|
Post by thisisouryear on Oct 26, 2020 15:14:52 GMT
Lockdowns don't work though. Only stupid people and the government think they do. New Zealand and South Korea would disagree. The countries whose economies have held up the best went for the Zero Covid approach through lockdowns backed up by a test track and trace that actually works the stupid fuckers.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Oct 26, 2020 15:28:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on Oct 26, 2020 15:49:32 GMT
So on that fear factor basis why a few weeks ago didn't they try and hide / not reveal data showing that it was the vast majority of young people who were getting it and of those young people hardly anyone died? Why did they adjust the death period down to 28 days if they wanted to ramp up the fear factor rather than downplaying it. They've got sage, the opposition and public opinion all against their anti lockdown policies, if there was any way they could show data to support their position they would. In regards to education being the major driver, I'd agree with that to a degree but as Milanstokie pointed out in Italy there were little rises when their schools / uni's reopened it was a few weeks later when the weather turned and households started mixing indoors again. The last thing I want is for the economy to be wrecked but I think we're in danger of doing more damage by having an uncohesive set of policies which don't work but which keep the economy in uncertainty. Rolling short, sharp lockdowns every few months with some normality like we saw in July and August in between is the only way to go imo to keep deaths down and to keep the economy functioning as best as it can in between until we get that immunity from the vaccine next summer. They adjusted the period because it was clearly ridiculous that people who had recovered from Covid but then went on to die of something else entirely were being included in the Covid figures. An issue that was actually pointed out to them by Carl Heneghan, somebody who has been very critical of the government. Your rolling short sharp national lockdowns might be the correct way to go but from where I'm sitting, you're basing it on very little. All I'm asking for, is to see the relevant data before I'll start championing one method over another. Is that really too much to ask? I noticed you just tossed away the rest of my post, which contained (imo) quite pertinent figures that need addressing. There is a lack of data out there which raises legitimate questions and as long as those questions present themselves, then I'll keep asking them. I haven't got an agenda and I'm not suggesting I'm right, indeed I'm not even offering an opinion, I just want to see the data before being able to formulate one. As I've asked before, if the virus is as prevalent as it was first time around, then why aren't they telling people who had to shield first time around to shield now? And I don't buy the fatigue answer any longer, this has been going on since the beginning of September but there still isn't an instruction for vulnerable people to shield, why is that? It's a perfectly reasonable question to ask. And I'm still really interested in why things aren't taking off in London to the same degree either? The lack of people currently in the West End and the City will probably be having some effect but there are plenty of people working from home who are employed in Manchester and Liverpool too and beyond that, London is an absolutely massive place which is in effect, a city of many small cities and towns, so why two months on, has the virus not taken hold in anything like the way it has in the North? Surely this is a hugely important question that needs answering because the answer in itself might help us to establish the best way forwards in other areas. It just seems to me, to simply say "just lock it all down" is an incredibly simple/lazy solution, even if it is a solution at all, at the end of the day, it might indeed be the only way but please, show me the data first. This is an interesting piece. www.spectator.co.uk/article/The-ten-worst-Covid-data-failuresRe shielding:- www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-on-shielding-and-protecting-extremely-vulnerable-persons-from-covid-19/guidance-on-shielding-and-protecting-extremely-vulnerable-persons-from-covid-19
|
|
|
Post by Gary Hackett on Oct 26, 2020 15:54:38 GMT
So on that fear factor basis why a few weeks ago didn't they try and hide / not reveal data showing that it was the vast majority of young people who were getting it and of those young people hardly anyone died? Why did they adjust the death period down to 28 days if they wanted to ramp up the fear factor rather than downplaying it. They've got sage, the opposition and public opinion all against their anti lockdown policies, if there was any way they could show data to support their position they would. In regards to education being the major driver, I'd agree with that to a degree but as Milanstokie pointed out in Italy there were little rises when their schools / uni's reopened it was a few weeks later when the weather turned and households started mixing indoors again. The last thing I want is for the economy to be wrecked but I think we're in danger of doing more damage by having an uncohesive set of policies which don't work but which keep the economy in uncertainty. Rolling short, sharp lockdowns every few months with some normality like we saw in July and August in between is the only way to go imo to keep deaths down and to keep the economy functioning as best as it can in between until we get that immunity from the vaccine next summer. They adjusted the period because it was clearly ridiculous that people who had recovered from Covid but then went on to die of something else entirely were being included in the Covid figures. An issue that was actually pointed out to them by Carl Heneghan, somebody who has been very critical of the government. Your rolling short sharp national lockdowns might be the correct way to go but from where I'm sitting, you're basing it on very little. All I'm asking for, is to see the relevant data before I'll start championing one method over another. Is that really too much to ask? I noticed you just tossed away the rest of my post, which contained (imo) quite pertinent figures that need addressing. There is a lack of data out there which raises legitimate questions and as long as those questions present themselves, then I'll keep asking them. I haven't got an agenda and I'm not suggesting I'm right, indeed I'm not even offering an opinion, I just want to see the data before being able to formulate one. As I've asked before, if the virus is as prevalent as it was first time around, then why aren't they telling people who had to shield first time around to shield now? And I don't buy the fatigue answer any longer, this has been going on since the beginning of September but there still isn't an instruction for vulnerable people to shield, why is that? It's a perfectly reasonable question to ask. And I'm still really interested in why things aren't taking off in London to the same degree either? The lack of people currently in the West End and the City will probably be having some effect but there are plenty of people working from home who are employed in Manchester and Liverpool too and beyond that, London is an absolutely massive place which is in effect, a city of many small cities and towns, so why two months on, has the virus not taken hold in anything like the way it has in the North? Surely this is a hugely important question that needs answering because the answer in itself might help us to establish the best way forwards in other areas. It just seems to me, to simply say "just lock it all down" is an incredibly simple/lazy solution, even if it is a solution at all, at the end of the day, it might indeed be the only way but please, show me the data first. This is an interesting piece. www.spectator.co.uk/article/The-ten-worst-Covid-data-failuresSorry mate, I edited down your post for the reply just to keep the bit I was replying to simple, I didn't toss it away (I'm not a complete tosser ;-) I do agree that the data should be available so we can make a more informed judgement but in the absence of that I can only make an opinion on what is available. Based on the research I have done and in the absence of the data we can't see my natural response is to be cautious and play it safe rather than gamble with lives, getting into a mess which leads to more uncertainly for the economy. The idea of a fire break like in wales so we can have a reset to get us back to July / August seems to me the most appealing of the options. I realise we'd have to have another again later in the winter but wouldn't that be better than businesses not knowing from one day to the next what's happening?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 26, 2020 16:39:41 GMT
They adjusted the period because it was clearly ridiculous that people who had recovered from Covid but then went on to die of something else entirely were being included in the Covid figures. An issue that was actually pointed out to them by Carl Heneghan, somebody who has been very critical of the government. Your rolling short sharp national lockdowns might be the correct way to go but from where I'm sitting, you're basing it on very little. All I'm asking for, is to see the relevant data before I'll start championing one method over another. Is that really too much to ask? I noticed you just tossed away the rest of my post, which contained (imo) quite pertinent figures that need addressing. There is a lack of data out there which raises legitimate questions and as long as those questions present themselves, then I'll keep asking them. I haven't got an agenda and I'm not suggesting I'm right, indeed I'm not even offering an opinion, I just want to see the data before being able to formulate one. As I've asked before, if the virus is as prevalent as it was first time around, then why aren't they telling people who had to shield first time around to shield now? And I don't buy the fatigue answer any longer, this has been going on since the beginning of September but there still isn't an instruction for vulnerable people to shield, why is that? It's a perfectly reasonable question to ask. And I'm still really interested in why things aren't taking off in London to the same degree either? The lack of people currently in the West End and the City will probably be having some effect but there are plenty of people working from home who are employed in Manchester and Liverpool too and beyond that, London is an absolutely massive place which is in effect, a city of many small cities and towns, so why two months on, has the virus not taken hold in anything like the way it has in the North? Surely this is a hugely important question that needs answering because the answer in itself might help us to establish the best way forwards in other areas. It just seems to me, to simply say "just lock it all down" is an incredibly simple/lazy solution, even if it is a solution at all, at the end of the day, it might indeed be the only way but please, show me the data first. This is an interesting piece. www.spectator.co.uk/article/The-ten-worst-Covid-data-failuresRe shielding:- www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-on-shielding-and-protecting-extremely-vulnerable-persons-from-covid-19/guidance-on-shielding-and-protecting-extremely-vulnerable-persons-from-covid-19As I said, they're not asking people to shield, when apparently the hospitals are about to hit capacity. At the very least, you'd expect them to be telling people to who are in tier 3 areas to do so but they aren't. It's worth raising the question, to ask why, isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 26, 2020 16:51:51 GMT
They adjusted the period because it was clearly ridiculous that people who had recovered from Covid but then went on to die of something else entirely were being included in the Covid figures. An issue that was actually pointed out to them by Carl Heneghan, somebody who has been very critical of the government. Your rolling short sharp national lockdowns might be the correct way to go but from where I'm sitting, you're basing it on very little. All I'm asking for, is to see the relevant data before I'll start championing one method over another. Is that really too much to ask? I noticed you just tossed away the rest of my post, which contained (imo) quite pertinent figures that need addressing. There is a lack of data out there which raises legitimate questions and as long as those questions present themselves, then I'll keep asking them. I haven't got an agenda and I'm not suggesting I'm right, indeed I'm not even offering an opinion, I just want to see the data before being able to formulate one. As I've asked before, if the virus is as prevalent as it was first time around, then why aren't they telling people who had to shield first time around to shield now? And I don't buy the fatigue answer any longer, this has been going on since the beginning of September but there still isn't an instruction for vulnerable people to shield, why is that? It's a perfectly reasonable question to ask. And I'm still really interested in why things aren't taking off in London to the same degree either? The lack of people currently in the West End and the City will probably be having some effect but there are plenty of people working from home who are employed in Manchester and Liverpool too and beyond that, London is an absolutely massive place which is in effect, a city of many small cities and towns, so why two months on, has the virus not taken hold in anything like the way it has in the North? Surely this is a hugely important question that needs answering because the answer in itself might help us to establish the best way forwards in other areas. It just seems to me, to simply say "just lock it all down" is an incredibly simple/lazy solution, even if it is a solution at all, at the end of the day, it might indeed be the only way but please, show me the data first. This is an interesting piece. www.spectator.co.uk/article/The-ten-worst-Covid-data-failuresSorry mate, I edited down your post for the reply just to keep the bit I was replying to simple, I didn't toss it away (I'm not a complete tosser ;-) I do agree that the data should be available so we can make a more informed judgement but in the absence of that I can only make an opinion on what is available. Based on the research I have done and in the absence of the data we can't see my natural response is to be cautious and play it safe rather than gamble with lives, getting into a mess which leads to more uncertainly for the economy. The idea of a fire break like in wales so we can have a reset to get us back to July / August seems to me the most appealing of the options. I realise we'd have to have another again later in the winter but wouldn't that be better than businesses not knowing from one day to the next what's happening? Well I don't think a business in Norfolk or Devon or Dorset etc. etc. would find it particularly appealing when there is virtually zero Covid in those areas and furthermore, we don't know if it will even actually work in the other areas that are badly affected (there's been no data offered to demonstrate how it will) and until we have a break down of the hospital admissions in the badly affected areas that demonstrate that hospital admissions for respiratory illnesses are far higher than they'd ordinarily be at this time of year, then we don't even know if it's actually needed in the first place. I'm sorry I can't give you an answer mate but I'm not going to have a stab in the dark based on very little.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Oct 26, 2020 18:03:52 GMT
For all those interested(not many on this thread now)
|
|
|
Post by Gary Hackett on Oct 26, 2020 18:09:52 GMT
Sorry mate, I edited down your post for the reply just to keep the bit I was replying to simple, I didn't toss it away (I'm not a complete tosser ;-) I do agree that the data should be available so we can make a more informed judgement but in the absence of that I can only make an opinion on what is available. Based on the research I have done and in the absence of the data we can't see my natural response is to be cautious and play it safe rather than gamble with lives, getting into a mess which leads to more uncertainly for the economy. The idea of a fire break like in wales so we can have a reset to get us back to July / August seems to me the most appealing of the options. I realise we'd have to have another again later in the winter but wouldn't that be better than businesses not knowing from one day to the next what's happening? Well I don't think a business in Norfolk or Devon or Dorset etc. etc. would find it particularly appealing when there is virtually zero Covid in those areas and furthermore, we don't know if it will even actually work in the other areas that are badly affected (there's been no data offered to demonstrate how it will) and until we have a break down of the hospital admissions in the badly affected areas that demonstrate that hospital admissions for respiratory illnesses are far higher than they'd ordinarily be at this time of year, then we don't even know if it's actually needed in the first place. I'm sorry I can't give you an answer mate but I'm not going to have a stab in the dark based on very little. When you say there is little covid in those areas... There's currently 70 cases per 100k in Devon. There were only 70 cases in Stoke on Trent 3 weeks ago and now there's 240 and we're in tier 2, doubling every 7 days and not far away from tier 3. Things change very quickly.
|
|
|
Post by drjeffsdiscobarge on Oct 26, 2020 18:27:06 GMT
Lockdowns don't work though. Only stupid people and the government think they do. They work to destroy people's lives and livelihoods whilst giving the illusion that it's about a pandemic. Ticks every box for this Globalist reset operation run via the WEF, UN, WHO, and the shills at John Hopkins, Imperial college, etc. If there really was a deadly pandemic, I'd happily and willingly lock myself in. And that's the crux of the matter. So you don't believe it's a real disease or you don't believe it's deadly?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 26, 2020 18:48:22 GMT
Well I don't think a business in Norfolk or Devon or Dorset etc. etc. would find it particularly appealing when there is virtually zero Covid in those areas and furthermore, we don't know if it will even actually work in the other areas that are badly affected (there's been no data offered to demonstrate how it will) and until we have a break down of the hospital admissions in the badly affected areas that demonstrate that hospital admissions for respiratory illnesses are far higher than they'd ordinarily be at this time of year, then we don't even know if it's actually needed in the first place. I'm sorry I can't give you an answer mate but I'm not going to have a stab in the dark based on very little. When you say there is little covid in those areas... There's currently 70 cases per 100k in Devon. There were only 70 cases in Stoke on Trent 3 weeks ago and now there's 240 and we're in tier 2, doubling every 7 days and not far away from tier 3. Things change very quickly. I was hoping I'd kind of addressed that in the remainder of the post. Even in the areas with a high number of 'cases', why do we not have a breakdown of the hospital admissions which demonstrate that this high number of cases is leading to an unusually high number of people being admitted to hospital with respiratory illnesses for this time of year? This is such a simple and pertinent question. If there actually aren't, then is there a possibility that a lot of these patients would have found themselves in hospital ANYWAY with flu or pneumonia or any other number of respiratory illnesses that becomes prevelant at this time of year? The ONS figures for excess deaths for September are showing that the numbers are actually down this year. And if there isn't a significant increase, do we even need a lockdown anyway? I'm not suggesting that the figures for respiratory illnesses HAVEN'T increased, I just want to see the data that shows that they have but it's not out there. The Manchester Evening News requested exactly the same information from all of the region's health authorities last week and got absolutely nowhere.
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on Oct 26, 2020 18:48:29 GMT
As I said, they're not asking people to shield, when apparently the hospitals are about to hit capacity. At the very least, you'd expect them to be telling people to who are in tier 3 areas to do so but they aren't. It's worth raising the question, to ask why, isn't it? Possibly is Paul - who have you asked? If I recall shielding was only advisory last time (you didn't get fined for going to the supermarket if you were 71) and as I read it the view is that the other measures that they have in place in addition to what they know now that they didn't then (such as outdoor spread) plus an assumption of awareness by those most at risk (borne out by them having the lower rates of infection by age) means they don't feel the need to do anything additional - yet - but reserve the right to. But that's just my interpretation. I must admit I've given up on trying to solve the problems of the nation and was finding my time on this thread quite depressing (as well as taking up too much of it) - resolving to leave it alone (but old habits die hard). I've got a father who shielded last time as did 2 x in-laws - as numbers of infections have increased they have shown themselves to be acutely aware of their own vulnerability and are taking steps to protect themselves without any persuasion from me or the government. They're not as paranoid as they were in April - but neither have they got any unrealistic expectations of a big family Christmas. They're lucky in many ways as they've got family to do their running around for them if need be - and I'm happy to do that - as I am for any neighbours not so fortunate. And for everything else that's going on - and the pain and sympathy I might feel for people having a tough time - either because of or in spite of any policy decisions - looking after those I'm in a position to is - I'm afraid - as much as I can do ......as unfortunately I'm not Marcus Rashford.
|
|
|
Post by Billy the kid on Oct 26, 2020 18:54:42 GMT
They adjusted the period because it was clearly ridiculous that people who had recovered from Covid but then went on to die of something else entirely were being included in the Covid figures. An issue that was actually pointed out to them by Carl Heneghan, somebody who has been very critical of the government. Your rolling short sharp national lockdowns might be the correct way to go but from where I'm sitting, you're basing it on very little. All I'm asking for, is to see the relevant data before I'll start championing one method over another. Is that really too much to ask? I noticed you just tossed away the rest of my post, which contained (imo) quite pertinent figures that need addressing. There is a lack of data out there which raises legitimate questions and as long as those questions present themselves, then I'll keep asking them. I haven't got an agenda and I'm not suggesting I'm right, indeed I'm not even offering an opinion, I just want to see the data before being able to formulate one. As I've asked before, if the virus is as prevalent as it was first time around, then why aren't they telling people who had to shield first time around to shield now? And I don't buy the fatigue answer any longer, this has been going on since the beginning of September but there still isn't an instruction for vulnerable people to shield, why is that? It's a perfectly reasonable question to ask. And I'm still really interested in why things aren't taking off in London to the same degree either? The lack of people currently in the West End and the City will probably be having some effect but there are plenty of people working from home who are employed in Manchester and Liverpool too and beyond that, London is an absolutely massive place which is in effect, a city of many small cities and towns, so why two months on, has the virus not taken hold in anything like the way it has in the North? Surely this is a hugely important question that needs answering because the answer in itself might help us to establish the best way forwards in other areas. It just seems to me, to simply say "just lock it all down" is an incredibly simple/lazy solution, even if it is a solution at all, at the end of the day, it might indeed be the only way but please, show me the data first. This is an interesting piece. www.spectator.co.uk/article/The-ten-worst-Covid-data-failuresSorry mate, I edited down your post for the reply just to keep the bit I was replying to simple, I didn't toss it away (I'm not a complete tosser ;-) I do agree that the data should be available so we can make a more informed judgement but in the absence of that I can only make an opinion on what is available. Based on the research I have done and in the absence of the data we can't see my natural response is to be cautious and play it safe rather than gamble with lives, getting into a mess which leads to more uncertainly for the economy. The idea of a fire break like in wales so we can have a reset to get us back to July / August seems to me the most appealing of the options. I realise we'd have to have another again later in the winter but wouldn't that be better than businesses not knowing from one day to the next what's happening? An option that would make better sense would be to have a rolling program, of say 4 weeks “relative normality” followed by a 2 week “lock down” business would be able to plan for this, education would, the health system would, two weeks of restrictions with a clear end date would help with compliance and for planning logistics at home etc etc. The self isolation. Period is around 2 weeks, so if the whole country had 4 weeks on and two weeks off then we would have a fighting chance to get either heard immunity through the population or buy enough time to get to the summer and reassess where we are at in terms of a vaccine, without completely ruining the Economy, and overwhelming the health service.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 26, 2020 19:01:45 GMT
As I said, they're not asking people to shield, when apparently the hospitals are about to hit capacity. At the very least, you'd expect them to be telling people to who are in tier 3 areas to do so but they aren't. It's worth raising the question, to ask why, isn't it? Possibly is Paul - who have you asked? If I recall shielding was only advisory last time (you didn't get fined for going to the supermarket if you were 71) and as I read it the view is that the other measures that they have in place in addition to what they know now that they didn't then (such as outdoor spread) plus an assumption of awareness by those most at risk (borne out by them having the lower rates of infection by age) means they don't feel the need to do anything additional - yet - but reserve the right to. But that's just my interpretation. I must admit I've given up on trying to solve the problems of the nation and was finding my time on this thread quite depressing (as well as taking up too much of it) - resolving to leave it alone (but old habits die hard). I've got a father who shielded last time as did 2 x in-laws - as numbers of infections have increased they have shown themselves to be acutely aware of their own vulnerability and are taking steps to protect themselves without any persuasion from me or the government. They're not as paranoid as they were in April - but neither have they got any unrealistic expectations of a big family Christmas. They're lucky in many ways as they've got family to do their running around for them if need be - and I'm happy to do that - as I am for any neighbours not so fortunate. And for everything else that's going on - and the pain and sympathy I might feel for people having a tough time - either because of or in spite of any policy decisions - looking after those I'm in a position to is - I'm afraid - as much as I can do ......as unfortunately I'm not Marcus Rashford. I've raised the question on here (obviously). I'd already read the link that you'd provided from top to bottom on the day it was published, as my wife received a letter in April asking her to shield and she has done so to the letter and continues to do so, that's how I knew that they weren't recommending that people did so this time.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Oct 26, 2020 19:05:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by MilanStokie on Oct 26, 2020 19:14:03 GMT
Anyway... New decree in Italy: Gyms and Swimming Pools closed for the foreseeable. Cinemas and theatres all closed for the foreseeable. Skiing season is effectively cancelled. All bars and restaurants to be closed after 18:00. Curfew from 23:00 - 06:00 (Already was this a week back) No establishment can sell any alcohol after 18:00 (supermarkets and takeaways included) Facemasks everywhere, including outside. €3000 fine for not adhering. Regional travel allowed but strongly recommended against and likely that will be banned in the next decree if the numbers continue to rise. I guess the world over is 'in on the act'. Pfft Please, please can we have this Boris sir.... BAAAAAA Who said they wanted it? Making shit up so you can call people sheep? Clever. Come to think of it, watching your replies from afar, it's actually all you do, fucking troll.
|
|
|
Post by bgreen13 on Oct 26, 2020 19:25:14 GMT
Please, please can we have this Boris sir.... BAAAAAA Who said they wanted it? Making shit up so you can call people sheep? Clever. Come to think of it, watching your replies from afar, it's actually all you do, fucking troll. Thanks for your interest.
|
|
|
Post by whatsashig on Oct 26, 2020 19:29:06 GMT
Do you not think that with most people keeping distance from everybody, pubs shutting early, cinemas closed or virtually empty in most places, the majority of elderly are staying in or keeping away from younger members of their family, that it's not actually spreading as quickly as it normally would, and the main flu season is normally December to March with only small outbreaks form October to December ? People aren't behaving like they normally did for the last god knows how many years, no major sporting events, no attendances at football, rugby matches, hardly any amateur races going on, no parkruns every Saturday, trains virtually empty around the country, it's transmission route has been severely taken out, it's not hard to work that one out is it ? You are forgetting January February and March this year the ONS publish only 394 people died of flu from jan 1 - aug 31 are you telling me our December to March flu season went from thousands and thousands to 394. Not having in it. And this is before it turned into 1984 [/https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/influenzadeathsfor2020 I’ll try again... It’s quite clear that folk can state anything as fact but really don’t get it, why when it’s so clearly not the case. Maybe ons facts are wrong but to quote ons facts as something that ons don’t state is a bit odd. www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/influenzadeathsfor2020
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Oct 26, 2020 20:36:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Oct 26, 2020 20:44:42 GMT
Lockdowns don't work though. Only stupid people and the government think they do. China and New Zealand would suggest differently
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Oct 26, 2020 21:15:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 26, 2020 21:56:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Oct 26, 2020 21:59:07 GMT
At least it will look good when they start displaying the stats for the lockdown action they've taken.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Oct 26, 2020 22:17:31 GMT
This is a great listen by two of the most reasoned voices within the madness of mainstream media.
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Oct 26, 2020 22:40:40 GMT
This is a great listen by two of the most reasoned voices within the madness of mainstream media. Spot on
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Oct 26, 2020 22:43:15 GMT
This is a great listen by two of the most reasoned voices within the madness of mainstream media.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Oct 26, 2020 22:46:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Oct 26, 2020 22:51:56 GMT
This is a great listen by two of the most reasoned voices within the madness of mainstream media. Weakness And lack of resilience masquerading as champions of freedoms it’s this very weakness and lack of fortitude which has allowed the virus to take off Anyone who sees the next story about virus overload i Europe can see lockdown was and is inevitable it’s hair now about how many we kill and Maine before we have the guts to do it and enforce it properly .
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Oct 26, 2020 23:21:01 GMT
This is a great listen by two of the most reasoned voices within the madness of mainstream media. 2 more armchair show offs jerking themselves off pretending they think allowing the virus to rip will save the economy. Getting after the virus with devastating speed is the way to go as China and New Zealand have proved and anyone with even an iota of sense can see.
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Oct 26, 2020 23:25:40 GMT
This is a great listen by two of the most reasoned voices within the madness of mainstream media. 2 more armchair show offs jerking themselves off pretending they think allowing the virus to rip will save the economy. It will have quite the opposite effect as China and New Zealand have proved and anyone with even an iota of sense can see. Just missing the Secretary for Education telling it to 'shut up and go away' before brandishing his bull whip.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 27, 2020 1:28:23 GMT
|
|