Sinister tension in the air

Risteard81

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Still waiting to hear what policies and measures you would have implemented to address the virus considering that you think the ones implemented are tantamount to totalitarianism.

You can't just keep saying something is a problem if you're not going to suggest an alternative solution.

I wouldn't base political policy on medical opinion in isolation. That's ludicrous. This isn't a medical issue in a vacuum - societal issues are also fundamental. Unless you want five times as many people to kill themselves as would have died as a direct result of the pandemic. Governments like the approach because they cede powers to themselves. When this crisis passes they will scurry to find the next crisis to support their limitless powers.

Raconteuse

Risteard81 wrote: »

Rubbish.

The support for totalitarianism is more dangerous than COVID-19. If you can't see that then you are blind.

Support for totalitarianism is support for a government not allowing criticism of it, support for people being thrown in jail/having violence inflicted on them for merely speaking out against the government. For an indefinite period.

This has nothing to do with the above. And again you're acting as though it's for no reason. It's an insult to people who actually have to live under dictatorships.

And no, these restrictions are not more dangerous than a potentially deadly disease that has killed approximately 12,000 people in Italy and Spain alone in mere weeks.

Again, what alternative do you suggest to letting people die and overwhelming the health service (which also has other very ill people to treat)? There are folks working in hospitals 100 hours a week right now and a few of you can only moan on the internet about how this situation, which isn't like a dictatorship, is like a dictatorship.

Raconteuse

Risteard81 wrote: »

I wouldn't base political policy on medical opinion in isolation. That's ludicrous. This isn't a medical issue in a vacuum - societal issues are also fundamental. Unless you want five times as many people to kill themselves as would have died as a direct result of the pandemic. Governments like the approach because they cede powers to themselves. When this crisis passes they will scurry to find the next crisis to support their limitless powers.

They will? Yeah they like it - all this is great craic for them.

Some people really WANT to feel oppressed.

Tell me how

Risteard81 wrote: »

Really? So how come someone who was evicted from office months ago is the self-appointed dictator then?

You should catch yourself up on the political procedures in place to ensure that we are not left without anyone in charge before you start spouting waffle.


This makes you look like you don't know what you are talking about.

Risteard81

Anyone who believes that the measures being taken won't result in collateral are mad. No point going on about how many have died from a virus without considering the effects of the "cure". Also many of those who are attributed with dying from COVID-19 actually died from pre-existing conditions, and a great many would have died anyway. So stop looking at figures in a vacuum - it's not healthy and ignores the true picture.

COVID-19 is a serious issue, but totalitarianism isn't the solution. It merely compounds the problem and increases everyone's suffering.

Raconteuse

It's not totalitarian. Again, an insult to people actually having to live under such conditions.

What's your alternative anyway? Still wondering.

PCeeeee

Risteard81 wrote: »

I wouldn't base political policy on medical opinion in isolation. That's ludicrous. This isn't a medical issue in a vacuum - societal issues are also fundamental. Unless you want five times as many people to kill themselves as would have died as a direct result of the pandemic. Governments like the approach because they cede powers to themselves. When this crisis passes they will scurry to find the next crisis to support their limitless powers.

Can I ask you to put a number of the amount of suicides you expect to see as a result of the political reaction in this state to Covid 19. Just a range will be fine no need to be overly specific.

Risteard81

PCeeeee wrote: »

Can I ask you to put a number of the amount of suicides you expect to see as a result of the political reaction in this state to Covid 19. Just a range will be fine no need to be overly specific.

Far in excess of the numbers likely to die as a result of COVID-19 who would not otherwise have died. Depressions have very serious consequences, as does indefinitely imprisoning people in their own homes. So-called democracies are all trying to outdo each other in terms of authoritarian control and with absolutely no credible evidence that it will achieve anything.

The fact they are stating this could go on for a couple of years should be enough to terrify anyone. Their intentions are not pure - they are evil.

mankteln

If the virus was just let to run rampant would that not also cause a recession?

PCeeeee

Risteard81 wrote: »

Far in excess of the numbers likely to die as a result of COVID-19 who would not otherwise have died. Depressions have very serious consequences, as does indefinitely imprisoning people in their own homes. So-called democracies are all trying to outdo each other in terms of authoritarian control and with absolutely no credible evidence that it will achieve anything.

The fact they are stating this could go on for a couple of years should be enough to terrify anyone. Their intentions are not pure - they are evil.

Thank you.

Raconteuse

Risteard81 wrote: »

Far in excess of the numbers likely to die as a result of COVID-19 who would not otherwise have died. Depressions have very serious consequences, as does indefinitely imprisoning people in their own homes. So-called democracies are all trying to outdo each other in terms of authoritarian control and with absolutely no credible evidence that it will achieve anything.

The fact they are stating this could go on for a couple of years should be enough to terrify anyone. Their intentions are not pure - they are evil.

Why are you acting as if it's just for the craic rather than due to a pandemic? What alternative do you suggest?

Elmer Blooker

Risteard81 wrote: »

Far in excess of the numbers likely to die as a result of COVID-19 who would not otherwise have died. Depressions have very serious consequences, as does indefinitely imprisoning people in their own homes. So-called democracies are all trying to outdo each other in terms of authoritarian control and with absolutely no credible evidence that it will achieve anything.

The fact they are stating this could go on for a couple of years should be enough to terrify anyone. Their intentions are not pure - they are evil.

You're a brave man for posting this ..... why have I been thinking a lot about that film "The lives of others" lately?

Elmer Blooker

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

You're a brave man for posting this ..... why have I been thinking a lot about that film "The lives of others" lately?

Haha..I totally have too..

storker

Risteard81 wrote: »

Far in excess of the numbers likely to die as a result of COVID-19 who would not otherwise have died. Depressions have very serious consequences, as does indefinitely imprisoning people in their own homes. So-called democracies are all trying to outdo each other in terms of authoritarian control and with absolutely no credible evidence that it will achieve anything.

The fact they are stating this could go on for a couple of years should be enough to terrify anyone. Their intentions are not pure - they are evil.

CONSPIRACY THEORY FORUM ---->>>>

Risteard81

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

You're a brave man for posting this ..... why have I been thinking a lot about that film "The lives of others" lately?

It concerns me when everyone is prepared to parrot the State's claims without any consideration as to whether they are valid. Any power grab by the State should be of concern to people, and they have a duty to ascertain whether it is indeed in their interests or whether it's actually in the interests of those being given the powers.

It's very convenient to consider this to be a medical issue in isolation, but it completely ignores all of the knock-on effects of these actions. It can't be considered in isolation.

Elmer Blooker

storker wrote: »

CONSPIRACY THEORY FORUM ---->>>>

I don't think so. I resent the way the media is promoting as much fear and paranoia as possible. I had to turn off the News at one as Aine Lawlor's funereal tone of voice was too much to take!
Nine dead so far is it?

Raconteuse

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

You're a brave man for posting this ..... why have I been thinking a lot about that film "The lives of others" lately?

How is he brave? Will he be arrested?

He's claiming that the pandemic is just a handy ruse for governments to oppress people and that it's not really about the pandemic at all. And therefore the ideal would be for people to carry on as things were (because he has not offered one jot of an alternative suggestion) potentially causing thousands of deaths and crippling an already stretched health service (which doesn't just have to look after patients with this virus).

It's sheer daftness.

It could have negative effects on society and certainly will on the economy, but again (not that I expect a reply) what is the alternative?

Blame the virus for this, not the measures to stem its spread.

storker

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I don't think so. I resent the way the media is promoting as much fear and paranoia as possible. I had to turn off the News at one as Aine Lawlor's funereal tone of voice was too much to take!
Nine dead so far is it?

Has it occurred to you that that might be because of the measures put in place? Your argument seems to be along the line of "I was wearing a seatbelt and wasn't flung out the front window, but the seatbelt was an unnecessary restriction on my liberty".

Raconteuse

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I don't think so. I resent the way the media is promoting as much fear and paranoia as possible. I had to turn off the News at one as Aine Lawlor's funereal tone of voice was too much to take!
Nine dead so far is it?

I agree that the media is relishing the gloom.

Only nine deaths (so far) because of most people doing what they can to help slow the spread.

Risteard81

Raconteuse wrote: »

How is he brave? Will he be arrested?

He's claiming that the pandemic is just a handy ruse for governments to oppress people and that it's not really about the pandemic at all. And therefore the ideal would be for people to carry on as things were (because he has not offered one jot of an alternative suggestion) potentially causing thousands of deaths and crippling an already stretched health service (which doesn't just have to look after patients with this virus).

It's sheer daftness.

It could have negative effects on society and certainly will on the economy, but again (not that I expect a reply) what is the alternative?

Blame the virus for this, not the measures to stem its spread.

Who said people won't die from the pandemic? I have made no such claim.

That doesn't mean that the solution is shutting the world down for two years and imprisoning the world's population until some vaccine may or may not be found. That is not a solution and the results of that would be catastrophic.

It's extremely sad that people will die but that's the reality. We don't need to compound the problems with governments trying to be more and more draconian to appease people on Twitter and Facebook, RTÉ and the BBC.

Boris Johnson has passed an equivalent of Hitler's Enabling Act which remains active for a minimum of two years. Does that not terrify you? It should.

How can you pretend for one second that you are living in a democracy when the evidence is clear that you aren't. We are issued diktats by the likes of Leo & Boris daily. (As I point out in the case of Leo he was supposedly thrown out of power quite some time ago.)

We won't have a civilisation for the pandemic to kill at the end of all this.

DeanAustin

Risteard81 wrote: »

Removal of people's fundamental rights is illegal.

Dictatorships are what exists now throughout the so-called "western" world.

This will not stop the disease. Doctors and the WHO should not dictate political policy. They have no idea of the harm their diktats are causing. Unfortunately many are too blind to see this.

Jesus Christ. God help you if you ever have the misfortune to live in an actual dictatorship.

Raconteuse

Nobody said people won't die. I didn't suggest you did at all.

Two years? Nothing like that has been suggested.

It is for a reason, not for the craic. Nothing has been dictated to me - it has been asked of me. Some are happily refusing to do what is being asked of them.

You and a small few others are speculating (and seemingly perversely hoping) that the government are rubbing their hands with glee over this, and that when the virus subsides, they'll try to come up with some other reason for it. Literally no reason whatsoever for this fantasy stuff.

Johnson was being completely blase about it not even two weeks ago. Do you really think he likes this? It is to stop the tide of illness and death, and to give the NHS a fighting chance. That is the only reason for it.

The only alternative is to allow the virus to do wreck. Why would you be ok with that?

Alf Veedersane

Risteard81 wrote: »

I wouldn't base political policy on medical opinion in isolation. That's ludicrous. This isn't a medical issue in a vacuum - societal issues are also fundamental. Unless you want five times as many people to kill themselves as would have died as a direct result of the pandemic. Governments like the approach because they cede powers to themselves. When this crisis passes they will scurry to find the next crisis to support their limitless powers.

Again, that's what you wouldn't do based on knowing none of what went into the decision making.

What would you have done?

Risteard81

Two years has absolutely been suggested throughout the media as there is no realistic chance of a vaccine being widely distributed much before then - if a vaccine is ever found.

So to think the world can be somehow parked indefinitely because people are going to die is foolish and dangerous, and completely ignores the immense consequences of that.

I note you approve of Boris Johnson investing unlimited powers in himself for at least two years. And you don't see it as authoritarian.

Spanish police kicking people and Indian police beating people with sticks is acceptable to you. In fact some people think it's funny and ask that the Gardaí do the same. But of course those asking for these responses are "democrats". I call them what they actually are - fascists.

Elmer Blooker

Raconteuse wrote: »

How is he brave? Will he be arrested?

He's claiming that the pandemic is just a handy ruse for governments to oppress people and that it's not really about the pandemic at all. And therefore the ideal would be for people to carry on as things were (because he has not offered one jot of an alternative suggestion) potentially causing thousands of deaths and crippling an already stretched health service (which doesn't just have to look after patients with this virus).

It's sheer daftness.

It could have negative effects on society and certainly will on the economy, but again (not that I expect a reply) what is the alternative?

Blame the virus for this, not the measures to stem its spread.

Anyone who doesn't swallow the 'official' media narrative is a 'conspiracy theorist'.
As I expected it only took a few minutes for Risteard to be told to take his opinions to the conspiracy forum.
What is the alternative? Fear, paranoia and being encouraged to mistrust everyone is not helping is it? Its only making the situation worse.

Alf Veedersane

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Anyone who doesn't swallow the 'official' media narrative is a 'conspiracy theorist'.
As I expected it only took a few minutes for Risteard to be told to take his opinions to the conspiracy forum.
What is the alternative? Fear, paranoia and being encouraged to mistrust everyone is not helping is it? Its only making the situation worse.

Funny you should ask. I've been asking for Risteard's alternative course of action given that what has been done is wrong.

Electric Sheep

if this is the hardest life experience you have had so far, lucky you. Most of us have experienced far worse.

Padkir

Tell me how wrote: »

You should catch yourself up on the political procedures in place to ensure that we are not left without anyone in charge before you start spouting waffle.


This makes you look like you don't know what you are talking about.

That's not that difficult for him to do to be honest...

Risteard81

Padkir wrote: »

That's not that difficult for him to do to be honest...

I'm sorry but the fact is Leo does NOT have a mandate to act as our overlord.

And Regina Doherty doesn't even have a seat. She's not a TD. So perhaps she should get out of the way and stay under house arrest.

DeanAustin

Risteard81 wrote: »

I'm sorry but the fact is Leo does NOT have a mandate to act as our overlord.

And Regina Doherty doesn't even have a seat. She's not a TD. So perhaps she should get out of the way and stay under house arrest.

You do know how our democracy works don't you?

That until a new government is formed, the old one stays where they are. FG are negotiating with FF to form a government despite a stated preference for being in opposition. If Leo is trying to seize power in the same way as an Idi Amin, Hitler or Marcos type leader, he's making an absolute bollox of it because FG said first they don't want power and are now negotiating with a party to weaken their position.

You're either a WUM or spouting a whole load of pseudo intellectual nonsense that doesn't stand up to any sort of scrutiny.