind.

Whose system is more benign ? YOU tell ME.

[Evmetro]

Yes, I think that's reasonable.

Put it this way. You've got the choice of trusting a Right wing Government, versus trusting a Left wing one.

I for one would trust a Left wing Government about as far as I could throw it. Right wing Governments ... a wholly different kettle of fish.

We have Boris Johnson heading our own Government. I completely trust him. I've no basis whatever for not doing so.

So, if he orders a lockdown, as he has, I'll trust his judgement. He passes laws to facilitate that order.. I'm fine with them, and will obey them to the letter.

You see, I trust my Government's motivations. They're doing their best for me. I know this. I trust this. No rebelling out of spite for me, thanks very much !! I've no wish either to harm my interests, nor those of my fellow citizens.

Your country, by contrast, threatens us, in the name of 'Freedom' and 'Liberty', to increase the chances of the globe suffering a second pandemic wave.

Should we be grateful ? Should we see YOUR system, as superior to ours ?

On what basis ?

Your drive for freedom threatens a very dire outcome. My 'Big Brother' Administration (a ridiculous assertion) does nothing of the kind.

Whose system is more benign ? YOU tell ME.
Wow! I would die fighting before a government could own me like they own you.

Covid 1984!

[revelarts]

Yes, I think that's reasonable.
Put it this way. You've got the choice of trusting a Right wing Government, versus trusting a Left wing one.
I for one would trust a Left wing Government about as far as I could throw it. Right wing Governments ... a wholly different kettle of fish.
We have Boris Johnson heading our own Government. I completely trust him. I've no basis whatever for not doing so.
So, if he orders a lockdown, as he has, I'll trust his judgement. He passes laws to facilitate that order.. I'm fine with them, and will obey them to the letter.
You see, I trust my Government's motivations. They're doing their best for me. I know this. I trust this. No rebelling out of spite for me, thanks very much !! I've no wish either to harm my interests, nor those of my fellow citizens.

Your country, by contrast, threatens us, in the name of 'Freedom' and 'Liberty', to increase the chances of the globe suffering a second pandemic wave.
Should we be grateful ? Should we see YOUR system, as superior to ours ?
On what basis ?
Your drive for freedom threatens a very dire outcome. My 'Big Brother' Administration (a ridiculous assertion) does nothing of the kind.
Whose system is more benign ? YOU tell ME.
again wow.

Ok I'll address that seriously. just to get it out there.
Well here's my problem with that.
I, for one, only give that level of trust to God himself.
period.

After that, well I've read history and lived through times where gov't's --under the left and right--- have been exposed as NOT always having my or the nations best interest at heart. From simply lying to the nation for money and power, to the extreme of using children in gov't experiments or letting people die by the hand of corporations.
And of course from time to time some officials simply make mistakes.

Ronald Reagan had a saying "Trust but verify"
I think that's wise.
Also our nation was founded by people that had a HIGH distrust of Gov't power. Who created the constitution and the system of gov't to hopefully mitigate against gov't abuses. So the people would remain in control and not have to simply implicitly trust the benevolence of random leaders. Plus the public wasn't set up to simply RELY on the gov't for it's overall well being. The individual, the family, Church and the local community were the primary basis for life. Not looking off trustingly to Washington D.C. or London.

there are pages of documents to that effect... many of the sentiments originate from great people from Great Britain. like John Locke and others

a few quotes for you to consider:

"Those who have been once intoxicated with power and have derived any kind of emolument from it can never willingly abandon it."

"The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion."
– Edmund Burke - statesmen and member of British parliament circa 1700s
.........

“What is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.”

"The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted."
– James Madison, 4th president of the United States
.........

“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."

“I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves ; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”

“The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all.”
– Thomas Jefferson, 3rh president of the United States, writer of declaration of independence
.........

“Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.”
– Thomas Paine, 18th-century British-American political activist
.........

“As the happiness of the people is the sole end of government, so the consent of the people is the only foundation of it, in reason, morality, and the natural fitness of things.”
– John Adams, 2nd president of the United States
.........

It would indeed be ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would sanction the subversion of one of those liberties which make the defense of our nation worthwhile."
– Earl Warren, Chief Justice Supreme Court Justice, circa 1950s
.........

“Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear -- kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor -- with the cry of grave national emergency... Always there has been some terrible evil to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing the exorbitant sums demanded. Yet, in retrospect, these disasters seem never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real.”
– Douglas MacArthur, U.S. Army general in WWI, WWII and Korea

I'll leave you with this last one.

“Any single man must judge for himself whether circumstances warrant obedience or resistance to the commands of the civil magistrate; we are all qualified, entitled, and morally obliged to evaluate the conduct of our rulers. This political judgment, moreover, is not simply or primarily a right, but like self-preservation, a duty to God. As such it is a judgment that men cannot part with according to the God of Nature. It is the first and foremost of our inalienable rights without which we can preserve no other.”
~ John Locke

[Hot Dogger]

Georgia’s Experiment in Human Sacrifice

The state is about to find out how many people need to lose their lives to shore up the economy.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/04/why-georgia-reopening-coronavirus-pandemic/610882/?utm_term=2020-04-29T17%253A03%253A35&utm_content=edit-promo&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_source=twitter

Not even gonna print the fear inducing blaming BS from this one, read on your own, the title is enough.

We used to have a country where 5 out of a 100 men died building and working railroads, bridges, skyscrapers, mines, tunnels, forges, foundries, you name it. All in the name of progress to provide their families a better life. Today the country is chock full of scared little wimps waiting and hoping for the government to provide.

[jimnyc]

I'm pointing these out from my POV as an American. These are for any continued denials of abuses or censorship taking place. Nope, my rights don't get deleted, altered, updated, changed, suspended, taken away or any way it can be described. It'll be fought for, and I'm far from alone.

--

NJ Woman Flexing Right To Protest Stay-at-Home Order Charged with Criminal Violation

In the latest example of what could be deemed an overreach by government officials during the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, a New Jersey woman has been charged with violating emergency orders by organizing a protest of the state-mandated lockdown orders.

Kim Pagan, a resident of Toms River, New Jersey, was issued a summons by the New Jersey State Police, according to the state’s Department of Law and Public Safety.

WNBC reported Pagan organized a protest at the New Jersey statehouse in Trenton, New Jersey, on Friday in response to Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy’s far-reaching lockdown order.

Her crime? She is charged with “violating the emergency orders by organizing a prohibited event.”

The charge sounds like something you would read about in a bad dystopian novel, but it is happening in the Garden State.

Rest - https://www.westernjournal.com/nj-woman-flexing-right-protest-stay-home-order-charged-criminal-violation/

16-Year-Old Wisconsin Girl Threatened With Arrest Over Coronavirus Instagram Posts, Now Suing Sheriff

16-year-old Amyiah Cohoon was one of the early coronavirus patients. The Wisconsin teenager had taken a field trip with her classmates to Florida in early March, just as the virus hysteria was starting up. They wrapped up the field trip early amid concerns and returned to Oxford, Wisconsin. Within a few days, Cohoon was starting to show symptoms of the virus. This was before testing was readily available, but doctors pretty much concluded she had the virus based off of her symptoms.

Rest - https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/16-year-old-wisconsin-girl-threatened-arrest-coronavirus-instagram-posts-now-suing-sheriff/

One Arrested as Raleigh, NC Police Suspend First Amendment; Declare Coronavirus Lockdown Protest “Non-Essential Activity”

Raleigh, North Carolina police suspended the First Amendment Tuesday, dispersing a protest against the COVID-19 Chinese coronavirus lockdown and arresting one protester for failing to disperse. The police issued a statement declaring “Protesting is a non-essential activity” that was in violation of an executive order by Governor Roy Cooper (D) prohibiting mass gatherings.

https://i.imgur.com/MuwbrGx.png

Rest - https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/one-arrested-raleigh-nc-police-suspend-first-amendment-declare-coronavirus-lockdown-protest-non-essential-activity/


And some on the never ending censorship taking place:

Facebook Deleting Coronavirus Posts, Leading To Charges Of Censorship

Facebook and other tech companies are working hard to curb misinformation on their platforms about the emerging COVID-19 or Coronavirus pandemic.

Maybe too hard.

“Facebook is blocking COVID-19 posts from fact based sources,” a Facebook friend who noticed it told me. “Facebook is hiding these posts. At the time of viral pandemic this shouldn’t be happening.”

Multiple others have experienced the same thing, and it’s the day after Facebook, along with Google, Twitter, Microsoft, LinkedIn, and Reddit issued a joint statement on combatting misinformation on their platforms. That’s a good thing, as long as what they’re targeting actually is incorrect or spammy information, and not quality reporting from generally-recognized sites.

Apparently, those sites include Medium, Buzzfeed, and USA Today.

Others that I’ve personally seen via screenshotted block notices include Stuff, The Independent, and the NY Post. The Dallas Morning News was also impacted.

Given that Facebook is a key source of news and information for many, this has resulted in more than a few conspiracy theories. “Facebook is going hard on information control, I guess Facebook wants us all to be misinformed and die,” one friend opined.

Rest - https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2020/03/17/facebook-deleting-coronavirus-posts-leading-to-charges-of-censorship/


YouTube to Ban Content That Contradicts WHO on COVID-19, Despite the UN Agency’s Catastrophic Track Record of Misinformation

Soon, YouTubers will be silenced if they don’t agree with the United Nations on public health. As The Verdict reports:

YouTube will ban any content containing medical advice that contradicts World Health Organisation (WHO) coronavirus recommendations, according to CEO Susan Wojcicki.

Wojcicki announced the policy on CNN on Sunday. WHO is an agency of the UN, charged with overseeing global public health. The Verdict report continues:

Wojcicki said that the Google-owned video streaming platform would be “removing information that is problematic”.

She told host Brian Stelter that this would include “anything that is medically unsubstantiated”.

“So people saying ‘take vitamin C; take turmeric, we’ll cure you’, those are the examples of things that would be a violation of our policy,” she said.

“Anything that would go against World Health Organisation recommendations would be a violation of our policy.”

While the decision has been welcomed by many, some have accused the streaming giant of censorship.

Rest - https://fee.org/articles/youtube-to-ban-content-that-contradicts-who-on-covid-19-despite-the-un-agency-s-catastrophic-track-record-of-misinformation/


Social media censorship in the time of coronavirus (I know folks in the UK may feel differently, and this article is a lot about the BBC and our good folks over there, but I'm more concerned about the US, and also more so trying to point out the censorship that is taking place.) ... Also, in todays age and society, we are all starting to rely on the internet more and more for our news sources and much of that is on social media, where folks share with one another. And depending on what they believe, others will see.

Social media censorship in the time of coronavirus

Every day new initiatives are being announced to ensure people have the correct information on the COVID-19 pandemic, but who watches the watchers?

The BBC reported today that the UK government is cracking down on misinformation about the coronavirus pandemic. This is taking the form of ‘a rapid response unit within the Cabinet Office [that] is working with social media firms to remove fake news and harmful content.’ As ever ‘harmful’ is undefined, but the government seems worried that people could die as a result of being misinformed.

Meanwhile an initiative started by the BBC, among others, called the Trusted News Initiative, has announced plans to ‘tackle potentially harmful coronavirus disinformation’. Most things are potentially harmful, surely, and there’s something distinctly sinister about an organisation designating itself ‘trusted’. Surely that’s for other people to decide.

“During emergencies of this magnitude, the need for trusted, factual, evidence-based reporting is more crucial than ever,” said Noel Curran, Director-General of the European Broadcasting Union, which calls itself ‘the world’s leading alliance of public service media’ and is a member of the TNI.

“Yet there is a tide of misinformation and bad information, driven mainly through online social platforms, which is threatening to undermine public trust and cause further anxiety for people. This initiative underlines the role of public service media in tackling misinformation head-on and delivering accurate content that audiences can safely rely on.”

Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are all members of the TNI too and on top of this, they seem to be constantly rolling out initiatives of their own. Last week Nick Clegg, Facebook’s VP of Global Affairs and Communications wrote about what the company is doing to ensure purity of information across all its platforms.

The most untainted source of COVID-19 information, according to Clegg, is the World Health Organization. So Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp are now all spamming their users with top tips from the WHO, in many cases whether they like it or not. Until recently not many people would have contested claim that the WHO is the ultimate global authority on such matters – the clue is in the name, right? – but the tendency of its senior leadership to overtly kowtow to China, as in the clip below, is undermining trust in it.

Speaking of Twitter, it seems to be taking a strong position on the matter of hydroxychloroquine, an antimalarial drug that also seems to have at least some positive medical effect on COVID-19. Twitter apparently doesn’t like people bigging the drug up too much on its platform, even going so far as to take down posts from President Trump’s Lawyer, Rudy Giuliani and the President of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, for extolling its virtues.

However, as Axios points out, Twitter is inconsistent in its implementation of this new rule, having recently permitted a tweet of clear misinformation from tech entrepreneur Elon Musk to stay up. This highlights the problem with this latest attempt at censorship, one shared with all others. The censorship decisions ultimately have to be made by humans and will therefore always be flawed.

Until recently very few people expected Twitter to be expert on the therapeutic qualities of hydroxychloroquine, yet now we do. Meanwhile Facebook has unilaterally anointed the WHO the Oracle of Healthy, despite its refusal to acknowledge Taiwan and many questions about its effectiveness in mitigating the catastrophe the world is now having to endure.

As for ‘trusted’ sources, how much of the mainstream media can really be trusted? Very few publications don’t have some kind of bias, with the US especially egregious in that respect. If President Trump suggested a new course of action, how sure can we be that CNN or the New York Times wouldn’t dismiss it out of hand or that Fox News would subject it to proper scrutiny?

Rest - https://telecoms.com/503401/social-media-censorship-in-the-time-of-coronavirus/


Was your Facebook post on the coronavirus deleted? This is why

Anti-spam issues prompted accusations of censorship.

Over the past 24 hours, users have reported that their Facebook posts relating to the novel coronavirus have been vanishing.

In these cases, users have been notified that their posts violate community standards, a boilerplate notification sent when posts are removed as they are deemed to be fake, fraudulent, or steeped in misinformation.

Facebook's community standards "outline what is and is not allowed on Facebook [...] based on feedback from our community and the advice of experts in fields such as technology, public safety, and human rights." Posts reported for breaking these rules are often linked to violence, extremist content, or scams.

Rest - https://www.zdnet.com/article/was-your-facebook-post-on-the-coronavirus-deleted-this-is-why/


And here is even one in the UK, from someone appointed by Boris Johnson. I wonder if he is entitled to his opinion? And what would happen if he got in front of a camera at home and made and uploaded a Youtube video stating his position, if it would be deleted, or should be deleted?

Some out there may scoff at the source of aljazeera. I don't read it, it only came back in various searches and I saw it. It seems to be interviews and direct words from folks, so I feel comfortable posting it. If any of the facts within are to be disputed, I'm more than open to that. Just know that I have already looked and verified.

UK police accused of abusing power to enforce COVID-19 lockdown

Some police may have gone 'further than they should have', says government minister, amid concerns over civil liberties.

As Britons navigate their way around restrictions to try and contain the spread of the new coronavirus, there are growing fears that police officers are abusing their new powers.

Some British police might have gone too far, Transport Secretary Grant Shapps told Sky News on Tuesday, less than a week after the UK approved emergency legislation that gave police the power to issue instant 30-pound ($37) fines to people who gather in groups of more than two people or leave their homes without good reason such as for work, food-shopping or exercise.

"I am sure there are individual examples where perhaps you look at it and think that is perhaps a bit further than they should have gone but in general terms, I think the case is that if people help everybody out, including the police, by staying home and the rest of it, then there will be no problems," said Shapps.

Some police have been accused of being overzealous by using drones to spy on people taking walks at nature spots and stopping dog-walkers from driving their pets to open spaces. There were reports they had even urged some shops not to sell Easter eggs because they were not essential items.

"The tradition of policing in this country is that policemen are citizens in uniform, they are not members of a disciplined hierarchy operating just at the government's command," Jonathan Sumption, a former UK Supreme Court judge, told the BBC.

"This is what a police state is like. It's a state in which the government can issue orders or express preferences with no legal authority and the police will enforce ministers' wishes."

As the national conversation turned to the lockdown enforcement, #policestate trended on Twitter in the UK, with several users offering their views.

"In all this, we cannot forget the importance of our civil liberties. Whilst this does not mean we should be able to do whatever we want, it does mean that the police should not abuse their power in such a vulnerable time," said Twitter user Olivia Lewis.

Unlike other countries, forces in Britain "police by consent" and pride themselves on being answerable to the public and not the state.

Martin Hewitt, chairman of the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC), said they were looking to ensure consistency in the police response as everyone got to grip with the new "unprecedented measures".

"Our plan is that we will engage with people, we will explain the measures ... we will encourage people to go home but then as a very last resort we will enforce," he told BBC radio.

The government drafted in the new regulations amid concern some Britons were failing to heed advice to avoid social gatherings to help prevent the spread of COVID-19.

The fast-tracked 329-page emergency bill faced little resistance in Parliament.

Before the regulations were introduced, the opposition Labour Party's Lord Falconer of Thoroton said he supported the powers.

"In normal times it would be utterly unacceptable. These are not normal times. As long as the emergency lasts and these powers are necessary, they should be available to the government."

In recent interviews with Al Jazeera, human rights experts said draconian measures to contain the spread of coronavirus were understandable in the short term, even if they limited civil liberties, but warned global governments should not abuse their powers.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/03/uk-police-accused-abusing-power-enforce-covid-19-lockdown-200331084607759.html


While verifying a few things from above, I then came across this article as well, which of course backs up the words from the prior as well.

Covid-19: ex-supreme court judge lambasts 'disgraceful' policing

Lord Sumption criticises Derbyshire police for stopping people exercising in Peak District

A former supreme court justice has heavily criticised Derbyshire police for stopping people exercising in the Peak District saying that such behaviour risks plunging Britain into a “police state”.

Lord Sumption warned that police had no legal power to enforce “ministers’ wishes” and that the public should not be “resigning their liberty” to over-zealous citizens in uniform.

“The behaviour of the Derbyshire police in trying to shame people in using their undoubted right to take exercise in the country and wrecking beauty spots in the fells so people don’t want to go there is frankly disgraceful,” he said.

“This is what a police state is like, it is a state in which a government can issue orders or express preferences with no legal authority and the police will enforce ministers’ wishes,” he told BBC Radio 4’s World at One.

Rest - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/30/covid-19-ex-supreme-court-judge-lambasts-disgraceful-policing

[Evmetro]

I'm pointing these out from my POV as an American. These are for any continued denials of abuses or censorship taking place. Nope, my rights don't get deleted, altered, updated, changed, suspended, taken away or any way it can be described. It'll be fought for, and I'm far from alone.


This gives me the warm fuzzies.

[Drummond]

again wow.

Ok I'll address that seriously. just to get it out there.
Well here's my problem with that.
I, for one, only give that level of trust to God himself.
period.

Again, wow ... indeed !!

So, to cut what appears to be a very long story short .. you'll not trust anybody ? You can't conceive of having a leadership entirely devoted to your greater good, one that will move heaven and earth to work to make your lives better ?

What a very sad existence Americans must be living, if they feel motivated to forever distrust public officials, whose job is to serve them ?

In that case, why don't you always vote Lefties into power ?? You KNOW to distrust THEM !!

But I'd hate to be a Right-wing politician in America. If what you say is a proper guide to how Americans think and feel, I'd simultaneously know that (a) I'll always do my best for my fellow citizen but (b) I'll also know that nobody will trust that I will.

What a miserable existence, AND an UNDESERVED one, for that well-meaning politician to go through !!

That's just terrible. Perverse in the extreme, and simply terrible.

And you want me to believe your system is superior ????? You've got to be joking !!!

'Trust but verify' makes no sense. With the proper trust, verification is redundant and actually insulting.

OK, Revelarts. I owe you thanks. Not that I needed it, but from what you've said, I can now know beyond doubt that the UK system is superior.

And I can know one other thing. You people are so mired in the past, you've zero capability to adapt to present-day conditions. Which is what I thought must be true anyway.

[Drummond]

I'm pointing these out from my POV as an American. These are for any continued denials of abuses or censorship taking place. Nope, my rights don't get deleted, altered, updated, changed, suspended, taken away or any way it can be described. It'll be fought for, and I'm far from alone.

Reminds me of a stellar speech in Patrick McGoohan's 'The Prisoner'. In the first episode, 'Number Six' gives Number Two a little tirade. He says:

'I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered ! My life is my own'.

All laudable stuff, of course. But in that series, Number Six really WAS living in a police State. He, at least, had reason to say what he did (within the confines of the fictional plot ..).

The thing of it is, Jim, you live in the free-est Nation on Earth. I'm happy to acknowledge you do. But, crazily, you seem not to know it.

That is so sad.

Why, you're about to become free enough to so open up your country and your economy, that thousands more will die of infection than would've done, otherwise !! You don't have a Central Government apparatus willing or able to stop you .. apparently.

Sad again !

Thanks for including British examples in your last post. But they don't tell you quite what you think they do. We have various police forces across the UK .. and, they've interpreted rules given to them rather more differently than anyone thought they would. Derbyshire is reportedly the 'worst', tracking individual hikers with drones. Also, by the way, they've given out hundreds of fines.

The Metropolitan Police, serving London, has given out ... no fines, AT ALL.

It's interesting, to say the least. You'd think the UK system to be inferior because so much, here, is centralised. But, here, we have examples of central directives being so loosely defined that forces interpreted them somewhat freely.

By American standards, isn't this a source of congratulation ? Apparently ... NOT. All it did was leave you with material to criticise us with. Ironically, the basis for it was that the central directives were not as tightly and unassailably expressed as they perhaps should have been.

Revelarts' post is a revelation. I owe him thanks for his clarity. I now know that American 'freedom' is based on a paranoia not permitting any trust to ever be felt toward any authority, no matter how well meaning that authority is.

My standard of existence is better. I have a great PM in Boris Johnson. I will trust him unless given proof that I cannot. There will be no paranoid distrust of any politician where I lack reason for distrust.

I'm sorry that Americans cannot do this for themselves.

As for those voices who do voice distrust: either they can prove good reason for it, or, partisan agenda-chasing explains it. Distrust needs to have something relevant AND CURRENT to explain it.

[Drummond]

Wow! I would die fighting before a government could own me like they own you.

Covid 1984!

You'd do it, die for a 'cause', not even grounded in reality.

My Government does not 'own' me. All my Government does is provide authoritative clarity. This it backs up with laws, designed to serve my better interests.

I'm not in the habit of biting the hand that feeds me.

Your ridiculous example of 'Covid 1984' illustrates this perfectly. 'Covid 1984' is an INVENTION, AND NOTHING MORE. But, because you like it so much, it takes on a feeling of reality for you, doesn't it, Evmetro ?

So, you'll fight for an idea (i.e an invention, and one designed to define what you're expected to perceive, too !). But, how about being grounded in reality ? Will you be so keen to fight for that ??

[Black Diamond]

You'd do it, die for a 'cause', not even grounded in reality.

My Government does not 'own' me. All my Government does is provide authoritative clarity. This it backs up with laws, designed to serve my better interests.

I'm not in the habit of biting the hand that feeds me.

Your ridiculous example of 'Covid 1984' illustrates this perfectly. 'Covid 1984' is an INVENTION, AND NOTHING MORE. But, because you like it so much, it takes on a feeling of reality for you, doesn't it, Evmetro ?

So, you'll fight for an idea (i.e an invention, and one designed to define what you're expected to perceive, too !). But, how about being grounded in reality ? Will you be so keen to fight for that ??

You think your government feeds you?

Our nation was born out of distrust for tyranny and monarchy. It was carefully set up so our president could not be king george iv
Should we elect a president every four years that has absolute power outside of our citizens being allowed to carry machine guns and rip him apart in the press or from the public square? And freedom to worship?

[Kathianne]

I am quite confident that the book was indeed fiction. The comparison of the fiction book to the current political landscape is entertainment.
Since it was published in 1949, bank on it.

One of the first novels of the horrors of socialism/communism.

[Drummond]

You think your government feeds you?

I know it does.

As of this evening ... indeed, for weeks, now ... our Government has spent out massive funds to ensure that people can still afford to feed themselves. Wages once paid for out of businesses are now being paid directly by Government.

That's to say, we don't have fifty States that might quibble about what they may do for their People. No. We have ONE central authority, providing ONE policy direction, providing CLARITY of direction. We have efficiency of direction, and that efficiency is feeding people.


Our nation was born out of distrust for tyranny and monarchy. It was carefully set up so our president could not be king george iv
Should we elect a president every four years that has absolute power outside of our citizens being allowed to carry machine guns and rip him apart in the press or from the public square? And freedom to worship?

Distrust of an authority from hundreds of years ago is one thing. Allowing it to roll over literally centuries, so that no one leader is ever trusted, no matter how good he is, shows zero regard for reality. If you're going to distrust, do it from a position of real-time knowledge and relevance, not mere assumption that has its roots buried deep in your ancestry !!

[Kathianne]

Wow. i mean wow.

looks like you really do love Big Brother.

Indeed. I asked him days ago, 'what if Johnson says it's time to open up?' He admitted he'd go along with the new guidelines. Yep, he just seems to think that it's only the US that should have to wait, or something.

No matter, the US is going to open up, that's a given. I do expect it will be a bit of open and close, by specific areas. We just can't keep doing what we were 2 weeks ago.

I think we should realize that there are huge differences between UK and US conservatives. He does NOT understand the Constitution, nor respect much of our system of government.

He feels his is 'the best,' which is likely true for UK residents.

[Drummond]

Since it was published in 1949, bank on it.

One of the first novels of the horrors of socialism/communism.

Nineteen Eighty-Four is a cautionary tale.

It is also ... please try to comprehend this ... it is FICTION.

Do you people always mire your understanding of the present from what was around generations previously ?

I think I envy you. If your ending of Covid-19 lockdowns becomes the great favour to the virus that I think it will, who knows .... maybe your perception of the horrors to come will have a timelag of fifty or more years to it !!

Will your citizens of 2075 suddenly wake up one morning, and think ... 'H'm. Maybe what our people did in causing all that suffering and death back in 2020, wasn't a great idea, after all ?'

Here's an idea.

Why not face those horrors, in .... 2020 ????

[Kathianne]

Nineteen Eighty-Four is a cautionary tale.

It is also ... please try to comprehend this ... it is FICTION.

Do you people always mire your understanding of the present from what was around generations previously ?

I think I envy you. If your ending of Covid-19 lockdowns becomes the great favour to the virus that I think it will, who knows .... maybe your perception of the horrors to come will have a timelag of fifty or more years to it !!

Will your citizens of 2075 suddenly wake up one morning, and think ... 'H'm. Maybe what our people did in causing all that suffering and death back in 2020, wasn't a great idea, after all ?'

Here's an idea.

Why not face those horrors, in .... 2020 ????
That would be depending on a government to tell me what to do. You enjoy that.

[Drummond]

Indeed. I asked him days ago, 'what if Johnson says it's time to open up?' He admitted he'd go along with the new guidelines. Yep, he just seems to think that it's only the US that should have to wait, or something.

There's a difference, though, which you're not recognising.

Our Government has been led, throughout, by scientific advice. It therefore remains perpetually grounded in science. That's to say, in scientific reality.

From what I can see, your country isn't. You want to open up your economy. You're centred on that. If scientific wisdom says 'Be VERY cautious in what you plan to do, you people will just ignore it.


No matter, the US is going to open up, that's a given. I do expect it will be a bit of open and close, by specific areas. We just can't keep doing what we were 2 weeks ago.

My economy is significantly weaker than yours, yet, we're not as yet moving to abandon lockdown rules (though it's under review). We ground our decisions in realism. We manage. You are better placed to manage than we are, but you choose not to. And that is BECAUSE you choose not to.

Never mind wisdom, or realism. You choose a course of action, and it may be reckless. But you do it anyway.


I think we should realize that there are huge differences between UK and US conservatives. He does NOT understand the Constitution, nor respect much of our system of government.

Here, Kath, we can agree. I learned only today that Americans' very view of Government is mired in a paranoia rooted in perceptions hundreds of years old. Because a tyranny MAY have existed THEN, you assume there's room for it, NOW.

That's just madness.

I trust my Government. My perception of Government has nothing to do with Charles I !!! it has to do with whether Boris is a good Prime Minister, or whether we offer something better than our Lefties.

In short, I live in the real world of today, facing today's issues in real-time.

This strikes me as eminently sane.


He feels his is 'the best,' which is likely true for UK residents.

Simply: YES.

[revelarts]

I know it does. ("feed me")

As of this evening ... indeed, for weeks, now ... our Government has spent out massive funds to ensure that people can still afford to feed themselves. Wages once paid for out of businesses are now being paid directly by Government.

That's to say, we don't have fifty States that might quibble about what they may do for their People. No. We have ONE central authority, providing ONE policy direction, providing CLARITY of direction. We have efficiency of direction, and that efficiency is feeding people.

Distrust of an authority from hundreds of years ago is one thing. Allowing it to roll over literally centuries, so that no one leader is ever trusted, no matter how good he is, shows zero regard for reality. If you're going to distrust, do it from a position of real-time knowledge and relevance, not mere assumption that has its roots buried deep in your ancestry !!

I don't think we would get a reply much different from a devout communist citizen in China.

--my government feeds me--
---"our Government has spent out massive funds to ensure that people can still afford to feed themselves. Wages once paid for out of businesses are now being paid directly by Government."---
---"We have ONE central authority, providing ONE policy direction, providing CLARITY of direction. We have efficiency of direction, and that efficiency is feeding people."--

I'm not sure any Chinese Party member could have said it any better... or with as much sincerity.

Reverent Statist Authoritarianism by any other name... still smells.
even with a light veneer of "conservatism".

[Drummond]

[/B]That would be depending on a government to tell me what to do. You enjoy that.

Enjoyment isn't the point. Adopting a commonsense approach, IS.

A reason I can trust my Government today is because my Government is entirely led by scientific wisdom. It acts for the best possible outcome, based on that wisdom.

In other words, I've ample, and highly coherent, reason for my trust.

My Government provides it.

[Drummond]

I don't think we would get a reply much different from a devout communist citizen in China.

--my government feeds me--
---"our Government has spent out massive funds to ensure that people can still afford to feed themselves. Wages once paid for out of businesses are now being paid directly by Government."---
---"We have ONE central authority, providing ONE policy direction, providing CLARITY of direction. We have efficiency of direction, and that efficiency is feeding people."--

I'm not sure any Chinese Party member could have said it any better... or with as much sincerity.

Reverent Statist Authoritarianism by any other name... still smells.
even with a light veneer of "conservatism".

You treated every statement as though it was a soundbyte. So OK, I've a challenge for you.

Every one of my statements, as quoted: DISPROVE them. Come on. DISPROVE their worth. If they're rubbish .. prove that they are.

Show me why relying on prejudices which originate from a point in time many generations past, is so much better than living a life grounded in real-time assessment of today's scientific realities.

Indeed, show me the existence of a Covid 1776. Or, enjoy trying to.

[Evmetro]

I don't think we would get a reply much different from a devout communist citizen in China.

--my government feeds me--
---"our Government has spent out massive funds to ensure that people can still afford to feed themselves. Wages once paid for out of businesses are now being paid directly by Government."---
---"We have ONE central authority, providing ONE policy direction, providing CLARITY of direction. We have efficiency of direction, and that efficiency is feeding people."--

I'm not sure any Chinese Party member could have said it any better... or with as much sincerity.

Reverent Statist Authoritarianism by any other name... still smells.
even with a light veneer of "conservatism".

I was just getting ready to point out that he just described a commie wet dream.

[jimnyc]

Reminds me of a stellar speech in Patrick McGoohan's 'The Prisoner'. In the first episode, 'Number Six' gives Number Two a little tirade. He says:

'I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered ! My life is my own'.

All laudable stuff, of course. But in that series, Number Six really WAS living in a police State. He, at least, had reason to say what he did (within the confines of the fictional plot ..).

The thing of it is, Jim, you live in the free-est Nation on Earth. I'm happy to acknowledge you do. But, crazily, you seem not to know it.

That is so sad.

Why, you're about to become free enough to so open up your country and your economy, that thousands more will die of infection than would've done, otherwise !! You don't have a Central Government apparatus willing or able to stop you .. apparently.

Sad again !

I take it back, and will once again give you the "fuck off". It's all you deserve. Anyone willing to drop to their knees for the government tells me all I need to know. And when someone like yourself disagrees with someone else, there is no in between, either they agree with you or somehow cede to your non-American bullshit, or we are belittled in various ways. Fuck that and fuck you.

If you like being ruled and think rights are to be scoffed at, your choice. And hell, sounds like perhaps you're in a place that will accommodate you. But we have rights, constitutional rights. And yeah, I know, my patriotic talk and willing to defend my rights as an American and state as much, means I'm sad and it's just all sad. It's OK, I'll deal with the sadness. :rolleyes: But I assure you that I also have my rights. And while myself and others are weirdly capable of common sense and protecting ourselves and protecting others, we can do so while enjoying our rights. And whether the liberal down the road disagrees with that, the liberal on CNN, anyone else trying to take my constitutional rights away, and even if folks from other countries disagree or want rights taken away, I simply don't care and offer the same salute, of course. :rolleyes:

Myself and so many others will be enjoying our rights and defending them. Sucks for others.

[Black Diamond]

I take it back, and will once again give you the "fuck off". It's all you deserve. Anyone willing to drop to their knees for the government tells me all I need to know. And when someone like yourself disagrees with someone else, there is no in between, either they agree with you or somehow cede to your non-American bullshit, or we are belittled in various ways. Fuck that and fuck you.

If you like being ruled and think rights are to be scoffed at, your choice. And hell, sounds like perhaps you're in a place that will accommodate you. But we have rights, constitutional rights. And yeah, I know, my patriotic talk and willing to defend my rights as an American and state as much, means I'm sad and it's just all sad. It's OK, I'll deal with the sadness. :rolleyes: But I assure you that I also have my rights. And while myself and others are weirdly capable of common sense and protecting ourselves and protecting others, we can do so while enjoying our rights. And whether the liberal down the road disagrees with that, the liberal on CNN, anyone else trying to take my constitutional rights away, and even if folks from other countries disagree or want rights taken away, I simply don't care and offer the same salute, of course. :rolleyes:

Myself and so many others will be enjoying our rights and defending them. Sucks for others.
I am wondering why he talks as if covid is certain death when it has a 98 percent survival rate.

[Kathianne]

Drummond, you keep saying things like 'rooted in science.' I can see that to a point, but then there are all the sidetracks.

Herd immunity was the 'scientifically proven way to go, we trust in science...' Until, our scientists showed the PM 'the numbers of keeping with the herd immunity way. So we chose to go the humane way, closing down.'

Of course, the US started over a week earlier, due to said numbers and wanting to save as many as possible. Indeed, even with the viral fire of NYC, NJ, and parts of CT, we still have flattened the curve in nearly all of the US. Where it hasn't flattened, they are not open. Nor are NYC, NJ, CT simply because the numbers are still too high, in spite of the flattened curve in all those areas.

Now in UK, no flattening yet. Could be because the lockdown started later? Could be UK has the European virus version, as did most of the East coast here.

Now you condemn as selfish, nay, murderers if the US opens, no matter how they deal with any spikes. Well, the hypocrisy comes from zero response regarding Sweden for one, which has a higher percapita death rate for the virus than the US, which is significantly lower than most in Europe, Germany being the significant one.

While your economy is smaller and it appears your people maybe willing to give up on it, the US isn't. Nor it appears is Germany and other European nations, though all have curtailed in areas with a spike. There's no way to figure a way out of this problem, other than trial and error.

While you want to stay in the castle until a vaccine, others are not so inclined. It's not just Americans either.

[jimnyc]

I don't think we would get a reply much different from a devout communist citizen in China.

:lol::lol::laugh2:

China has their privacy invaded as a part of life. They have little rights, so most don't know any better and couldn't care less. And yep, many will become dependent on that. They can have food rationed somewhere, and think they need government running their lives to feed them.

Well, if anything, we are seeing that a lot don't care for our freedoms and some are laughing at death happening here (chinese)... maybe less will strive to come here for freedoms and opportunity? :dunno:

[jimnyc]

I am wondering why he talks as if covid is certain death when it has a 98 percent survival rate.

99+

And while certainly bad for certain folks, its hardly a death sentence out there & the mortality rate is quite low. But opening means we have to drop common sense, don't take any precautions, no one is allowed to wear a mask.... and we push the old people and baby carriages out the door first! :)

[Drummond]

I am wondering why he talks as if covid is certain death when it has a 98 percent survival rate.

It doesn't for the two percent who die.

Two percent, of HOW BIG a number ? In a second pandemic wave, that two percent will be a percentage of a far bigger pool of people.

In a society going all-out to achieve herd immunity, it'll be too many for any imaginable healthcare system to cope with. Say goodbye, in those circumstances, to treatment for other illnesses, no matter how grave, and add all those deaths to the two percent you speak of.

Doesn't seem so 'cozy' a fate once you consider these things, does it ?

Viruses mutate, too. The one responsible for the Spanish flu outbreak did, and it mutated to become far deadlier.

If a virus has the ability to mutate, and it's given enough time to ... what price human life then ?

[Drummond]

99+

And while certainly bad for certain folks, its hardly a death sentence out there & the mortality rate is quite low. But opening means we have to drop common sense, don't take any precautions, no one is allowed to wear a mask.... and we push the old people and baby carriages out the door first! :)

Thank you. No reply is even necessary to this one.

[Kathianne]

It doesn't for the two percent who die.

Two percent, of HOW BIG a number ? In a second pandemic wave, that two percent will be a percentage of a far bigger pool of people.

In a society going all-out to achieve herd immunity, it'll be too many for any imaginable healthcare system to cope with. Say goodbye, in those circumstances, to treatment for other illnesses, no matter how grave, and add all those deaths to the two percent you speak of.

Doesn't seem so 'cozy' a fate once you consider these things, does it ?

Viruses mutate, too. The one responsible for the Spanish flu outbreak did, and it mutated to become far deadlier.

If a virus has the ability to mutate, and it's given enough time to ... what price human life then ?


Not sure where you get 'all out for herd immunity.' We are starting to open up, most states that means that folks can return to certain types of businesses. It means that retail stores can have 'pick up/curbside' services. It means that parks that were closed are opened. It means that some beaches are opened, but not pools. Social distancing remains. Masks are widely worn around here in groceries and even in parks for exercise. Not required, though there are cities/states/counties that are trying to. I don't know if the government can make such a law, much less enforce it.

Private stores CAN require the wearing of masks. Airlines are already requiring it. I'm expecting that we are going to see the same soon at all grocers, retail, and any restaurants that will be reopening. The stores haven't 'enforced' social distancing the way many employees and customers may have liked, but that too could be coming. Indeed, I think with 'opening up', the stores are going to be in competition to 'whom makes the customers feel safest.' It's a thing.

Oh, btw where restaurants are allowed to open-which are very few-no more than 25% of capacity are allowed, about the same that grocers were allowed all along.

[Drummond]

@Drummond (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2287), you keep saying things like 'rooted in science.' I can see that to a point, but then there are all the sidetracks.

Herd immunity was the 'scientifically proven way to go, we trust in science...' Until, our scientists showed the PM 'the numbers of keeping with the herd immunity way. So we chose to go the humane way, closing down.'

Both approaches had scientific expertise applied to them. The humane way, still does.


Of course, the US started over a week earlier, due to said numbers and wanting to save as many as possible. Indeed, even with the viral fire of NYC, NJ, and parts of CT, we still have flattened the curve in nearly all of the US. Where it hasn't flattened, they are not open. Nor are NYC, NJ, CT simply because the numbers are still too high, in spite of the flattened curve in all those areas.

Don't worry. Judging by what I've read here, I'm sure that's all going to change soon. Human life is cheap. it seems .. commerce is worth more.


Now in UK, no flattening yet. Could be because the lockdown started later? Could be UK has the European virus version, as did most of the East coast here.

Not true, our latest stats are showing a flattening. Also, our Government is promising to release what it's calling a 'roadmap' to eventual lockdown easing. We will learn more of that, later this week.

Our Government's approach to the virus has been well planned throughout .. the four-point staged response spoke of that. The 'roadmap' also will. We don't believe in being reckless, in the face of a deadly pathogen. And you can be sure that the next steps will also have scientific backing.


Now you condemn as selfish, nay, murderers if the US opens, no matter how they deal with any spikes. Well, the hypocrisy comes from zero response regarding Sweden for one, which has a higher percapita death rate for the virus than the US, which is significantly lower than most in Europe, Germany being the significant one.

However you argue this, you're threatening the world with a second wave of the pandemic. Definitely a 'Wuhan on steroids' ... Wuhan will have been a more modest version of a release than all your States opening up will be.

Me, I don't want to be on the receiving end of one. For one thing .. our Government will have to cope with it. They will, of course, still do their best to.


While your economy is smaller and it appears your people maybe willing to give up on it, the US isn't. Nor it appears is Germany and other European nations, though all have curtailed in areas with a spike. There's no way to figure a way out of this problem, other than trial and error.

True to an extent. But we in the UK can learn from the ranges of lockdown relaxation measures each country takes. If one approach shows a better outcome than another, we can note the differences and adjust accordingly ...

... and, we ARE beginning to plan for lockdown relaxation. We're just not being reckless about it, that's all.


While you want to stay in the castle until a vaccine, others are not so inclined. It's not just Americans either.

You're thinking about Brazil ? You wouldn't believe the bad press Bolsonaro is getting.

Others have a more intelligent method. We in the UK intend to learn from their efforts.

[Drummond]

I take it back, and will once again give you the "fuck off". It's all you deserve. Anyone willing to drop to their knees for the government tells me all I need to know. And when someone like yourself disagrees with someone else, there is no in between, either they agree with you or somehow cede to your non-American bullshit, or we are belittled in various ways. Fuck that and fuck you.

If you like being ruled and think rights are to be scoffed at, your choice. And hell, sounds like perhaps you're in a place that will accommodate you. But we have rights, constitutional rights. And yeah, I know, my patriotic talk and willing to defend my rights as an American and state as much, means I'm sad and it's just all sad. It's OK, I'll deal with the sadness. :rolleyes: But I assure you that I also have my rights. And while myself and others are weirdly capable of common sense and protecting ourselves and protecting others, we can do so while enjoying our rights. And whether the liberal down the road disagrees with that, the liberal on CNN, anyone else trying to take my constitutional rights away, and even if folks from other countries disagree or want rights taken away, I simply don't care and offer the same salute, of course. :rolleyes:

Myself and so many others will be enjoying our rights and defending them. Sucks for others.

Rights are no good to you if you're dead.

As for the 'sucks for others', you must mean the world in general, of which I am a part. Yes, well .. there it is. Your rights, are our dictated terms. Thank you SO much.

We have a saying in my part of the world (and do your research, if you think I made it up .. it's been around for a very considerable time). The saying is, 'When America sneezes, the world catches a cold'.

As old as that saying is, it could've been written for today, couldn't it, Jim ? You sneeze Covid-19 ... you threaten the rest of us with it. Only .. not in quite as limited form of release of it as must've been true of Wuhan.

I noted your post #115. Note that I'd doubtless qualify as one of the 'old' people you refer to.

I note your utter contempt.

Adding that to a return of your abuse, Jim, as well as your closed-mindedness ... the writing's on the wall. I see no future for myself here.

You may feel this is cause to throw a party. I will ask you, if you do, to observe social distancing if you do throw one.

But I'd be ignored, of course.

Life, after all, is VERY cheap. Isn't it, Jim ?

Goodbye. Feel free to ban me, for being a human being. And for not being an American.:salute:

[Kathianne]

Rights are no good to you if you're dead.

As for the 'sucks for others', you must mean the world in general, of which I am a part. Yes, well .. there it is. Your rights, are our dictated terms. Thank you SO much.

We have a saying in my part of the world (and do your research, if you think I made it up .. it's been around for a very considerable time). The saying is, 'When America sneezes, the world catches a cold'.

As old as that saying is, it could've been written for today, couldn't it, Jim ? You sneeze Covid-19 ... you threaten the rest of us with it. Only .. not in quite as limited form of release of it as must've been true of Wuhan.

I noted your post #115. Note that I'd doubtless qualify as one of the 'old' people you refer to.

I note your utter contempt.

Adding that to a return of your abuse, Jim, as well as your closed-mindedness ... the writing's on the wall. I see no future for myself here.

You may feel this is cause to throw a party. I will ask you, if you do, to observe social distancing if you do throw one.

But I'd be ignored, of course.

Life, after all, is VERY cheap. Isn't it, Jim ?

Goodbye. Feel free to ban me, for being a human being. And for not being an American.:salute:


You're not being banned, have never been threatened with being banned, just your attempt to being the victim.

Walk if that is your inclination, no one is stopping you. Should you choose to come and slander our country, you'll still be able to. Enjoy your system, as we do ours.

[Black Diamond]

You're not being banned, have never been threatened with being banned, just your attempt to being the victim.

Walk if that is your inclination, no one is stopping you. Should you choose to come and slander our country, you'll still be able to. Enjoy your system, as we do ours.

Holy crow. I was wondering if he would pull that crap again.

[Kathianne]

Holy crow. I was wondering if he would pull that crap again.

I often wonder if he realizes that it was Trump leading for the opening?

Weirder is that now that UK IS, (as I already had stated based upon what Johnson said the other day at his first appearance), THEIR opening would be 'scientific,' LOL! Not one idea that the UK has been following by weeks just about everything the US has been doing, save the nonsense of 'herd' at the beginning which was their own brilliant was to meet a new virus, until it wasn't. :rolleyes:

Yet somehow Mr. Drummond assumes the mantle of superiority, not only for himself but for the entire UK.

[Drummond]

You're not being banned, have never been threatened with being banned, just your attempt to being the victim.

Walk if that is your inclination, no one is stopping you. Should you choose to come and slander our country, you'll still be able to. Enjoy your system, as we do ours.

More confirmation that I'm making the right decision.

I don't initiate abuse on here (Pete notwithstanding, of course). But I get it, nonetheless. That is the truth. No, I'm not a victim. But neither do I earn abuse. Certainly not for arguing as a caring, decent human being would, one capable of thinking that individual human life is worth something.

And, there's been no slander. I have spoken truthfully throughout. Slander (actually, libel, as I'm not using my voice) involves lies. I have told no lies.

For example, I've certainly not, EVER, accused Jim of being a Leftie.

I give my views. If these are disliked enough, it earns me abuse. Not logic. Not reasoned debate, just abuse.

I am not here to be abused.

Even though I'm not American, my life has individual human worth. So, I say, I don't earn abuse from this forum.

This remains true for as long as I, an elderly guy, dare to keep on living; IF my environment allows me to.

[Black Diamond]

More confirmation that I'm making the right decision.

I don't initiate abuse on here (Pete notwithstanding, of course). But I get it, nonetheless. That is the truth. No, I'm not a victim. But neither do I earn abuse. Certainly not for arguing as a caring, decent human being would, one capable of thinking that individual human life is worth something.

And, there's been no slander. I have spoken truthfully throughout. Slander (actually, libel, as I'm not using my voice) involves lies. I have told no lies.

For example, I've certainly not, EVER, accused Jim of being a Leftie.

I give my views. If these are disliked enough, it earns me abuse. Not logic. Not reasoned debate, just abuse.

I am not here to be abused.

Even though I'm not American, my life has individual human worth. So, I say, I don't earn abuse from this forum.

This remains true for as long as I, an elderly guy, dare to keep on living; IF my environment allows me to.

You insult people or things they are proud of enough times you're gonna get hit. Verbally usually. It's how it is here and I doubt it's any different on the other side of the pond.

[Kathianne]

You insult people or things they are proud of enough times you're gonna get hit. Verbally usually. It's how it is here and I doubt it's any different on the other side of the pond.

Exactly right. Truth is, I've always enjoyed discussing, often agreeing with Drummond. There are topics though, where he just digs in; insults all over the place, throws in gottcha questions that would require much time to answer-which he will just dismiss, (voice of experience which is why I don't play that anymore); insists he knows the 'truth'-such as demanding that if the Constitution doesn't address a pandemic it has no relevance to the situation we face; insists that his country is more 'scientific' than the rube nation, US.

I don't know if anyone noticed but when it was announced that UK scientists thought they were on the road to a vaccine, he was proud. I get that. I said I hoped they would develop or anywhere else, a vaccine would be great. (Caveat: anywhere but China, I will not take a vaccine that originates in China. I do not trust they wouldn't poison the world.) Yet he seems blind or jealous or something in that he never acknowledges what the US does right. Ummm, nearly all medical discoveries in the past 100 years have come from US, Israeli, or French. Goes true with techniques, procedures, pharmaceuticals. The Canadians have some too.

I like the UK, I like Boris Johnson. I do not like those that are not in our country, telling us how our country should act or we are less than his/her country. Drummond has always had those tendencies, even when liking something the US does, he will banter on how we 'should have done more, hit harder, or something.' Never quite right. He expected 'more' of Trump, though he's 'the best' we've had...

[jimnyc]

You're not being banned, have never been threatened with being banned, just your attempt to being the victim.

Walk if that is your inclination, no one is stopping you. Should you choose to come and slander our country, you'll still be able to. Enjoy your system, as we do ours.

Acts like an asshole and gets told to fuck off = Somehow he's gonna get banned, he has no future here solely because of little 'ol me's words. Oh woe is me!

Vilify others instead of their debates as we have seen, and now become a victim.

I think I've seen this before, but can't put my finger on it. Oh, wait, lefties!! Liberals sure do act weird. Even as if they wanna play conservative for awhile, but when a strong wind blow, time to suck one's thumb and wait on the government for assistance and directions.

[jimnyc]

I note your utter contempt.

Adding that to a return of your abuse, Jim, as well as your closed-mindedness ... the writing's on the wall. I see no future for myself here.

You may feel this is cause to throw a party. I will ask you, if you do, to observe social distancing if you do throw one.

But I'd be ignored, of course.

Life, after all, is VERY cheap. Isn't it, Jim ?

Goodbye. Feel free to ban me, for being a human being. And for not being an American.:salute:

Writing on the wall and banning? What else can we invent today, I wonder? That's twice in a short amount of time, so no accident. The victim game.

--

For ANYONE else reading - I have went in depth about common sense ways, PPE protection, how companies can help, how we can help the elderly & compromised, what we may have to be prepared for, might be rolling openings and shutdowns.... And I started about 300 threads on every angle imaginable for this virus. Then when discussing with some folks, of course I mention these things over and over - only to be ignored over and over and over and over and over. How may times will I have to read to prove this or that, to prove censorship or tyranny, only to be met with prove it! 3 posts later. And continual little jabs ignore and points made past them, to be met with the same over and over. And then to be told "You're not listening" :laugh2: Rather ironic non-reading leftie stuff going on there! Anyway, I have tried to support every last thing I have stated - and have.

So I replied as I do. Take it or leave it. You push at me over and over and treat me crappy, I will deliver it back eventually, and ten fold. And continue on with facts instead of fear, while I do still post such stuff to share.

But ain't no one getting banned, folks and no writing on any walls. Simply a disagreement on freedom with a Yankee "fuck you" in their for good effect. Imagine that, freedom of speech while you fight for such and honor it? :)

[jimnyc]

I don't initiate abuse on here (Pete notwithstanding, of course). But I get it, nonetheless. That is the truth. No, I'm not a victim. But neither do I earn abuse. Certainly not for arguing as a caring, decent human being would, one capable of thinking that individual human life is worth something.

And I respected you in return more so than many American members here. I treat people in the manner in which they treat me.

Sure, and as you fight your posts for human life, I make my posts for American rights. Difference being, everyone while talking with you has been respecting that, but you have NOT respected our way of life, our rights. You don't get to push people around and talk down to them like you have been doing about this, and then take the high road if someone tosses shit in your direction. Well, you can, and you apparently do, but it doesn't work both ways.

[jimnyc]

You insult people or things they are proud of enough times you're gonna get hit. Verbally usually. It's how it is here and I doubt it's any different on the other side of the pond.

So someone DID notice besides myself. I don't involve others, never do and always can take care of myself. I personally took offense to certain things that have been stated endlessly already. Some things we cherish as Americans and simply no need to trash it. This virus is in the UK too, and while I can completely shred both the crown and parliament for crap, I don't care to, and it would make little sense and would be disrespectful, at least so long as Drummond is here. So I always avoided such, and will continue to.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Here I am sick, log on to find such rancor in this thread. I could not be more disappointed than I am right now.
Why otherwise intelligent, decent people end up fighting over this virus is truly a sad and great pity, imho...
When nobody has the pefect knowledge of how to respond to it .-Tyr

[Black Diamond]

Here I am sick, log on to find such rancor in this thread. I could not be more disappointed than I am right now.
Why otherwise intelligent, decent people end up fighting over this virus is truly a sad and great pity, imho...
When nobody has the pefect knowledge of how to respond to it .-Tyr

Sorry to upset you but coming in and insulting Americans calling them murderers over and over for opening up and then running off like a petulant child when someone finally pushes back isn't gonna win the brit any friends.

[Abbey Marie]

Drummond, there has never been any discussion about banning you in the umpteen years I’ve been on staff. Just wanted you to know.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Sorry to upset you but coming in and insulting Americans calling them murderers over and over for opening up and then running off like a petulant child when someone finally pushes back isn't gonna win the brit any friends.

You have not upset me- my take on this is that nobody wins in this argument and it is a shame that it has arrived at the point I thought it would get to. You see, we humans are prone to reach points in debates when we see and feel everything is personal , instead of the reality that oft it is just verbal sparring that runs far off track due to due to our emotions interfering with our otherwise fair/sound thinking.
Add to that the serious nature of what, not just we each see and feel and may know- but what this darker world is now.
Wisdom says step back, speak less, think deeper/longer and get more facts/knowledge on the subject.
As the many deliberate lies told about C-19 has so far increased the fear and panic putting billions on edge, imho.
Your own choice of words-- " Sorry to upset you ", could be misconstrued as an insult to me and my character/intelligence/maturity. As it could be taken as if saying--you think I am commenting unduly upset--(which is about as far from the case as can be)
I myself choose to think it was not issued in that way. See that is a more rational way of considering it, eh??
So my previous point about context, emotion, misunderstanding getting into the already controversial communication stands.
However, lets be clear-- please in the future do not apologize to me for something you so wrongly think you have done.
I am not a child , I am not upset by you..
I do prefer a reply to me to not start with a clearly false statement.. ok?--Tyr

[jimnyc]

Here I am sick, log on to find such rancor in this thread. I could not be more disappointed than I am right now.
Why otherwise intelligent, decent people end up fighting over this virus is truly a sad and great pity, imho...
When nobody has the pefect knowledge of how to respond to it .-Tyr


You have not upset me- my take on this is that nobody wins in this argument and it is a shame that it has arrived at the point I thought it would get to. You see, we humans are prone to reach points in debates when we see and feel everything is personal , instead of the reality that oft it is just verbal sparring that runs far off track due to due to our emotions interfering with our otherwise fair/sound thinking.
Add to that the serious nature of what, not just we each see and feel and may know- but what this darker world is now.
Wisdom says step back, speak less, think deeper/longer and get more facts/knowledge on the subject.
As the many deliberate lies told about C-19 has so far increased the fear and panic putting billions on edge, imho.
Your own choice of words-- " Sorry to upset you ", could be misconstrued as an insult to me and my character/intelligence/maturity. As it could be taken as if saying--you think I am commenting unduly upset--(which is about as far from the case as can be)
I myself choose to think it was not issued in that way. See that is a more rational way of considering it, eh??
So my previous point about context, emotion, misunderstanding getting into the already controversial communication stands.
However, lets be clear-- please in the future do not apologize to me for something you so wrongly think you have done.
I am not a child , I am not upset by you..
I do prefer a reply to me to not start with a clearly false statement.. ok?--Tyr


No winners and only folks losing. Certainly not what I had intended for. I did try and fix it earlier and apologized but I guess it was one way. Ok, I can deal with that. So long as I do my part, I'm good. But repeated talk of criminals, our cruddy constitution and our rights meaning nothing.... it wore me down and made me angry, and I responded in a way I normally don't. As I always said, I get passionate about subjects, and I think most can understand passion about American rights, honor, dignity and all that stuff. To me, taking an American's rights away is like spitting on me and/or jailing me. Because otherwise I have rights and am deserving of due process and such. But that constitution thing is something I have the highest regard and belief in. So when it's repeatedly kicked, I hope folks can imagine each time it builds up inside me. And then stuff about going out means I am harming others, or going for a simple drive makes me wrong somehow.

So that's why I responded as I did. And for that, I apologize to the board.

I never claimed to be perfect, but everyone knows I honor all of our rights, freedom of speech and such here at our board. So I try. I knew I was out of line at one point and apologized. Then I talked again but in a much more respectful tone to make it right. But it didn't take long before those same insults to America came time and time again. And claiming to be ignoring him while demanding proof over and over for things I posted a few hundred times here. So I reached that point and lashed out in a post.

Yeah, I was wrong. But I do feel too that it is wrong to lash out at Americans, to speak as such about folks who want to exercise their constitutional rights as an American. Perhaps it wasn't intended as such, but I surely replied a bunch making it clear that I saw such talk of our COTUS and rights to be an insult. But it continued.

I feel bad, Tyr, as I feel I disappointed both yourself and Drummond. You know I am highly respectful whether here on the board or in PM's with ya, and NEVER my goal. But when guys get heated up, they lash out, and that's that. I'll do it with my brother while driving down the highway and then I'm in the rest area 5 minutes later buying breakfast, a few packs of smokes and a coffee for him! Partly because that's just how it is, and part out of guilt too I suppose. :)

Sorry this all happened, Robert. I know he's a good friend of yours. I too saw him as a friend from afar across the pond. The great speaker we have on our board from the UK (what I would tell my wife often), and how detailed he can be and how smart and such. She knows all the "characters". :) But wasn't my intent for any of this to happen. Just was angry and wrote FU to another guy, comes natural to me when angry, but I'm sure it's far far far from the normal dialogue of many.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

No winners and only folks losing. Certainly not what I had intended for. I did try and fix it earlier and apologized but I guess it was one way. Ok, I can deal with that. So long as I do my part, I'm good. But repeated talk of criminals, our cruddy constitution and our rights meaning nothing.... it wore me down and made me angry, and I responded in a way I normally don't. As I always said, I get passionate about subjects, and I think most can understand passion about American rights, honor, dignity and all that stuff. To me, taking an American's rights away is like spitting on me and/or jailing me. Because otherwise I have rights and am deserving of due process and such. But that constitution thing is something I have the highest regard and belief in. So when it's repeatedly kicked, I hope folks can imagine each time it builds up inside me. And then stuff about going out means I am harming others, or going for a simple drive makes me wrong somehow.

So that's why I responded as I did. And for that, I apologize to the board.

I never claimed to be perfect, but everyone knows I honor all of our rights, freedom of speech and such here at our board. So I try. I knew I was out of line at one point and apologized. Then I talked again but in a much more respectful tone to make it right. But it didn't take long before those same insults to America came time and time again. And claiming to be ignoring him while demanding proof over and over for things I posted a few hundred times here. So I reached that point and lashed out in a post.

Yeah, I was wrong. But I do feel too that it is wrong to lash out at Americans, to speak as such about folks who want to exercise their constitutional rights as an American. Perhaps it wasn't intended as such, but I surely replied a bunch making it clear that I saw such talk of our COTUS and rights to be an insult. But it continued.

I feel bad, Tyr, as I feel I disappointed both yourself and Drummond. You know I am highly respectful whether here on the board or in PM's with ya, and NEVER my goal. But when guys get heated up, they lash out, and that's that. I'll do it with my brother while driving down the highway and then I'm in the rest area 5 minutes later buying breakfast, a few packs of smokes and a coffee for him! Partly because that's just how it is, and part out of guilt too I suppose. :)

Sorry this all happened, Robert. I know he's a good friend of yours. I too saw him as a friend from afar across the pond. The great speaker we have on our board from the UK (what I would tell my wife often), and how detailed he can be and how smart and such. She knows all the "characters". :) But wasn't my intent for any of this to happen. Just was angry and wrote FU to another guy, comes natural to me when angry, but I'm sure it's far far far from the normal dialogue of many.

My friend, I neither asked for or need an apology from either you or my friend Drummond--as you each held decisively and firmly to your beliefs , and your idea of the values in your respective nations and cultures.
To me it is sad and tragic that it led to this -Drummond leaving. Yet I know we each make our own path in this dark and too oft tumultuous world. I have asked my friend Drummond not to leave but he is an honorable man and thus makes his own decisions in accord with his integrity, wisdom and desire to live as a free man.
And anybody that says he is not an honorable man- I will myself spit on and challenge their reasoning and bias. And would gladly meet face to face any day of the week...
It is not for me to judge who is more right- who is more wrong.
We as Americans take immense pride in our nation and our freedoms. I challenge any person to declare I myself do not do that.
Yet my friend also takes such a view in his nation.
As to how (or why)the insults may have flown- does not matter to me-- such can not be undone.
Sad point is-- nothing was gained-- AND MUCH WAS TRULY LOST.
I've seen that recently in comments made to me- and I decided right away to not bicker or insult any of my friends here .
Instead -I've decided tis best to gather more information (true/verified) -not blindly believe the organized lies being deliberately spread non-stop) as this virus scourge continues.
I will not abandon either friend--if that makes me an outsider or -- persona non grata-- so be it...--Tyr

[Kathianne]

Just because:

https://scontent-lax3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/96242329_234851341266899_3777896698630635520_o.jpg ?_nc_cat=107&_nc_sid=dd9801&_nc_ohc=5fSZSvdSts4AX-VcYzO&_nc_ht=scontent-lax3-2.xx&oh=b651e0ccbaa8f0e500c9d8f3b0f18fcd&oe=5ED76D3C

[Black Diamond]

You have not upset me- my take on this is that nobody wins in this argument and it is a shame that it has arrived at the point I thought it would get to. You see, we humans are prone to reach points in debates when we see and feel everything is personal , instead of the reality that oft it is just verbal sparring that runs far off track due to due to our emotions interfering with our otherwise fair/sound thinking.
Add to that the serious nature of what, not just we each see and feel and may know- but what this darker world is now.
Wisdom says step back, speak less, think deeper/longer and get more facts/knowledge on the subject.
As the many deliberate lies told about C-19 has so far increased the fear and panic putting billions on edge, imho.
Your own choice of words-- " Sorry to upset you ", could be misconstrued as an insult to me and my character/intelligence/maturity. As it could be taken as if saying--you think I am commenting unduly upset--(which is about as far from the case as can be)
I myself choose to think it was not issued in that way. See that is a more rational way of considering it, eh??
So my previous point about context, emotion, misunderstanding getting into the already controversial communication stands.
However, lets be clear-- please in the future do not apologize to me for something you so wrongly think you have done.
I am not a child , I am not upset by you..
I do prefer a reply to me to not start with a clearly false statement.. ok?--Tyr

I understand where you're coming from and I know people who say they are sorry when they clearly are not. it isn't my intention to treat you like a child. You are a man.

Wisdom does say speak less and reflect rather than react. It is difficult to follow that good advice at times.
It is true that some of these arguments are never won. But It becomes difficult to hold back when one is repeatedly attacked as a murderer; when one's country is repeatedly said to be inferior.. .02.

[Kathianne]

No winners and only folks losing. Certainly not what I had intended for. I did try and fix it earlier and apologized but I guess it was one way. Ok, I can deal with that. So long as I do my part, I'm good. But repeated talk of criminals, our cruddy constitution and our rights meaning nothing.... it wore me down and made me angry, and I responded in a way I normally don't. As I always said, I get passionate about subjects, and I think most can understand passion about American rights, honor, dignity and all that stuff. To me, taking an American's rights away is like spitting on me and/or jailing me. Because otherwise I have rights and am deserving of due process and such. But that constitution thing is something I have the highest regard and belief in. So when it's repeatedly kicked, I hope folks can imagine each time it builds up inside me. And then stuff about going out means I am harming others, or going for a simple drive makes me wrong somehow.

So that's why I responded as I did. And for that, I apologize to the board.

I never claimed to be perfect, but everyone knows I honor all of our rights, freedom of speech and such here at our board. So I try. I knew I was out of line at one point and apologized. Then I talked again but in a much more respectful tone to make it right. But it didn't take long before those same insults to America came time and time again. And claiming to be ignoring him while demanding proof over and over for things I posted a few hundred times here. So I reached that point and lashed out in a post.

Yeah, I was wrong. But I do feel too that it is wrong to lash out at Americans, to speak as such about folks who want to exercise their constitutional rights as an American. Perhaps it wasn't intended as such, but I surely replied a bunch making it clear that I saw such talk of our COTUS and rights to be an insult. But it continued.

I feel bad, Tyr, as I feel I disappointed both yourself and Drummond. You know I am highly respectful whether here on the board or in PM's with ya, and NEVER my goal. But when guys get heated up, they lash out, and that's that. I'll do it with my brother while driving down the highway and then I'm in the rest area 5 minutes later buying breakfast, a few packs of smokes and a coffee for him! Partly because that's just how it is, and part out of guilt too I suppose. :)

Sorry this all happened, Robert. I know he's a good friend of yours. I too saw him as a friend from afar across the pond. The great speaker we have on our board from the UK (what I would tell my wife often), and how detailed he can be and how smart and such. She knows all the "characters". :) But wasn't my intent for any of this to happen. Just was angry and wrote FU to another guy, comes natural to me when angry, but I'm sure it's far far far from the normal dialogue of many.
I don't see anything to be sorry for, other than perhaps some f bombs. You stood up for our system, which is defined by the document written by those 'old, dead men' who also were disparaged, along with their premiere document. A document that countries ever since, have attempted to make into their own.

If anyone is owned an apology it would be America, made by one Drummond.

[Kathianne]

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/371022/

Even in NYC

Irish democracy or removal of consent.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I understand where you're coming from and I know people who say they are sorry when they clearly are not. it isn't my intention to treat you like a child. You are a man.

Wisdom does say speak less and reflect rather than react. It is difficult to follow that good advice at times.
It is true that some of these arguments are never won. But It becomes difficult to hold back when one is repeatedly attacked as a murderer; when one's country is repeatedly said to be inferior.. .02.

Sure it is difficult. I fully understand that. I also fully understand the views expressed by both of my friends.
As each man held firm to their beliefs and judgment. I place blame on nobody. These things happen and too oft
turn out badly-- with reality that nobody won-- because the debate was unwinnable as each one had a right to their own opinion on the matter.
As to any insults engaged, not my place to fault either. People get angry- oft say things in anger. Such is life.
I do not hold that my country is inferior as it is in many ways superior.
Especially so in the fact that it has the greatest Constitution ever devised. It has the greatest amount of freedoms and rights that any government or ruling body has ever operated by.
The subject was the C-virus and reopening. My stand is each nation has the right to do as they think best for their own culture, for their own citizens.
In fact, I hold that we should have never went into lock down, except in hotspots--and even then done so with better judgment on management and restrictions.
The argument lead to one person leaving- I'd prefer that it did not continue and perhaps lead to another negative result.-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I don't see anything to be sorry for, other than perhaps some f bombs. You stood up for our system, which is defined by the document written by those 'old, dead men' who also were disparaged, along with their premiere document. A document that countries ever since, have attempted to make into their own.

If anyone is owned an apology it would be America, made by one Drummond.

My comment is read my reply to blackdiamond..
I doubt even a sincere apology would soothe any that took sincere and great offense to what was said in anger.
Yet if one were given it should be accepted in my opinion.
Of course that is my opinion- one that I as an American hold every right to have.. -Tyr

[Kathianne]

My comment is read my reply to blackdiamond..
I doubt even a sincere apology would soothe any that took sincere and great offense to what was said in anger.
Yet if one were given it should be accepted in my opinion.
Of course that is my opinion- one that I as an American hold every right to have.. -Tyr
I would accept such, though I don’t think he knows just how badly he has offended or even why.

[Drummond]

I don't see anything to be sorry for, other than perhaps some f bombs. You stood up for our system, which is defined by the document written by those 'old, dead men' who also were disparaged, along with their premiere document. A document that countries ever since, have attempted to make into their own.

If anyone is owned an apology it would be America, made by one Drummond.

I logged in, briefly, to see if any apologies were waiting for me .. and also to see if my friend Tyr had added any useful contributions.

My thanks to Tyr for what he HAS contributed .. he's a fine friend.

I see no apologies given to me.

Kathianne .. are you being serious ? What on earth have I to apologise for ??

Let's go through this, step by step, shall we ?

Certain of your Governors decided to 'open up' ... to end lockdowns, and even during a period when your own infection and death rates are the worst anywhere in the world, today. Infections consequently, WILL soar.

You trade across the world; you are a major trading nation.

Your people, especially if you're relaxing your lockdowns, will travel abroad. Will ANY of them be carrying infection ? Remember .. some people are asymptomatic. Many will be incubating the virus without presenting symptoms.

But with lockdowns ended, travel will take off once more, and this WILL involve foreign travel. Any country accepting your citizens is itself at risk.

Even worse ... viruses mutate. A premature lockdown feeds any likelihood of mutation, since the virus is kept alive, it reinfects, the mechanism for mutation is there.

Now ... IS THERE ANY SUGGESTION THAT, CONCURRENT WITH LOCKDOWN LIFTING, YOU'LL CLOSE YOUR BORDERS, TO STOP FOREIGN INFECTIONS, TO STOP A SECOND PANDEMIC ?

[B]NO.

Therefore ... it stands to reason that, in chasing your freedoms, you impact badly on those of others .. we uppity foreigners really do NOT want a second pandemic on our hands, thanks very much !!

But perhaps foreign freedoms just don't matter .. such as, the freedom to live !! Yours, evidently, do ... but, do others ?

Assure me that your people will keep your borders shut. If you do, Kath, you and others will get an apology. If not ... I say that MY freedoms, also count for something.

I have a right to live. My countrymen have a right to live. I would like to have that recognised. May I ask that ? Pretty please ??

Or is it a waste of time to ask ?

And if you people can't do that ... well ... need I even comment ?

I WILL NEVER BETRAY MY OWN COUNTRY'S INTERESTS. NONE OF YOU CAN EXPECT ME TO.

Don't therefore tell me I must apologise. Just as you people are loyal to your country, so I am, to mine.

Let nobody tell me that I lack even that right.

End of story.

P.S >>

If you people really do think that ONLY your rights matter, and you've no interest in considering anyone else's ... I suggest to Jim that he makes DP an 'Americans-only' club, and doesn't allow non-Americans on here. I am more than willing to be banned myself in the furtherance of that policy.

[jimnyc]

I am just reading this. I will write here, but now publicly, what I wrote to Tyr in private.

Drummond - You have my apologies for my F bomb to you. I am sorry for an outburst.

Please understand, much was said about freedoms and our constitution and things being criminal. I do not want to argue or rehash it with you. Suffice to say, it made me upset and I thought I was clear. At any rate, I continued trying to make my points. But it seemed to me, and maybe I'm wrong, but seemed to me that while I respect everything about the UK and her decisions and ability to 100% govern and run their own country.... and I love the folks from over there and really nothing bad to say at all. And no matter ANY decision made over there I would be supportive to our brothers across the pond.

But just my opinion, and how it made me feel, was as if I was not getting any respect whatsoever in return, whether that was to me directly, or to our freedoms or our constitution.

And the first time I felt I was wrong, I apologized. But it was for more or less the same things. And It was accepted, and accepted only. I guess I kind of expected things to be equal and a gentlemen's disagreement and then the gents apologize and make up. But it felt one sided. But ok, I know I did right by apologizing, so I did and left it at that. But just my opinion, and how it made me feel, was that it continued onward towards me, with things that felt insulting to me.

And even though I am now apologizing publicly, as a man should be at minimum responsible for his OWN words, that is what I am doing. I'll do what I think is right, even when sometimes it doesn't feel that way.

Unfortunately, I have done some apologizing in life. I try to make amends when I am wrong. I'm certainly not perfect, but try to acknowledge when I messed up and fix things. And sometimes when I was younger, you would call someone to apologize or see them and shake hands and apologize. And the other person says "thank you" and either hangs up or walks away at that point. I am learning to live with such situations and understanding that what matters most is that "I" do the right thing by me and what I think a decent man does. I wish I could just avoid such things overall, but sometimes when passionate I just cannot help it. But 99 out of 100 times the reason I did so is somewhat understandable, even if folks cannot comprehend it and fail to remember everything else that was stated, and it all gets forgotten over the F bomb.

Stay or go, or anything else that comes along with all I have stated on this subject, I will learn from it. I can't change who I am. But I can try harder at times to avoid certain negative situations.

[jimnyc]

Personally, I never once ever stated that only my rights matter, or that only the rights of the USA matter. I also FULLY understand the hesitation and nerves of so many others. I want rights AND for folks to live and fight this damn thing. And yes, that IS possible. By no means whatsoever would my thinking on it, mean that I think other countries or folks must do the same, or if they don't they are somehow wrong. Hell, even in our own country, we will have some going out, some still staying put. And that's to be fully respected AND protected. Just that we have our constitutional rights and due process. But outside of that, of course everything in the world must be done to stop this scourge. Not by putting us under house arrest, fining and jailing though.

And if Zimbabwe wants to fully do this or that, I respect that fully. Hell, if they want to put the country in jail til its over, so be it. I only speak for myself, and the USA. This should never ever be misconstrued that my way or the highway, or that only my rights matter. Hell, my wifes rights matter, then my neighbors and then my friends at the station. Everyone may act and respond differently, and all should be respected for their choices.

[jimnyc]

I apologized for my words. And I don't need an apology in return honestly.

And while I demand MY rights and that of my fellow citizens, I surely can never promise that borders remain closed. While I have 100% full control over myself, our government, fed and local, are those that take rights away and will determine the borders. Now, I know for sure I am NOT traveling, so that much is guaranteed from myself. Hell, I won't even be traveling domestically on a plane until mostly safe to do so. Just don't trust it right now. Same with buses and subways and such. Wanting my rights doesn't exclude me from common sense. And if I HAVE to hit something like that with no alternative, on goes an N95 mask and gloves - to protect myself - and to ensure that I myself am not unknowingly passing it to someone else.

What is within my own control, will be 100% respectful to the rights of others.

As for countries, I think each should control their own destinies. For example, the USA opens for business to an extent, and another country is worried about their citizens passing things along. By all means, block travel incoming from here. I wouldn't be upset, personally. Each country and citizen has their own rights to be respected. And each government has a duty to protect their citizens in their own ways.

[jimnyc]

I would accept such, though I don’t think he knows just how badly he has offended or even why.

Rights are a very touchy subject. Of course us Americans I think have the most freedoms in the entire world, so therefore I think more to lose. Even when little things are taken from us, we will fight to keep those things. Our freedom was fought and bled for and then fought for in many ways without the blood since. And our constitution has been a basis for so much of our lives. It's a basis in everything we do to an extent. Our laws, our government, our rights - none would be the way they are today if not for that COTUS. And even today, our laws, our rules and guidelines, our very court system and even the SC of the United States still rely on and use that document today. Without it, we have no freedoms. Without it, our government takes too many rights. Without it, they end up ruling us instead of representing us. It's far from perfect, but the very glue that holds it all together year after year is that COTUS. That's the truth of the matter. Which is why when folks here arguments over various amendments things always get heated. Not just with discussing what they mean specifically, but certainly keeping them and not letting folks change them or take them away. We know that if and when we start allowing for such, and that document starts getting overruled and ignored - that's the day we simply start losing all of our rights and freedoms.

[Drummond]

I am just reading this. I will write here, but now publicly, what I wrote to Tyr in private.

Drummond - You have my apologies for my F bomb to you. I am sorry for an outburst.

Please understand, much was said about freedoms and our constitution and things being criminal. I do not want to argue or rehash it with you. Suffice to say, it made me upset and I thought I was clear. At any rate, I continued trying to make my points. But it seemed to me, and maybe I'm wrong, but seemed to me that while I respect everything about the UK and her decisions and ability to 100% govern and run their own country.... and I love the folks from over there and really nothing bad to say at all. And no matter ANY decision made over there I would be supportive to our brothers across the pond.

But just my opinion, and how it made me feel, was as if I was not getting any respect whatsoever in return, whether that was to me directly, or to our freedoms or our constitution.

And the first time I felt I was wrong, I apologized. But it was for more or less the same things. And It was accepted, and accepted only. I guess I kind of expected things to be equal and a gentlemen's disagreement and then the gents apologize and make up. But it felt one sided. But ok, I know I did right by apologizing, so I did and left it at that. But just my opinion, and how it made me feel, was that it continued onward towards me, with things that felt insulting to me.

And even though I am now apologizing publicly, as a man should be at minimum responsible for his OWN words, that is what I am doing. I'll do what I think is right, even when sometimes it doesn't feel that way.

Unfortunately, I have done some apologizing in life. I try to make amends when I am wrong. I'm certainly not perfect, but try to acknowledge when I messed up and fix things. And sometimes when I was younger, you would call someone to apologize or see them and shake hands and apologize. And the other person says "thank you" and either hangs up or walks away at that point. I am learning to live with such situations and understanding that what matters most is that "I" do the right thing by me and what I think a decent man does. I wish I could just avoid such things overall, but sometimes when passionate I just cannot help it. But 99 out of 100 times the reason I did so is somewhat understandable, even if folks cannot comprehend it and fail to remember everything else that was stated, and it all gets forgotten over the F bomb.

Stay or go, or anything else that comes along with all I have stated on this subject, I will learn from it. I can't change who I am. But I can try harder at times to avoid certain negative situations.

Apology noted ! Thank you for it, Jim. It's certainly a gracious one, and it seems very heartfelt, too. So I'm happy to accept it.

There is a wider issue involved, however.

I've no quarrel with your countrymens' rights. I've no specific quarrel with your Constitution, except for the point that those who hold responsibility for drafting it, made no specific provision for the reality of today's pandemic. I feel that they could have; after all, England had its Great Plague in 1665, so plagues were well known to be a possibility in the world.

Regardless; Americans are following their Constitutional rights, but in such a way as to threaten an impact on the rights of non-Americans. If you, or anyone, cares to dispute that, nothing stops you trying to counter the reality I describe in my post above.

Opening up to create a post-lockdown environment will see infection rates, already bad, become far worse. Now, I'd rather that Americans didn't suffer such a fate, but, if you choose to, then, you do.

But unless you lock down your borders, you threaten the world with further infection. The longer the virus thrives, the greater the risk of mutation.

Your freedoms and concerns for liberty are your concern. But you cannot, realistically, claim that your choices don't impact on others. Those others may be forced to live with that impact.

Your choices may become our imperatives. 'America sneezes; the world catches a cold'.

Anyone on here still expecting an apology from me, MUST understand that whatever regard I have for the US and its people, does not override the respect and loyalty I hold to my own people.

None of you can expect or demand than it must. You are loyal to your country and its interests, as I am, to mine.

If the Americans here cannot accept this, then you, Jim, really need to ban non-American participation here.

[Kathianne]

Apology noted ! Thank you for it, Jim. It's certainly a gracious one, and it seems very heartfelt, too. So I'm happy to accept it.

There is a wider issue involved, however.

I've no quarrel with your countrymens' rights. I've no specific quarrel with your Constitution, except for the point that those who hold responsibility for drafting it, made no specific provision for the reality of today's pandemic. I feel that they could have; after all, England had its Great Plague in 1665, so plagues were well known to be a possibility in the world.

Regardless; Americans are following their Constitutional rights, but in such a way as to threaten an impact on the rights of non-Americans. If you, or anyone, cares to dispute that, nothing stops you trying to counter the reality I describe in my post above.

Opening up to create a post-lockdown environment will see infection rates, already bad, become far worse. Now, I'd rather that Americans didn't suffer such a fate, but, if you choose to, then, you do.

But unless you lock down your borders, you threaten the world with further infection. The longer the virus thrives, the greater the risk of mutation.

Your freedoms and concerns for liberty are your concern. But you cannot, realistically, claim that your choices don't impact on others. Those others may be forced to live with that impact.

Your choices may become our imperatives. 'America sneezes; the world catches a cold'.

Anyone on here still expecting an apology from me, MUST understand that whatever regard I have for the US and its people, does not override the respect and loyalty I hold to my own people.

None of you can expect or demand than it must. You are loyal to your country and its interests, as I am, to mine.

If the Americans here cannot accept this, then you, Jim, really need to ban non-American participation here.


Just wow! You miss everything that isn't what you want to hear.

[Drummond]

Just wow! You miss everything that isn't what you want to hear.

To what extent do you wish me to betray my own country's interests ?

[Drummond]

Just wow! You miss everything that isn't what you want to hear.

No answer to my post #151, I see.

I think, Kath, that you're helping to illustrate why I shouldn't be here.

Americans have rights. But then, the same is true for my own people. You really can't see that ?

Jim; please, learn from this. My opinion, for what it's worth, must be that non-Americans don't belong here.

[jimnyc]

No answer to my post #151, I see.

I think, Kath, that you're helping to illustrate why I shouldn't be here.

Americans have rights. But then, the same is true for my own people. You really can't see that ?

Jim; please, learn from this. My opinion, for what it's worth, must be that non-Americans don't belong here.

My opinion is that all are welcome here. My further opinion is that while your people have rights, your country, and I fully respect that, the respect was not returned. It's respect the rights of others, by demand, but zero respect in return. I respect people in how they treat me. I respect the rights of other countries and their own laws and rights due to their citizens. I fully understand and respect that around the world, the rights issue and freedoms may not be identical, so I respect the differences. You have not seen me argue against other countries but China. The way any country handles this, or any other decision, is their right to make. And the citizens of those countries that have their own respective rights, I respect how they approach such issues. In my honest opinion, that respect for our country and our rights and our way of life have not been respected, only belittled and given expectations against our freedoms and way of life.

And yet, so be it. I don't demand such and that's cool with me. And everyone is entitled to the USA version of freedom of speech here and all are welcome until they violate the rules, and even then they likely wouldn't get but a timeout. Folks can disagree on things and still give one another full respect. It's always a 2 way street.

[Drummond]

My opinion is that all are welcome here. My further opinion is that while your people have rights, your country, and I fully respect that, the respect was not returned. It's respect the rights of others, by demand, but zero respect in return. I respect people in how they treat me. I respect the rights of other countries and their own laws and rights due to their citizens. I fully understand and respect that around the world, the rights issue and freedoms may not be identical, so I respect the differences. You have not seen me argue against other countries but China. The way any country handles this, or any other decision, is their right to make. And the citizens of those countries that have their own respective rights, I respect how they approach such issues. In my honest opinion, that respect for our country and our rights and our way of life have not been respected, only belittled and given expectations against our freedoms and way of life.

And yet, so be it. I don't demand such and that's cool with me. And everyone is entitled to the USA version of freedom of speech here and all are welcome until they violate the rules, and even then they likely wouldn't get but a timeout. Folks can disagree on things and still give one another full respect. It's always a 2 way street.

Perhaps, Jim, what drives this -- on my side, if not also yours -- is fear ? Or at least, apprehension ?

Many of your people have chosen to end lockdown regimes. This will mean that Covid-19 gets a new lease of life, that many more of you will become infected and carry that infection.

This is a choice which your people either are, or will shortly be, embracing ... with all that it will cause.

Now, if your people have little enough regard for individual human life that you're willing to go with the choice of endangering it in a very big way, that is a choice for you to make. But, I've seen no sign that Americans have considered anyone's rights other than their own.

Are arrangements in hand to protect life beyond your borders ? Are we foreigners being shown that consideration ? YES or NO ?

If NO, please tell me what the basis should be for respecting and considering Americans, if you don't care about the fate of non-Americans ?

Are you angry that the Chinese did so little, at least initially, to consider people beyond its own borders ? Do you think that the Chinese should be held accountable for their actions ?

Now apply that to America. You, at least potentially, threaten multiple 'Wuhans' upon us all. But in the absence of evidence that you'll show a level of responsibility comparable to that which you think you should've had from China, can you tell me why I, or anyone from my part of the world, should feel obligated to treat the potential American threat with so much more equanimity than you think China should get ?

Do you see my point ?

Let me put it this way. How many, on this forum, think you should be taking major steps to stop your second wave of infection reaching other shores ? Are they too busy expecting respect from foreign lands, to think that a responsible, and life saving, global attitude might actually earn it ??

Foreigners have rights, and it doesn't get any more basic and fundamental than to have our right to life respected.

Do you agree ? If not, please explain why not.

We should respect your rights ... fair enough. Do you respect ours ?

[Abbey Marie]

@Drummond (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2287), I am one of the very few here who wants the States to remain mostly shut down until the virus numbers decrease for at least 14 days. I am afraid of what will happen if we don’t, both because of my high risk issues, and because it is risky to an extent for a ton of people.

I also understand quite clearly the effect the closure is having on a different ton of people. I have a good friend who owns a very small hair salon, and I hear firsthand how tough a time she is having. A lot of these small business owners were already operating on a small margin, and this is devastating to them. She is single, has three kids and a mortgage and all the bills that go with that, plus all the bills that business owners have. Like buying her own expensive health insurance, e.g. She’s been unable to get the stimulus check so far, too. Her state (PA) is allowing her to open up next week (to do the hair of “essential” people only), and she is almost literally jumping for joy.

So, I see this issue clearly from both sides.

If your main concern is that we Americans will have a second serious wave of infection from opening too soon, I agree with that concern. But if your main concern is that we will then infect your country by traveling after that happens, I’m not on board so much. First, I doubt we would be traveling if we are in such dire straits. Second, as someone said, you can always ban travel from the US. (Bermuda has closed its airport and ports, and they are a tourism-based country).

More to follow...

[Kathianne]

@Drummond (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2287), I am one of the very few here who wants the States to remain mostly shut down until the virus numbers decrease for at least 14 days. I am afraid of what will happen if we don’t, both because of my high risk issues, and because it is risky to an extent for a ton of people.

I also understand quite clearly the effect the closure is having on a different ton of people. I have a good friend who owns a very small hair salon, and I hear firsthand how tough a time she is having. A lot of these small business owners were already operating on a small margin, and this is devastating to them. She is single, has three kids and a mortgage and all the bills that go with that, plus all the bills that business owners have. Like buying her own expensive health insurance, e.g. She’s been unable to get the stimulus check so far, too. Her state (PA) is allowing her to open up next week (to do the hair of “essential” people only), and she is almost literally jumping for joy.

So, I see this issue clearly from both sides.

If your main concern is that we Americans will have a second serious wave of infection from opening too soon, I agree. But if your main concern is that we will then infect your country by traveling after that happens, I’m not on board so much. First, I doubt we would be traveling if we are in such dire straits. Second, as someone said, you can always ban travel from the US. (Bermuda has closed its airport and ports, and they are a tourism-based country).

More to follow...
Really, excellent suggestion. UK may ban Americans from visiting. New Zealand and Australia are only slowly letting each other visit, every other country banned from at least New Zealand. Now talk about borders. Excellent!

[Drummond]

@Drummond (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2287), I am one of the very few here who wants the States to remain mostly shut down until the virus numbers decrease for at least 14 days. I am afraid of what will happen if we don’t, both because of my high risk issues, and because it is risky to an extent for a ton of people.

I also understand quite clearly the effect the closure is having on a different ton of people. I have a good friend who owns a very small hair salon, and I hear firsthand how tough a time she is having. A lot of these small business owners were already operating on a small margin, and this is devastating to them. She is single, has three kids and a mortgage and all the bills that go with that, plus all the bills that business owners have. Like buying her own expensive health insurance, e.g. She’s been unable to get the stimulus check so far, too. Her state (PA) is allowing her to open up next week (to do the hair of “essential” people only), and she is almost literally jumping for joy.

So, I see this issue clearly from both sides.

If your main concern is that we Americans will have a second serious wave of infection from opening too soon, I agree with that concern. But if your main concern is that we will then infect your country by traveling after that happens, I’m not on board so much. First, I doubt we would be traveling if we are in such dire straits. Second, as someone said, you can always ban travel from the US. (Bermuda has closed its airport and ports, and they are a tourism-based country).

More to follow...

Don't think for a moment that I lack sympathy for what America will go through, once all those States that are hell-bent on opening up, DO. I also know that it has to happen, sooner or later.

Should you be opening up, to the extent intended, now ? Arguable, but it's not my place to pass judgement.

I wonder if it's occurred to people, here, that the decision to open up is one dictated to everyone apprehensive about it ? Rights are relative, you see. One person's freedom is another's prison.

The same principle applies to foreign countries having to cope with the freedom that America is, overall, exercising against them.

Abbey, you're right, the UK could deny entry to the UK of anyone from America. But, it's not that simple. What if an American (infected, of course) flies to another country, infects some people, then one or more fly from THAT country, to here ?

To be fully safe (this not counting illegal immigrants !) we'd have to seal our borders against EVERYONE, from EVERYWHERE.

Partly why this matters is that a second infection wave may be a mutated version ... the longer a virus exists, and the greater the biological diversity available to it from repeated infections, the greater the chance of a mutation.

As was true of the Spanish flu, what if that second wave is a lot deadlier ?

So .. I'd like to learn what consideration America has given to keeping the world safe from that eventuality. And, if it's not considered any of this, how, then, should we regard America ?

If my answer to that is objected to ... OK. What answers do others offer ?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

No answer to my post #151, I see.

I think, Kath, that you're helping to illustrate why I shouldn't be here.

Americans have rights. But then, the same is true for my own people. You really can't see that ?

Jim; please, learn from this. My opinion, for what it's worth, must be that non-Americans don't belong here.

My friend, on this I adamantly disagree. As history shows that you have always been welcomed here by those that matter here, imho.
And Jim certainly tries his best to be fair and not in any unnecessary way censure or ban members. I have see that in my many years here.
I also on this topic of the virus and reopening quite firmly believe each nation must set its own course.
As to what or how bad the disease may- or may not be/become- Fate will decide just as it always has throughout mankind's long history.
We are indeed a modern world, with modern and great advances in medicine.
As Americans we do see the dangers and the loss but we as a free people, the most free citizens on earth do not want to give our government any more power than that which it has already seized.
Without rehashing all the points thus made by the many replies given in this thread.
I think that, unless we want a one world government,(which I would myself die to try to prevent) we must decide to honor the independence of each and every nation..
Point being we get to take our own risks and how such risks may or may not affect others can not take paramount importance or control over own sovereignty /freedoms and rights.
As you so sincerely and firmly adhere to your nation's choice-its course-- we argue so do we have that same right.
I have got to go may revisit this tread tomorrow. But I am reluctant and very likely not to choose to enter into a contest on the merits , pros and cons on this subject my friend as I see it as unwinnable to either side.
Stay safe my friend. God bless.

[jimnyc]

Do you respect ours ?

I think I made myself abundantly clear in how I feel about your country alone, but other countries around the world, and that I fully respect that. Their decisions to make. Unsure why you would continue to ask this. I continue to show respect and simply don't see it in return.

I'm outta the discussion. No point, agree to disagree. Or not. Either way I'm taking myself out of this one. It's either accept the disrespect I see and no matter how I describe it or how many times, or take it in the face somehow while I seem to find myself repeating myself.

I said what I needed to say. I did the right thing by correcting the words I used. Gonna leave it at that and just walk away.

[Drummond]

I think I made myself abundantly clear in how I feel about your country alone, but other countries around the world, and that I fully respect that. Their decisions to make. Unsure why you would continue to ask this. I continue to show respect and simply don't see it in return.

I'm outta the discussion. No point, agree to disagree. Or not. Either way I'm taking myself out of this one. It's either accept the disrespect I see and no matter how I describe it or how many times, or take it in the face somehow while I seem to find myself repeating myself.

I said what I needed to say. I did the right thing by correcting the words I used. Gonna leave it at that and just walk away.

No reply expected to my answer, then.

You don't say that America should be showing respect for foreign lives by helping to safeguard them, as your closing your borders would achieve.

On the one hand, I'm sure that most here feel that China could've done a lot more to protect the world from its virus than it did. So, if America starts (or has great potential to start) a second pandemic wave .. could it not show us greater respect than China demonstrably did ?

If no plans exist for safeguarding the world, then, from America as a whole .. where's that respect ?

[Abbey Marie]

Don't think for a moment that I lack sympathy for what America will go through, once all those States that are hell-bent on opening up, DO. I also know that it has to happen, sooner or later.

Should you be opening up, to the extent intended, now ? Arguable, but it's not my place to pass judgement.

I wonder if it's occurred to people, here, that the decision to open up is one dictated to everyone apprehensive about it ? Rights are relative, you see. One person's freedom is another's prison.

The same principle applies to foreign countries having to cope with the freedom that America is, overall, exercising against them.

Abbey, you're right, the UK could deny entry to the UK of anyone from America. But, it's not that simple. What if an American (infected, of course) flies to another country, infects some people, then one or more fly from THAT country, to here ?

To be fully safe (this not counting illegal immigrants !) we'd have to seal our borders against EVERYONE, from EVERYWHERE.

Partly why this matters is that a second infection wave may be a mutated version ... the longer a virus exists, and the greater the biological diversity available to it from repeated infections, the greater the chance of a mutation.

As was true of the Spanish flu, what if that second wave is a lot deadlier ?

So .. I'd like to learn what consideration America has given to keeping the world safe from that eventuality. And, if it's not considered any of this, how, then, should we regard America ?

If my answer to that is objected to ... OK. What answers do others offer ?

Re: the bolded section. There is much more to fear in the world than the very small possibility that in such a set of circuitous facts you would get infected. I think for your own peace of mind, you shouldn’t worry about it. And that is coming from someone with more than one high risk right here in the country you fear most.

Do you believe in God? Prayer helps keep me from letting the fear demons get to me too much.

Anyway, bottom line is, your country has to decide how it wants to protect itself, and people have to understand that we can never be even close to total immunity.

[Drummond]

My friend, on this I adamantly disagree. As history shows that you have always been welcomed here by those that matter here, imho.
And Jim certainly tries his best to be fair and not in any unnecessary way censure or ban members. I have see that in my many years here.
I also on this topic of the virus and reopening quite firmly believe each nation must set its own course.
As to what or how bad the disease may- or may not be/become- Fate will decide just as it always has throughout mankind's long history.
We are indeed a modern world, with modern and great advances in medicine.
As Americans we do see the dangers and the loss but we as a free people, the most free citizens on earth do not want to give our government any more power than that which it has already seized.
Without rehashing all the points thus made by the many replies given in this thread.
I think that, unless we want a one world government,(which I would myself die to try to prevent) we must decide to honor the independence of each and every nation..
Point being we get to take our own risks and how such risks may or may not affect others can not take paramount importance or control over own sovereignty /freedoms and rights.
As you so sincerely and firmly adhere to your nation's choice-its course-- we argue so do we have that same right.
I have got to go may revisit this tread tomorrow. But I am reluctant and very likely not to choose to enter into a contest on the merits , pros and cons on this subject my friend as I see it as unwinnable to either side.
Stay safe my friend. God bless.

My point on banning, Tyr, is that it's my belief that non-Americans should be banned, certainly including myself. I've not said that I've been threatened by a ban. A ban is my suggestion.

I note your comment about fate. Well ... fate played its part in the Great Plague of 1665. The outcome was far from pretty. Now, we've sufficient general knowledge about viruses to take basic protection measures.

America proposes to defy them, even as it's reaching colossal infection and death totals, now unmatched by any other country. This may be America's choice, but I don't see why we must all be stuck with it .. any more than I think China's international attitude to us all was less than appalling.

We do indeed get to take our own risks. More precisely, we can have those risks moved in our direction .. towards the UK and elsewhere. And, yes, America can do exactly what China did, and say that its actions are those that the world as a whole must tolerate.

... so, OK. What's good for China, is good for America. Not so good for other countries, but them's the breaks, eh ?

Tyr, your wisdom shines through, as ever. I'm not going to win this argument, and I'd say that those disagreeing with me won't, either. We're just stuck with a reality. One chosen by America, one foisted upon us, which we must all, in our way, find a way of coping with.

Stay safe yourself, Tyr. I'll do my best to do the same, such as that 'best' will be.

[Drummond]

Re: the bolded section. There is much more to fear in the world than the very small possibility that in such a set of circuitous facts you would get infected. I think for your own peace of mind, you shouldn’t worry about it. And that is coming from someone with more than one high risk right here in the country you fear most.

I wish very much that the risk you are facing, is one you could reliably avoid.

The 'small possibility' may just be that. Then again, did the Chinese authorities start off with that belief, when the virus first appeared in Wuhan ? Or, did the much greater danger posed by the Spanish Flu's second wave, seem to be a very small chance, just before it hit ?

The world of precedents is not encouraging.


Do you believe in God? Prayer helps keep me from letting the fear demons get to me too much.

Indeed I do believe, and it helps ! Still, my belief in God doesn't prevent me from being a realist.


Anyway, bottom line is, your country has to decide how it wants to protect itself, and people have to understand that we can never be even close to total immunity.

With a vaccine or cure, immunity can become a reality ... if or when one arrives.

Jumping the gun does nobody any great favours.

And, yes, my country needs to defend itself as and when it does. This was and is, after all, the reality of Wuhan.

And of all that follows, too.

[Black Diamond]

I think jimnyc needs to be commended for his patience and for being so gracious. I don't know how he does it. And I am not referring to banning vs not banning.

[Drummond]

I think @jimnyc (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=1) needs to be commended for his patience and for being so gracious. I don't know how he does it. And I am not referring to banning vs not banning.

I don't know what more I can do to make my case. The same goes for trying to get people to listen.

Jim's tolerance, graciousness (in between 'F'-bombs !) is of course appreciated.

But, consider. My call for America to act responsibly on the world stage is apparently falling on deaf ears. On the one hand, Americans (.. right along with the rest of us !) feel that China needs to be held to account for the Wuhan outbreak, and how that evolved. This, Americans see the justice of.

But, where is its equivalent, when considering what may occur if Covid-19 explodes across America ?

Has any consideration been given to border control ? I have asked, but nobody has given me any hint of preparations from America along those lines.

So, then, you ask for, and expect, respect from foreigners such as myself. But where's the evidence that you even respect our right to live ?

If the overall mood on this forum is that Americans have no need to consider questions such as this, but that non-Americans must nonetheless show the fullest respect for 'The American View' ... then, clearly, there is a case for banning non-Americans here.

You don't even respect our right to life. But, you expect respect to be unstinting from those whose lives you disrespect.

What's wrong with this picture ? Anyone here have the smallest inkling of what that might be ?

... so, no. Jim, in my opinion, would be wise to ban us pesky foreigners from here. Because I can't guarantee that foreigners will always concede that respect must only flow in one direction.

Those that'll survive, of course.

[Kathianne]

So when UK begins opening next week and some saying it should be faster and some say it should be slower and a few will cluck that it should be 'scientific,' 'planned,' anything other than what those vulgar Americans have done they will be fine. They won't be hurting anyone else. After all, they are European!

[Kathianne]

LOL! Remember all the 'scientific' talk about facemasks, herd, compassion of humanity? Yeah, :rolleyes: no more or less than any other country.

Here's Boris, 'facemasks are going to be part of reopening of UK' LOL! Oh so scientific. More like 'we don't have enough of them, while we were going all herd and such, then sick, we forgot to order! Bumbling, nothing more or less.

Wish UK well with their scientific opening. Hey, even copying the US way of calling the suckers, face coverings. LOL!

https://news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-lockdown-restrictions-lifted-first-081532930.html


...Unlike many other countries, the UK government has resisted calls for citizens to be advised to wear face masks, insisting that they only have a limited effect on reducing the spread of infection. The real reason for the reluctance to encourage their use is likely to do with fears about supply shortages, rather than doubts about the science.This reluctance has begun to drop away in recent weeks with Johnson signalling that new advice on face-coverings will form a big part of his plans to ease the lockdown. (https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-boris-johnson-says-masks-will-be-useful-2020-5?r=US&IR=T?utm_source=yahoo.com&utm_medium=referral) The calculation made in Downing Street is that while masks in themselves may not have a dramatic impact on reducing infection spread, they could have a significant impact on increasing public confidence about returning to work, particularly on public transport.
However, ministers are unlikely to use the term "face mask," and will instead insist upon "cloth coverings," in order to discourage the panic-buying of clinical face masks.

...

[jimnyc]

I will never be banning anyone prior to even posting here, ever. Would never be a thought. I hope the entire board understands that fully. Whatever is written by ANY member that ever comes here with all of their own valued opinions, still doesn't represent my vision for this board and what I have always fought for over the years, much to the disliking of some. We don't ban people on request of others, nor their own request. We don't ban people for any other reason than breaking the rules. Much has been stated by many a member over the years, from simple requests, to how things should be handled, to demands & all kinds of various input. But I've held steady to my beliefs and plan on continuing to do so. Everyone is entitled to having their voice and opinions. This does not mean that folks will always agree, and that's the point of the boards existence.

[jimnyc]

LOL! Remember all the 'scientific' talk about facemasks, herd, compassion of humanity? Yeah, :rolleyes: no more or less than any other country.

Here's Boris, 'facemasks are going to be part of reopening of UK' LOL! Oh so scientific. More like 'we don't have enough of them, while we were going all herd and such, then sick, we forgot to order! Bumbling, nothing more or less.

Wish UK well with their scientific opening. Hey, even copying the US way of calling the suckers, face coverings. LOL!

https://news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-lockdown-restrictions-lifted-first-081532930.html

Facemasks were behind, just as they were here. I even said it would come, and it is. Same with opening, even if 1-2 weeks after us, was kind of inevitable. I'm confident there will be differences in how the openings are handled. I wish them nothing but the best of luck and health!!

[Kathianne]

Facemasks were behind, just as they were here. I even said it would come, and it is. Same with opening, even if 1-2 weeks after us, was kind of inevitable. I'm confident there will be differences in how the openings are handled. I wish them nothing but the best of luck and health!!
Oh same here. Just that some implied that 'masks' were useless and perhaps harmful, after all the experts from government, WHO said so! Until they weren't any longer, useless and harmful that is.

Then there were some who implied that US would be every bit as guilty and culpable as China if US 'reopened' prior to something or other. No mention of the countries that already had started, nor even in Europe the great Sweden experiment with 'herd.' Not only any mention, no bothering to respond when brought up, just ignored with pompous superiority.

[Black Diamond]

Really, excellent suggestion. UK may ban Americans from visiting. New Zealand and Australia are only slowly letting each other visit, every other country banned from at least New Zealand. Now talk about borders. Excellent!

All sounds xenophobic.

[Black Diamond]

All sounds xenophobic.

I'm Joe Biden and I approve of the quoted post.

[Drummond]

All sounds xenophobic.

No, it isn't. But even if it were, it'd still be a lifesaving exercise.

Enjoy this taste of UK 'xenophobia' ...

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?69814-UK-acts-to-protect-its-borders-!!!&p=958904#post958904

[Drummond]

I'm Joe Biden and I approve of the quoted post.

Figures ... it did come across as Leftie ....

[Black Diamond]

No, it isn't. But even if it were, it'd still be a lifesaving exercise.

Enjoy this taste of UK 'xenophobia' ...

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?69814-UK-acts-to-protect-its-borders-!!!&p=958904#post958904

I know it isn't.

[Drummond]

LOL! Remember all the 'scientific' talk about facemasks, herd, compassion of humanity? Yeah, :rolleyes: no more or less than any other country.

Here's Boris, 'facemasks are going to be part of reopening of UK' LOL! Oh so scientific. More like 'we don't have enough of them, while we were going all herd and such, then sick, we forgot to order! Bumbling, nothing more or less.

Wish UK well with their scientific opening. Hey, even copying the US way of calling the suckers, face coverings. LOL!

https://news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-lockdown-restrictions-lifted-first-081532930.html

Having fun with this, Kathianne ?

You 'conveniently' omit what we've been discussing in recent days about how Covid-19 transmits its infection from person-to-person.

It comes down to this: does the virus just spread purely by airborne transmission ? OR, does it 'piggyback' on tiny droplets of water in the breath of an infected person, needing that water to travel ?

If it spreads via airborne transmission, the example I gave in another post about mask viability is valid; i.e, if you can blow out a candle through a face mask, then the mask is useless. HOWEVER ... if transmission - if the new theory is valid - is droplet-based, not specifically air-based, then a more inferior form of face mask may have limited use.

Our scientists are still not saying that the poorer quality masks are 'safe' ... just that they may be better than first thought.

As I've said ... our Government is led by scientific advice. Science doesn't stand still. Neither, therefore, does it have to follow that Government advice will, either.

As much as you may feel the urge to descend into sarcasm to make your points, one fact remains clear, which is, our Government is far more caring about individual human life than yours appears to be.

[Drummond]

I know it isn't.

Well, quite. We're just doing what has to be done. In the absence of responsible conduct from others, so we have to act more responsibly ourselves.

Lives are at stake, after all. Something that Conservative thinkers should value.

[Drummond]

Oh same here. Just that some implied that 'masks' were useless and perhaps harmful, after all the experts from government, WHO said so! Until they weren't any longer, useless and harmful that is.

Then there were some who implied that US would be every bit as guilty and culpable as China if US 'reopened' prior to something or other. No mention of the countries that already had started, nor even in Europe the great Sweden experiment with 'herd.' Not only any mention, no bothering to respond when brought up, just ignored with pompous superiority.

Name me one country in Europe that's as large as the US, or has as many people in its population.

Your wholesale opening-up will make the virus spike far more radically, among far more people .. creating conditions that couldn't be more ideal for it. That also includes a greater capacity for mutation, by the way.

Sweden has less than ten million people in a landmass the size of the UK, which has well over six times as many people. Population density is therefore far less, overall.

And Helsinki has not done well. Indeed, try comparing Sweden's statistics with those of its neighbours.

But feel free to 'forget' these facts.

[Drummond]

https://uk.style.yahoo.com/coronavirus-uk-lockdown-extended-161926788.html


The UK’s coronavirus lockdown has been extended, the government has confirmed.

Foreign secretary Dominic Raab, leading the government’s daily coronavirus press conference in Downing Street, said: “There is no change today in the guidance or in the rules.”

The government was legally obliged on Thursday to give notice of whether the lockdown would be continuing.

We're still waiting for a qualifying statement from Boris, due this coming Sunday. Our media speculate that very limited easings MAY be introduced.

[revelarts]

Oh same here. Just that some implied that 'masks' were useless and perhaps harmful, after all the experts from government, WHO said so! Until they weren't any longer, useless and harmful that is.

ummm well Kath you know sometimes,
"Guberments Lie!"

[Kathianne]

ummm well Kath you know sometimes,
"Guberments Lie!"

Indeed. I said from the get go, 'masks help.' How could I say something like that? Had been watching what was happening in Hong Kong, Taiwan, well before the crisis hit here. Saw the increase in mask wearing everyday folks via videos in late summer/fall, 'some pneumonia disease on mainland,' was reason given. Saw their numbers and Italy and thought that WHO and CDC were lying. They were.

[Black Diamond]

ummm well Kath you know sometimes,
"Guberments Lie!"

Britain's never does.

[Kathianne]

Britain's never does.
:laugh2:

They just changes their mind...

[Drummond]

Britain's never does.

Don't be ridiculous. We, in the past, have voted Socialists into power.

You're overlooking the fact that, currently, we have Conservatives in charge. So you need to rethink things, I suggest ...

[Drummond]

:laugh2:

They just changes their mind...

Covered previously, I think ? Scientific advice isn't static, if the science underpinning it is evolving with increased knowledge.

We do what you do not do. We adapt to reality. Scientific advice changes ? OK .. we adapt to it.

Let me repeat a challenge I've just posted elsewhere. On the subject of adaptability ... tell me, does your Constitution make any reference to pandemics ? Any advice offered ? Any decrees ? Any consideration mentioned regarding how pandemics can change a society, and so, what to do if/when it does ?

Our scientists adapt to their understanding of the science involved, not least because nothing stops them. Likewise, nothing stops our Government being led by scientific realities, as these are understood, and how these evolve.

Call it a 'reality, real-time' approach.

[jimnyc]

Covered previously, I think ? Scientific advice isn't static, if the science underpinning it is evolving with increased knowledge.

We do what you do not do. We adapt to reality. Scientific advice changes ? OK .. we adapt to it.

And the USA evolves as information evolves and is understood. And yet folks around the world will still condemn at times. And then others around the world will sometimes evolve themselves as science evolves, and even sometimes end up taking similar changes/stances. As in here with masks. And eventually opening. Seems some do so in the name if science and learning and knowledge and with all full testing and caution and respect - while the evil empire of the USA is reckless when they do such things.

[Kathianne]

And the USA evolves as information evolves and is understood. And yet folks around the world will still condemn at times. And then others around the world will sometimes evolve themselves as science evolves, and even sometimes end up taking similar changes/stances. As in here with masks. And eventually opening. Seems some do so in the name if science and learning and knowledge and with all full testing and caution and respect - while the evil empire of the USA is reckless when they do such things.

Yes Jim, it's so weird how 'science and UK' keep following the US example, being so 'unscientific' and all! Yes, no pesky doctors or any type of science like fellows around here. Nope, uh huh! LOL!

[jimnyc]

Yes Jim, it's so weird how 'science and UK' keep following the US example, being so 'unscientific' and all! Yes, no pesky doctors or any type of science like fellows around here. Nope, uh huh! LOL!

Our constitution has zero to do with pandemics. Other than to perhaps shed some perceived negativity on the document, there shouldn't even be an expectation or question that it's in there. I thought it was very well understood for years now what the COTUS is and for. We use it to support our freedoms. Others at times will scoff at it because something else ISN'T in it, such as maybe things like pandemics or national emergencies and protecting the nation or the entire free world. But it's not supposed to, never was.

And the masks and all accompanying decisions, all supported by science, and LONG before this. Studies of the effectiveness of them have been done for years. And it's still a known fact at what they can block and how much. To me it was NEVER a question. It was only a question as to when they tell others it may be wise here too, at one point in time. But the science already had long proven such.

Basically, seems to me like before anything happens here, folks are making such informed decisions based in what science and doctors are telling us, and evolving on as time progresses. But no on is ignoring that and running out and licking poles and hopping on international travel. But yeah, I'm sure there are and will be idiots that put themselves in danger. In a free land of 328+ million people, there will always be some. But I mentioned tirelessly all the endless precautions being taken. And none of that stops with freedoms and rights. It continues, and in a mass way.

I honestly see no difference between how the UK and the USA are handling incoming traffic to their respective countries. Neither is sending air travel around the world. I don't know the facts yet of how it will be handled when outgoing travel eventually resumes for either of our countries. So not a lot to compare in that department yet. But I know enough of both countries citizens to know we will all honor the rights and decisions of other countries and how they are handling. So all told, I really don't see any difference at all yet between incoming or outgoing. Perhaps internally there are many differences between our countries. Nothing the UK decides within their borders is my business. Nothing within our freedom loving borders should is their business. And if quarantines will happen should I visit the UK, then my chances, or that of anyone else visiting, and getting others sick will be severely diminished. So I don't see our freedoms harming them. Not unless they were to FULLY open and no quarantines, and if so, then would they be reckless for such a decision on their own people? Personally, I say no, because eventually it WILL happen. And until then, the protection is there.

But we should remain on lockdown and our rights suspended for now - so that we don't somehow get folks sick in the UK? While they are just starting to "maybe" wear masks, and they too are about to open, albeit in a limited manner. And I see nothing that says no one from the UK, who may be asymptomatic, will be stopped from leaving and possibly infecting elsewhere?

[Kathianne]

Our constitution has zero to do with pandemics. Other than to perhaps shed some perceived negativity on the document, there shouldn't even be an expectation or question that it's in there. I thought it was very well understood for years now what the COTUS is and for. We use it to support our freedoms. Others at times will scoff at it because something else ISN'T in it, such as maybe things like pandemics or national emergencies and protecting the nation or the entire free world. But it's not supposed to, never was.

And the masks and all accompanying decisions, all supported by science, and LONG before this. Studies of the effectiveness of them have been done for years. And it's still a known fact at what they can block and how much. To me it was NEVER a question. It was only a question as to when they tell others it may be wise here too, at one point in time. But the science already had long proven such.

Basically, seems to me like before anything happens here, folks are making such informed decisions based in what science and doctors are telling us, and evolving on as time progresses. But no on is ignoring that and running out and licking poles and hopping on international travel. But yeah, I'm sure there are and will be idiots that put themselves in danger. In a free land of 328+ million people, there will always be some. But I mentioned tirelessly all the endless precautions being taken. And none of that stops with freedoms and rights. It continues, and in a mass way.

I honestly see no difference between how the UK and the USA are handling incoming traffic to their respective countries. Neither is sending air travel around the world. I don't know the facts yet of how it will be handled when outgoing travel eventually resumes for either of our countries. So not a lot to compare in that department yet. But I know enough of both countries citizens to know we will all honor the rights and decisions of other countries and how they are handling. So all told, I really don't see any difference at all yet between incoming or outgoing. Perhaps internally there are many differences between our countries. Nothing the UK decides within their borders is my business. Nothing within our freedom loving borders should is their business. And if quarantines will happen should I visit the UK, then my chances, or that of anyone else visiting, and getting others sick will be severely diminished. So I don't see our freedoms harming them. Not unless they were to FULLY open and no quarantines, and if so, then would they be reckless for such a decision on their own people? Personally, I say no, because eventually it WILL happen. And until then, the protection is there.

But we should remain on lockdown and our rights suspended for now - so that we don't somehow get folks sick in the UK? While they are just starting to "maybe" wear masks, and they too are about to open, albeit in a limited manner. And I see nothing that says no one from the UK, who may be asymptomatic, will be stopped from leaving and possibly infecting elsewhere?

Agree. The number 1 thing the Constitution does is set up a government with many checks and balances. Among the checks is how the people are protected against the natural tendency of government towards tyranny. It is set up to LIMIT government, as the benign tyranny by England wasn't all that benign and had been thrown off.

I also agree that the analogy between the US opening up and what China has done, being comparable is laughable. The only conclusion I can come up with is that someone who put forth the analogy hates the US and its people.

China, as you noted, sent people throughout the world for months, without warning of the contagion. The US is hiding nothing, indeed it's been heavily covered by news outlets worldwide. Any country could ban or quarantine any visitors, for any reason, into their country. The problem isn't large as most people are not traveling and the lowest bookings on airlines is on business class.

[jimnyc]

China lied and the folks that were traveling were sick and the world had no knowledge.

Folks around the world are all involved now and countries know more than enough to determine their best moves and next actions. If they want to quarantine incoming to protect their country, so be it. But any comparison to us opening and China lying and tossing unsuspecting sickness on the world, not giving countries an opportunity to decide what to do and how to handle, is mute and dies at the very mention of it.

Other will open, as the UK is even in the beginning of, even if slower. And unless these respective countries block every single one of their citizens from leaving their own borders, then I guess they can be accused of doing the same as China. Makes no sense to even think of such a comparison. Folks around the world talking about opening up and how to handle everything, I don't see any of them talking about how no one will be able to leave their respective countries.

We'll see, perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe the UK will be quarantining folks for 14 days coming in. And no one can leave their borders. And folks who did undergo quarantine, and eventually leave the country, will be forced to go back the way they came, and no stopping flights anywhere on the way, MUST all be direct 1 way flights. Otherwise, they still may be letting a sick person leave to bring to another country. If and when they do this, in both directions, then they will be doing different. Until then, it's the same as here, no matter how much arguing is given. Simple facts.

[revelarts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcUAG6t5aN8

[Drummond]

Agree. The number 1 thing the Constitution does is set up a government with many checks and balances. Among the checks is how the people are protected against the natural tendency of government towards tyranny. It is set up to LIMIT government, as the benign tyranny by England wasn't all that benign and had been thrown off.

I also agree that the analogy between the US opening up and what China has done, being comparable is laughable. The only conclusion I can come up with is that someone who put forth the analogy hates the US and its people.

China, as you noted, sent people throughout the world for months, without warning of the contagion. The US is hiding nothing, indeed it's been heavily covered by news outlets worldwide. Any country could ban or quarantine any visitors, for any reason, into their country. The problem isn't large as most people are not traveling and the lowest bookings on airlines is on business class.

So, I have a question or 2.

With the US generally opening up ... how, exactly, will that affect the ability of Americans to fly from your country to other countries ? Will you relax any current ban(s) on international travel, as part of your new 'freedom' .. or, will you maintain travel bans ?

Will someone come along and declare travel bans to be 'a tyranny', e.g American airlines ? Will they say any continuation of a ban breaches their Constitutional right to operate freely ?

In the UK, there's no fracturing of authority. The nearest equivalent to a US State, here, would be a County Council. No County Council has the means of challenging laws and direction given to it by Central Government.

Since that's so, no fracturing of direction happens, which means people are protected from any Council that might, in its wildest dreams, consider doing so. As matters stand, our Government is enforcing rules which apply throughout England, and these rules are saving lives every day.

Your States, however, have more autonomy, and their 'fight against tyranny' will only get people killed.

Question: is a Government acting to save lives, acting tyrannically ?

Question: is a State defying a benevolent Government, not its own tyranny ?

The State of Georgia .. opening up. Trump put on record that, at the time, he disagreed with the Governor's decision. He was ignored.

How many peoples' lives will be needlessly shortened, and suffer the tyranny of a death sentence .. in the name of 'freedom' ?

Time will tell, of course.

[Kathianne]

So, I have a question or 2.

With the US generally opening up ... how, exactly, will that affect the ability of Americans to fly from your country to other countries ? Will you relax any current ban(s) on international travel, as part of your new 'freedom' .. or, will you maintain travel bans ?

Will someone come along and declare travel bans to be 'a tyranny', e.g American airlines ? Will they say any continuation of a ban breaches their Constitutional right to operate freely ?

In the UK, there's no fracturing of authority. The nearest equivalent to a US State, here, would be a County Council. No County Council has the means of challenging laws and direction given to it by Central Government.

Since that's so, no fracturing of direction happens, which means people are protected from any Council that might, in its wildest dreams, consider doing so. As matters stand, our Government is enforcing rules which apply throughout England, and these rules are saving lives every day.

Your States, however, have more autonomy, and their 'fight against tyranny' will only get people killed.

Question: is a Government acting to save lives, acting tyrannically ?

Question: is a State defying a benevolent Government, not its own tyranny ?

The State of Georgia .. opening up. Trump put on record that, at the time, he disagreed with the Governor's decision. He was ignored.

How many peoples' lives will be needlessly shortened, and suffer the tyranny of a death sentence .. in the name of 'freedom' ?

Time will tell, of course.
You really should worry much more about the UK and Boris 'doctor' that convinced him of locking down making fun of the plebes that listen while he gets his nooky on the side. :rolleyes:

[Drummond]

And the USA evolves as information evolves and is understood. And yet folks around the world will still condemn at times. And then others around the world will sometimes evolve themselves as science evolves, and even sometimes end up taking similar changes/stances. As in here with masks. And eventually opening. Seems some do so in the name if science and learning and knowledge and with all full testing and caution and respect - while the evil empire of the USA is reckless when they do such things.

So, will travel bans end ? If 'yes', that would be done in the knowledge that Covid-19 is far from defeated.

You pose (assuming travel bans do go) a particular risk to others that very few countries could match or exceed. Your country's landmass is huge. Your country's commerce domination in the world is nearly unmatched. Your country's population is also huge ... around 330 million ?

So with travel bans rescinded, and many Americans having potential to travel internationally .. you do pose an infection threat !

Bear in mind that around 20% of infected people remain asymptomatic. Most of the rest show no symptoms for several days. None of those people will be aware they're carriers of the disease.

I come back to my original question. Will travel bans be rescinded, or not ?

[Kathianne]

So, will travel bans end ? If 'yes', that would be done in the knowledge that Covid-19 is far from defeated.

You pose (assuming travel bans do go) a particular risk to others that very few countries could match or exceed. Your country's landmass is huge. Your country's commerce domination in the world is nearly unmatched. Your country's population is also huge ... around 330 million ?

So with travel bans rescinded, and many Americans having potential to travel internationally .. you do pose an infection threat !

Bear in mind that around 20% of infected people remain asymptomatic. Most of the rest show no symptoms for several days. None of those people will be aware they're carriers of the disease.

I come back to my original question. Will travel bans be rescinded, or not ?
Call your buddy, Trump. We have 0 control over such, anymore than you do. So tell me this, when your country is exactly where ours is today, will you be the same towards it, as you are towards ours? No? Scientific. LOL!

[jimnyc]

So, will travel bans end ? If 'yes', that would be done in the knowledge that Covid-19 is far from defeated.

You pose (assuming travel bans do go) a particular risk to others that very few countries could match or exceed. Your country's landmass is huge. Your country's commerce domination in the world is nearly unmatched. Your country's population is also huge ... around 330 million ?

So with travel bans rescinded, and many Americans having potential to travel internationally .. you do pose an infection threat !

Bear in mind that around 20% of infected people remain asymptomatic. Most of the rest show no symptoms for several days. None of those people will be aware they're carriers of the disease.

I come back to my original question. Will travel bans be rescinded, or not ?


So that's a YES - that the UK IS blocking outgoing traffic 100% when they open? I don't care if it's ONE person from the UK getting others sick. Why do they get a pass? Lower population? Nope. Gotta shut down entirely. ALL incoming AND outgoing traffic to protect US. Can you link me to that master plan they are starting?

Don't bother. We ALL know the answers ALREADY and have for awhile now.