Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
All Covid-19 measures are permanent, don't be a boiling frog!
Options
Comments
-
How many "cases" do you think those cops' actions prevented? I'll set the spread at somewhere between zero and zero.
And as for this, personal incredulity and ignorance
Cases are spiking in France, one of the current rules that can be adopted by local municipalities is to e.g. wear masks at the beach because surprise, surprise, the virus can still spread on beaches. "Volunteers" don't have any power to enforce this, and have been attacked, so police have to do it. Ergo, we have a bunch of French police walking up the beach asking people to wear their masks. Police in France are armed, you see a photo of it and lose your **** because "1984 PoLiCe StAtE!!".
They are sending in riot police to Marseille due to new rules. No they aren't baton-charging people sun-bathing on the beach, they are there because idiots and groups of ignorant people can't adhere to simple rules to wear masksA bus driver died last month in Bayonne, south-west France, after two men attacked him when he reminded them they ought to wear masks.A female nurse was also beaten last week in Seine-Saint-Denis, just north of Paris, after she asked two teenagers climbing aboard a bus to wear face coverings.
https://www.euronews.com/2020/08/17/coronavirus-france-sends-in-riot-police-to-enforce-face-mask-rules-in-marseille
None of this has anything to do with your bizarre fantasy world views.0 -
This entire thread is just people constantly attacking Covid rules or measures in order to allude to some conspiracy or "plan" they never detail
They keep insisting this "thing" is happening, accuse others of being too stupid or blind not to see it, but they can't explain what that "thing" is, they can't answer questions on it and they all run away when asked. What a dishonest mindset to have.0 -
Everything you have described in this post is bizarre dystopianism but in your head it has become normal and rational. Paramilitary police carrying assault rifles raiding a beach to make families sitting on their own wear masks that don't do anything to prevent the spread of a disease that doesn't transmit outdoors, and the thought process that clicks in your brain is "those are the rules; the rules stop the virus; clever people follow the rules; if we all follow the rules then we get our freedom back." It's surreal to contemplate how brainwashed people have become.
How many "cases" do you think those cops' actions prevented? I'll set the spread at somewhere between zero and zero.
When you say you live in Europe, do you mean Ireland?
If you had ever lived in France you would not be surprised to see armed police, like in the picture.
Do you know better than the French authorities what is needed in their current situation, with increasing covid numbers?
If they make a rule that says no drinking on the beach, and they enforce it, what's so strange?
For your own sake you need to open your eyes and see what is happening in the real world,
and stop interpreting things through the lens of nonsensical notions from conspiracy web sites.
(and talking about brain washed - come on - who is actually brain washed here!!)0 -
This entire thread is just people constantly attacking Covid rules or measures in order to allude to some conspiracy or "plan" they never detail
They keep insisting this "thing" is happening, accuse others of being too stupid or blind not to see it, but they can't explain what that "thing" is, they can't answer questions on it and they all run away when asked. What a dishonest mindset to have.
brianhere explains it in the opening post. He outlines why he believes the measures will be permanent.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »brianhere explains it in the opening post. He outlines why he believes the measures will be permanent.
You keep referring back to that first post. His opening line says that all new rules are permanent. It has already been proved otherwise. Why do you keep peddling that bs?0 -
Advertisement
-
Deleted User wrote: »brianhere explains it in the opening post. He outlines why he believes the measures will be permanent.
Nope
The first post doesn't explain a thing, it just makes a whole bunch of vague and nonsensical "predictions" and "points" without any rational explanation behind
To address each parta) Because they already have shown that they are stringing people along. The publicans, for example, have been assured every couple of weeks for the whole summer that they will be allowed to reopen, but the government had no intention of allowing this. First it was to stop the spread of the disease altogether, then it was 'flattening the curve' and now it is in response to an increase in cases which they know perfectly well had to follow an increase in testing. You don't want to be the donkey chasing the carrot here!
Pubs had to reclose because there was a second wave.b) Because they have invested so much money and time in changing the whole apparatus of society, in schools for example, and other places. Clearly these changes were not implemented in order to disappear in only a few weeks, they show the planning and expense of permanent measures.
Measures were reimplemented because of the second wave. Likewise we have a third wave now in many countries.c) Because the state has a record of never releasing back to the population rights that they seized during some panic. A few examples:
i) During the hype about TB in the 1950s the state introduced a voluntary scheme to control the disease in cattle. It involved those who had tested negative for the disease to be given a special tag and the farmer a 'herd number'. This voluntary scheme then evolved into the state controlling all aspects of agricultural activity by only allowing any such activity - even keeping a few hens - with the permission of the state, via compulsory herd numbers.
ii) Similar to this current panic, in the 1970s the state amended earlier WWII legislation to enable it to abolish jury trials. This was a great shock to the legal profession - even to the then President - and affront to the time honoured legal practices in Ireland but it was rushed through on the basis of sunset clauses whereby it would have to be renewed every year, and hence was temporary. Of course it is still with us long after the troubles have ended.
Bizarre personal views. Measures were reduced when cases reduced, and generally reintroduced when the virus flared up again.iii) After 9/11 and some hyped episodes like 'underwear bombers', this state and all around the world introduced time consuming and very intrusive security procedures particularly at airports. This of course is still with us long after the scare has died down.
Airline terrorism hasn't "magically" disappeared, the threat is always there, which is why we have airline security.d) This last point I am sure some of you will not get, but I will make it anyway. These measures are being rolled out precisely because they have huge social and population control advantages for the state, hence they are only piggy backing on the virus to do what they have all along planned to do, and hence have no intention of ever releasing you in the future from their newly introduced grip.
Drivel.
At no point is the plan or conspiracy detailed, is a timeline given, is anything explained. It's just a list of disjointed and irrational views.0 -
shtpEdthePlum wrote: »That is actually a very good thread, imo.
I would like to hear a salient refutation of the information in it by those who find it inadequate. As somebody who does not trust the man one iota, it interests me to know what the obsession is with leaping to his defence when he's clearly reprehensible.
Probably that Netflix documentary propaganda piece a few years ago that painted him as some sort of genius deity.
https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2058171517/2
Here's a thread about him going full Monty Burns this summer.PintOfView wrote: »So can you give me a couple of facts that you actually 'know' about Bill Gates,
and not stuff you just repeat from posters on other fringe sites, who themselves are just
repeating stuff they haven't actually bothered to research either?
The stuff on that thread you link to is hardly credible, is it?
You say "he's clearly reprehensible".
If you are so confident then pop a couple of concrete facts you know about Bill Gates up here, and I'll happily check them for you!
However please don't just dump a link to some web site, or other thread!
Also, can you refute that Bill G seems to have given something like 50 billion (that's 50,000 million) to various causes,
and likely has improved the lives of at least 10's, but probably 100's, of millions of real people.
shtpEdthePlum, can I take it you have not been able to come up with any facts that paint Bill Gates in a bad light?
And, are you unable to refute that he seems to have given 50 billion to various causes, which appear to be good causes?
It's easy for anyone to drive by with wild accusations, but they are meaningless, irresponsible, and amount to misinformation, unless you provide details that can be substantiated.
I am not a disciple of Bill Gates, simply "obsessed with leaping to his defence", as you put it.
If you outline a good, and verifiable, case against him, or anyone else, I would expect to look at it on its merit, and draw honest conclusions.
Can you say that you would be prepared to draw honest conclusions, based on evidence?
Or is this a religion to you, where you accept on faith, and without any verification, what you read on certain web sites?
It seems to me that you, and some other posters on here, have been caught up in a web of deceit and fiction,
and have been totally taken in by web sites run by misguided people,
or by sites that deliberately cultivate you and misinform you.
If you don't agree, then explain why that's not the case?0 -
PintOfView wrote: »shtpEdthePlum, can I take it you have not been able to come up with any facts that paint Bill Gates in a bad light?
And, are you unable to refute that he seems to have given 50 billion to various causes, which appear to be good causes?
It's easy for anyone to drive by with wild accusations, but they are meaningless, irresponsible, and amount to misinformation, unless you provide details that can be substantiated.
I am not a disciple of Bill Gates, simply "obsessed with leaping to his defence", as you put it.
If you outline a good, and verifiable, case against him, or anyone else, I would expect to look at it on its merit, and draw honest conclusions.
Can you say that you would be prepared to draw honest conclusions, based on evidence?
Or is this a religion to you, where you accept on faith, and without any verification, what you read on certain web sites?
It seems to me that you, and some other posters on here, have been caught up in a web of deceit and fiction,
and have been totally taken in by web sites run by misguided people,
or by sites that deliberately cultivate you and misinform you.
If you don't agree, then explain why that's not the case?
What do you think of what David Rockefeller says at the start of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIYryBKZVFw0 -
Deleted User wrote: »What do you think of what David Rockefeller says at the start of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIYryBKZVFw
He’s dead...although maybe he has risen over the weekend.0 -
PintOfView wrote: »I haven't read up on Marx, and communism, and fascism, etc., so am just running on general knowledge of those.
What's the difference between free market capitalism, and what we have now?
And just to be devil's advocate, how are the elites and large corporations, you think are taking over, not the result of free market capitalism?
Most people have no notion of Marxism, capitalism, communism. Most couldn't distinguish socialism from botulism.
People are programmed to think that capitalism is good for them and that if they work hard they'll succeed and become wealthy. While there is a smidgen of truth to this it belies the fact that capitalism is predicated on exploitation.
Marxism's basic tenet is that the workers who do the work own the factors of production. I've used the analogy before. A lemonade stand. Your 3 kids set one up. They own the jugs, the beakers, they acquire the sugar and the lemons and they do all the work creating the lemonade. They control production and benefit from their labour. The more they work, coupled with other factors like how popular their drink is or how hot the wather is contributes to their success. Sounds very "free-market" but it's basically a Marxist model.
By comparison, someone who sets up the lemonade stand and employs your 3 kids to do all the work and pays them a wage and takes the excess profits for himself would be a capitalist model. Again you might say "well that seems kind of fair too" and to a degree it is. It's just that the non-working owner's ever increasing desire for higher profits culminates in exploitation. The 3 kids may work more and more but their remuneration is not increased while the profits go to the owner. In a drive to maximise profits and reduce costs he will invest in crappy knives that the kids will constantly cut themselves with. He will dock their wages if they drop and smash a jug. They will do the work but he will determine the conditions.
Under a Marxist model it's in all the workers' interests that collectively the work gets done and they all reap the rewards.
It could be argued that within a Marxist framework the lazy worker gets an easy ride but that's not usually the case. People are naturally cooperative and like to help each other and muck in if it's worthwhile. By the same token the absolute workaholic in a capitalist paradigm can toil his fingers to the bone and still see no return that would merit his increased efforts.0 -
Advertisement
-
Deleted User wrote: »What do you think of what David Rockefeller says at the start of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIYryBKZVFw
I think it's fiction and fantasy.
What do you think of it?
Do you believe that's David Rockefeller?0 -
ShatterAlan wrote: »Most people have no notion of Marxism, capitalism, communism. Most couldn't distinguish socialism from botulism.
People are programmed to think that capitalism is good for them and that if they work hard they'll succeed and become wealthy. While there is a smidgen of truth to this it belies the fact that capitalism is predicated on exploitation.
Marxism's basic tenet is that the workers who do the work own the factors of production. I've used the analogy before. A lemonade stand. Your 3 kids set one up. They own the jugs, the beakers, they acquire the sugar and the lemons and they do all the work creating the lemonade. They control production and benefit from their labour. The more they work, coupled with other factors like how popular their drink is or how hot the wather is contributes to their success. Sounds very "free-market" but it's basically a Marxist model.
By comparison, someone who sets up the lemonade stand and employs your 3 kids to do all the work and pays them a wage and takes the excess profits for himself would be a capitalist model. Again you might say "well that seems kind of fair too" and to a degree it is. It's just that the non-working owner's ever increasing desire for higher profits culminates in exploitation. The 3 kids may work more and more but their remuneration is not increased while the profits go to the owner. In a drive to maximise profits and reduce costs he will invest in crappy knives that the kids will constantly cut themselves with. He will dock their wages if they drop and smash a jug. They will do the work but he will determine the conditions.
Under a Marxist model it's in all the workers' interests that collectively the work gets done and they all reap the rewards.
It could be argued that within a Marxist framework the lazy worker gets an easy ride but that's not usually the case. People are naturally cooperative and like to help each other and muck in if it's worthwhile. By the same token the absolute workaholic in a capitalist paradigm can toil his fingers to the bone and still see no return that would merit his increased efforts.
Well thanks for your explanation!0 -
ShatterAlan wrote: »Most people have no notion of Marxism, capitalism, communism. Most couldn't distinguish socialism from botulism.
People are programmed to think that capitalism is good for them and that if they work hard they'll succeed and become wealthy. While there is a smidgen of truth to this it belies the fact that capitalism is predicated on exploitation.
Marxism's basic tenet is that the workers who do the work own the factors of production. I've used the analogy before. A lemonade stand. Your 3 kids set one up. They own the jugs, the beakers, they acquire the sugar and the lemons and they do all the work creating the lemonade. They control production and benefit from their labour. The more they work, coupled with other factors like how popular their drink is or how hot the wather is contributes to their success. Sounds very "free-market" but it's basically a Marxist model.
By comparison, someone who sets up the lemonade stand and employs your 3 kids to do all the work and pays them a wage and takes the excess profits for himself would be a capitalist model. Again you might say "well that seems kind of fair too" and to a degree it is. It's just that the non-working owner's ever increasing desire for higher profits culminates in exploitation. The 3 kids may work more and more but their remuneration is not increased while the profits go to the owner. In a drive to maximise profits and reduce costs he will invest in crappy knives that the kids will constantly cut themselves with. He will dock their wages if they drop and smash a jug. They will do the work but he will determine the conditions.
Under a Marxist model it's in all the workers' interests that collectively the work gets done and they all reap the rewards.
It could be argued that within a Marxist framework the lazy worker gets an easy ride but that's not usually the case. People are naturally cooperative and like to help each other and muck in if it's worthwhile. By the same token the absolute workaholic in a capitalist paradigm can toil his fingers to the bone and still see no return that would merit his increased efforts.
Most people I've talked to on the subject have more of an idea than this, but anyway.
Communism as a system has failed repeatedly and there are only a handful of countries left which still roughly adhere to it's ideology: e.g. China, North Korea, Cuba - you'll notice a trend, they are a conspiracy theorists nightmare, one of those countries is literally a prison for it's own citizens and I don't need to comment on the Orwellian nightmare China has become.
"Capitalism" in the form of mixed economies have been around for centuries and no one has come up with a better (or least worse) alternative. The best performing countries in the world with the highest metrics for standards of living and happiness, e.g. Scandinavian countries, are not that way because they are Communist.
Conspiracy theorists in this thread have so far blamed corporations, "elites", "Fascism", Democratic governments And Communism as the usual mess of contradictory culprits for a bunch of vague conspiracies about Covid. And Satan of course, he's a popular boogeyman.0 -
Weren't we being told that all of the covid measures were part of a plot to destroy capitalism and install a communist world government?Conspiracy theorists in this thread have so far blamed corporations, "elites", "Fascism", democracy And communism in the usual mess of contradictory culprits
I guess that's a good thing now?0 -
Weren't we being told that all of the covid measures were part of a plot to destroy capitalism and install a communist world government?
I guess that's a good thing now?
Fascism and communism are more or less the same thing both tolitarian ideologies that have been responsible for mass genocides.0 -
PintOfView wrote: »When you say you live in Europe, do you mean Ireland?
If you had ever lived in France you would not be surprised to see armed police, like in the picture.
Do you know better than the French authorities what is needed in their current situation, with increasing covid numbers?
If they make a rule that says no drinking on the beach, and they enforce it, what's so strange?
For your own sake you need to open your eyes and see what is happening in the real world,
and stop interpreting things through the lens of nonsensical notions from conspiracy web sites.
(and talking about brain washed - come on - who is actually brain washed here!!)
It wasn't so long ago that French police were harassing and humiliating and arresting Muslim women on French beaches for wearing "burkinis". All under the banner of "integrate, be like us, don't be different, show your face and body, you terrorist!".
Now they're going around forcing everyone to mask up.
Why is it mandatory to wear a mask in France on a beach but not on a beach in Ireland or Spain or The Netherlands? Now people may possibly come out with the excuse that wearing a mask in public prevents virus spread. If that's the case then why is it so open and not enforced in so many places?0 -
ShatterAlan wrote: »It wasn't so long ago that French police were harassing and humiliating and arresting Muslim women on French beaches for wearing "burkinis". All under the banner of "integrate, be like us, don't be different, show your face and body, you terrorist!".
Now they're going around forcing everyone to mask up.
Why is it mandatory to wear a mask in France on a beach but not on a beach in Ireland or Spain or The Netherlands? Now people may possibly come out with the excuse that wearing a mask in public prevents virus spread. If that's the case then why is it so open and not enforced in so many places?
Different countries have different rules/laws, why is it mandatory to carry ID in Spain but not in Ireland?0 -
Fascism and communism are more or less the same thing both tolitarian ideologies that have been responsible for mass genocides.
They are nothing alike.
And to even say such a thing displays an embarrassing lack of knowledge.
It's as bereft of understanding as saying that mountain-climbing and formula 1 racing are more or less the same thing because you can get injured or die doing either.0 -
-
ShatterAlan wrote: »It wasn't so long ago that French police were harassing and humiliating and arresting Muslim women on French beaches for wearing "burkinis". All under the banner of "integrate, be like us, don't be different, show your face and body, you terrorist!".
Several French towns/cities banned "burkinis" citing security concerns after terrorist attacks. In French polls nearly two out of three French people backed these bans (before you start blaming the government)Now they're going around forcing everyone to mask up.
Enforcing local rules and laws.Why is it mandatory to wear a mask in France on a beach but not on a beach in Ireland or Spain or The Netherlands? Now people may possibly come out with the excuse that wearing a mask in public prevents virus spread. If that's the case then why is it so open and not enforced in so many places?
Because each country is setting it's own rules to deal with the pandemic. Different countries have differing levels of the virus at different times.0 -
Advertisement
-
ShatterAlan wrote: »It wasn't so long ago that French police were harassing and humiliating and arresting Muslim women on French beaches for wearing "burkinis". All under the banner of "integrate, be like us, don't be different, show your face and body, you terrorist!".
Now they're going around forcing everyone to mask up.
Why is it mandatory to wear a mask in France on a beach but not on a beach in Ireland or Spain or The Netherlands? Now people may possibly come out with the excuse that wearing a mask in public prevents virus spread. If that's the case then why is it so open and not enforced in so many places?
I thought it was the drinking on the beach that the people were being pulled up for?
Also, I can't imagine that wearing a mask on a beach, or in a park, is being recommended?
(see this from June 2020 -> https://www.connexionfrance.com/Practical/Your-Questions/Masks-What-are-rules-for-beaches-and-campsites-in-France)0 -
Because different countries have different laws and different leaders who might want to put their focus in different areas.ShatterAlan wrote: »Why is it mandatory to wear a mask in France on a beach but not on a beach in Ireland or Spain or The Netherlands? Now people may possibly come out with the excuse that wearing a mask in public prevents virus spread. If that's the case then why is it so open and not enforced in so many places?
For example in one country it might be easier to actually have a mandatory mask measure, but in another it might be less possible due to other laws in place. Similarly one government might be more interested in pushing such a mandate but others less so.
It's not difficult to imagine.
So what's your explanation for this difference?
Why would there be a difference if this was a global conspiracy to force people to do something that doesn't work for no reason?0 -
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »Different countries have different rules/laws, why is it mandatory to carry ID in Spain but not in Ireland?
Why is it a criminal offence to assault and beat the crap out of someone in EVERY country?
Shouldn't it be the same for another life-threatening endeavour such as not wearing a mask on a beach?
If not carrying an ID is a universally accepted threat to public health then wouldn't it be mandatory everywhere?
If not wearing a mask in France on a beach is a grave threat to public health but not so in other countries then can you explain the reasoning?0 -
PintOfView wrote: »I thought it was the drinking on the beach that the people were being pulled up for?
Also, I can't imagine that wearing a mask on a beach, or in a park, is being recommended?
(see this from June 2020 -> https://www.connexionfrance.com/Practical/Your-Questions/Masks-What-are-rules-for-beaches-and-campsites-in-France)
If you're talking about drinking alcohol on a beach in France then I don't know. I was in Arcachon a few years ago just near Cap Feret and my ex was chatting to two police officers on the sand with a cigarette and a beaker full of ice and wine in her hand. Didn't seem to be an issue,
Other families had hampers and coolers with beer and other boozy beverages along with their snacks. Some people even set up tables and sat around them all bread and cheese and cold meats and of course red wine.0 -
Since you're ignoring the fact that this has just been explained to you, I'll assume you're just going to keep pretending.ShatterAlan wrote: »If not wearing a mask in France on a beach is a grave threat to public health but not so in other countries then can you explain the reasoning?
That's fine.
So you believe that this discrepancy shows there's a conspiracy.
Ok.
How?
What do you believe is the REAL explanation?0 -
ShatterAlan wrote: »
If not wearing a mask in France on a beach is a grave threat to public health but not so in other countries then can you explain the reasoning?
In France, I believe it's a rule at the digression of local authorities, so some areas, which are hotspots for beach-goers have decided to enact it. In Spain, a new national law means people have to wear a mask in all public spaces, including beaches and swimming pools. Again, each country is dealing with different levels of the virus and responding according to that.0 -
Several French towns/cities banned "burkinis" citing security concerns after terrorist attacks. In French polls nearly two out of three French people backed these bans (before you start blaming the government)
Enforcing local rules and laws.
Because each country is setting it's own rules to deal with the pandemic. Different countries have differing levels of the virus at different times.
So if the the public get together and in their wisdom determine that somebody should be prohibited from wearing what they want to wear then you're ok with that?
You and all your neighbours could get together and say that you want to ban "rock-chick Milly" who lives in the neighbourhood from wearing Docs and fishnets and a mini-skirt because she looks trashy or because you're concerned she could be some kind of subversive. Or Mick the skinhead who goes about his business but looks a little scary on account of his shaved head and bomber jacket.
That's ok with you?
You see you can be suspicious and paranoid and frightened all you want but someone who you are suspicious or wary of isn't actually committing a crime. You're fears and feelings and insecurities don't actually trump their rights.
EDIT: Can you provide a source for the 2/3 poll?0 -
ShatterAlan wrote: »Why is it a criminal offence to assault and beat the crap out of someone in EVERY country?
Shouldn't it be the same for another life-threatening endeavour such as not wearing a mask on a beach?
If not carrying an ID is a universally accepted threat to public health then wouldn't it be mandatory everywhere?
If not wearing a mask in France on a beach is a grave threat to public health but not so in other countries then can you explain the reasoning?
It's very confusing. Masks are required everywhere in Spain, even when sunbathing and walking alone in the countryside. In Sweden they're required nowhere. Okay, there's the recommendation to wear them on public transport at certain times of the day, but it's only a recommendation. Spain has come to the conclusion that they're essential, while Sweden has basically come to the conclusion that they're unessential.0 -
PintOfView wrote: »I thought it was the drinking on the beach that the people were being pulled up for?
Also, I can't imagine that wearing a mask on a beach, or in a park, is being recommended?
(see this from June 2020 -> https://www.connexionfrance.com/Practical/Your-Questions/Masks-What-are-rules-for-beaches-and-campsites-in-France)
Not only is it being recommended it's the law in Spain: https://english.elpais.com/economy_and_business/2021-04-01/spains-tourism-industry-rails-against-new-face-mask-rules-they-are-going-to-turn-beaches-into-field-hospitals.html
"The obligation to keep mouths and noses covered in public spaces, including the beach and swimming pool, will undoubtedly put a number of tourists off coming to Spain, according to industry pundits who point out that businesses were not consulted on the measure."0 -
Advertisement
-
In France, I believe it's a rule at the digression of local authorities, so some areas, which are hotspots for beach-goers have decided to enact it. In Spain, a new national law means people have to wear a mask in all public spaces, including beaches and swimming pools. Again, each country is dealing with different levels of the virus and responding according to that.
In France there was an ordnance that masks were required in enclosed public areas. Not outside and certainly not in parks and beaches.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement