Coronavirus

[Section_31]

2 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

African Americans in parts of New York City are being arrested for violating social distancing rules at a far higher rate than white people, according to data from the Brooklyn district attorney.

Adam Gabbatt reports that data showed that between 17 March and 4 May, 40 people were arrested in Brooklyn for breaking social distancing rules. One was white, four were Hispanic and 35 were black.

 

Who knew??

Just people throwing shitballs at good police.

[TheHowieLama]

Just now, Section_31 said:

Just people throwing shitballs at good police.

Well it might be all they have, no one can afford a milkshake in this day and age.

[Anubis]

35 minutes ago, Mudface said:

This is really chilling- https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/08/care-home-residents-harvested-left-to-die-uk-government-herd-immunity

 

There should be prosecutions when this is over.

 

Yes there should.

[Anubis]

17 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

African Americans in parts of New York City are being arrested for violating social distancing rules at a far higher rate than white people, according to data from the Brooklyn district attorney.

Adam Gabbatt reports that data showed that between 17 March and 4 May, 40 people were arrested in Brooklyn for breaking social distancing rules. One was white, four were Hispanic and 35 were black.

 

Who knew??

Come on, Howie. It’s not like the NYPD have a history of institutionalised racism or anything...

[TheHowieLama]

4 minutes ago, Anubis said:

Come on, Howie. It’s not like the NYPD have a history of institutionalised racism or anything...

It is where Don't Ask, Don't Tell got it's start. 

[Pureblood]

13 minutes ago, Anubis said:

Yes there should.

I read that all ministers benefit from Crown immunity and can't be prosecuted.

[Scooby Dudek]

1 hour ago, TK421 said:

Um. Ever so slightly misleading.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-52594570

 

Coronavirus deaths in Italy have risen above 30,000, latest figures show - the highest death toll in the European Union.

Italy has the third highest number of officially recorded coronavirus deaths in the world, after the United States and the UK.

 

Thankfully we left so we could control our borders, plus the £350 million a week to give OUR NHS all the PPE it needs. 

 

[Anubis]

8 minutes ago, TK421 said:

I read that all ministers benefit from Crown immunity and can't be prosecuted.

Won’t cover Cummings and his ilk.

[TheHowieLama]

6 minutes ago, Anubis said:

Won’t cover Cummings and his ilk.

Who is going to prosecute Domenic Cummings?

[Bobby Hundreds]

Nobody should be unprosecutable.

 

Is that even a word.

[johnsusername]

31 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Who is going to prosecute Domenic Cummings?

Judge Dredd, hopefully. 

[Pureblood]

28 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

Nobody should be unprosecutable.

 

Is that even a word.

I read it here.

 

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2020-05-02-british-government-ministers-have-been-complicit-in-millions-of-deaths-since-1945-so-dont-be-surprised-that-they-wont-face-justice-over-coronavirus/

 

Crown immunity

 

Yet Britain’s unwritten constitution is still permeated by the concept of Crown immunity. This doctrine, which surely should not have escaped the Middle Ages, deems that ministers cannot commit a legal wrong and do not act as persons but as agents steeped with Crown authority, and are therefore untouchable under the law. 

 

If a minister breaches the criminal law outside of his public duties, she is subject to criminal law like anyone else. But if she makes decisions as a minister, however reprehensible or incompetent, these are considered as acts of government and not for the criminal courts.

 

Whether it’s war crimes by a prime minister, a minister’s complicity in torture and rendition or catastrophic health and social policy decisions, accountability, we are told, is meant to come through democracy and parliament. But it doesn’t.

 

Public inquiries tend to take years and can embarrass ministers but invariably fail to formally censure them, let alone hold them legally accountable. The common law offence of misconduct in public office sets an impossible threshold, even if it could be applied to ministers. The process of judicial review can sometimes act as a check on ministers, but the limitations are also stark. 

 

For example, the Court of Appeal ruling in 2019 that UK arms sales to Saudi Arabia were unlawful, while important, required only that the government’s arms export decisions be reviewed. It was a million miles away from holding ministers individually culpable for the deaths of thousands of civilians in Yemen.

 

The failure to hold ministers accountable for contributing to deaths at home or abroad is one of the biggest gaping holes in the contention that British governance is democratic in a meaningful sense. If the rule of law is not made to apply to decision-makers with enormous power over life and death, but just to everyone else, what kind of a democracy is that? 

[Bruce Spanner]

48 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Who is going to prosecute Domenic Cummings?

Sir Keir Starmer QC.

 

And god, most likely god, or Buddha maybe, not sure, but as long as the cunt dies in an horrific, drawn out, painful way I don’t fucking care.

 

Pseudo intelligencia chancer.

 

 

[TheHowieLama]

4 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

Sir Keir Starmer QC.

 

And god, most likely god.

Lower case god, or the big fella himself?

[Bruce Spanner]

17 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Lower case god, or the big fella himself?

The Jewish one, or the OG as they call him in Hasidic rap communities. 

[Scooby Dudek]

36 minutes ago, TK421 said:

I read it here.

 

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2020-05-02-british-government-ministers-have-been-complicit-in-millions-of-deaths-since-1945-so-dont-be-surprised-that-they-wont-face-justice-over-coronavirus/

 

Crown immunity

 

Yet Britain’s unwritten constitution is still permeated by the concept of Crown immunity. This doctrine, which surely should not have escaped the Middle Ages, deems that ministers cannot commit a legal wrong and do not act as persons but as agents steeped with Crown authority, and are therefore untouchable under the law. 

 

If a minister breaches the criminal law outside of his public duties, she is subject to criminal law like anyone else. But if she makes decisions as a minister, however reprehensible or incompetent, these are considered as acts of government and not for the criminal courts.

 

Whether it’s war crimes by a prime minister, a minister’s complicity in torture and rendition or catastrophic health and social policy decisions, accountability, we are told, is meant to come through democracy and parliament. But it doesn’t.

 

Public inquiries tend to take years and can embarrass ministers but invariably fail to formally censure them, let alone hold them legally accountable. The common law offence of misconduct in public office sets an impossible threshold, even if it could be applied to ministers. The process of judicial review can sometimes act as a check on ministers, but the limitations are also stark. 

 

For example, the Court of Appeal ruling in 2019 that UK arms sales to Saudi Arabia were unlawful, while important, required only that the government’s arms export decisions be reviewed. It was a million miles away from holding ministers individually culpable for the deaths of thousands of civilians in Yemen.

 

The failure to hold ministers accountable for contributing to deaths at home or abroad is one of the biggest gaping holes in the contention that British governance is democratic in a meaningful sense. If the rule of law is not made to apply to decision-makers with enormous power over life and death, but just to everyone else, what kind of a democracy is that? 

No idea, but does the court that tried the Nazis at Nuremberg not superced State law ? 

Or is this only in relation to war crimes ? 

 

[Scott_M]

2 hours ago, Sugar Ape said:

I don’t think it’s really possible for Trump to fall (much) below that. If all the other shit he’s done to date hasn’t put those people off then nothing will. That’s his base. 

I get what your saying but a lot of people voted for him because they didn’t like Hilary Clinton.
 

I know that graph is a snapshot from March, so I’d hope that they trajectory of it has plummeted since 2016 and it’s just the narrow minded inbreds left. 

[Pureblood]

16 minutes ago, Scooby Dudek said:

No idea, but does the court that tried the Nazis at Nuremberg not superced State law ? 

Or is this only in relation to war crimes ? 

 

Would imagine that's some sort of international wartime thing, yes. 

[TheHowieLama]

1 minute ago, Scott_M said:

I get what your saying but a lot of people voted for him because they didn’t like Hilary Clinton.
 

I know that graph is a snapshot from March, so I’d hope that they trajectory of it has plummeted since 2016 and it’s just the narrow minded inbreds left. 

He has consistently been the lowest rated President ever - his overall approval rating has been basically the same the entire time - never cracking 50%, never going below 40% I believe. I think his highest ever rating is shown on that graph @ 48%

[cochyn]

SA banning alcohol sales? First step to revolution. 

 

From what I've seen round my way there's folk openly flouting social distancing advice. Most don't but many do. I think by easing restrictions gov.com is hedging on giving people just enough rope for them to take matters into their own hands. The merest hint of liberation and people will take the piss. Gov.com can then be content in knowing it has at least fulfilled its legal requirements,

 

Remember, we're a nation replete with over-eaters, piss-heads and fuck-the-worlders. Given the choice most would choose self-serving nihilsm over informed obedience. Job done, crack on. Aw, sad old Doris has died - she's had a good knock, but we need to live.     

[Dr Arthur De Sabre]

11 hours ago, Sugar Ape said:

Scotty from marketing had a pretty low bar to shoot from, after all this is the fella who fucked off to Hawaii at Christmas whilst swathes of the country were on fire.

i don’t like him or his party, but have to accept he head played a part in facilitating the Australian response.

the states are enabled to open up and act independently, this hasn’t stopped LNP members having a pop at Vic State Premier (Labor) who is holding back on opening state schools. And we’ve had a new cluster of ~62 people in West Melbourne which kind of vindicates the decision to stay closed for now.

12 hours ago, TK421 said:

Yes, impressive stuff from Australia and New Zealand.  

 

As for the science, I just think that if these negative effects of mask wearing were true there would be an increase in cases and deaths in these countries commensurate to the level of risk.  

You cannot look at Aus or NZ and say well the no mask approach works as it is not like it’s a blanket approach mask on / mask off if you will. There are a good proportion of people wearing masks here in Melbourne that I have seen out and about.

if I go into a clinic or anywhere I am going to be in an enclosed spear with someone else, I wear 1.

12 hours ago, skaro said:

 

As long as someone is proved right, and someone else wrong, that's the important thing.

Ah come on John, there’s scope for debate, but you have to bring a solid argument.

As always it depends on the context of the debate as much as the content.

Brainstorming session come out with anything no matter if it sounds a bit crazy as it could spark some one else to move laterally, you know like would bleach kill the virus.
Probably not wise to do this as president of the states addressing a few hundred million during the middle of a pandemic.

GF - good robust argument has always been welcome.

6 hours ago, TheHowieLama said:

Yea, somewhere between 35 and 40% have drank the Kool Aid. He said himself he could go out and shoot someone in broad daylight and would still have that support.

Including our very own Mrs Tavares I think, pretty sure she was tweeting support for him in the run

up to the election.

[Dr Arthur De Sabre]

7 hours ago, Mudface said:

This is really chilling- https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/08/care-home-residents-harvested-left-to-die-uk-government-herd-immunity

 

There should be prosecutions when this is over.

 

 

 

Reasons to be cheerful part 3

 

 

Edited May 9, 2020 by Audrey Witherspoon
Missed the Video

[s(k)aturation]

36 minutes ago, Audrey Witherspoon said:

Ah come on John, there’s scope for debate, but you have to bring a solid argument.

As always it depends on the context of the debate as much as the content.

Brainstorming session come out with anything no matter if it sounds a bit crazy as it could spark some one else to move laterally, you know like would bleach kill the virus.
Probably not wise to do this as president of the states addressing a few hundred million during the middle of a pandemic.

GF - good robust argument has always been welcome.

 

Fair enough, Cev.

Permission to be childish occasionally though, please.

The governments have done a reasonable job down here, yes, but the 3 stage response that 8 States and Territories can implement at different times and stages to suit themselves fuels my particular hatred of our being comfortably the most over-governed country on earth (1 in 30 people is a public servant).

I don't like ScoMo much, and I particularly dislike Dan Andrews.

Personally, I think he is grand-standing a bit, pandering to some unions who are happy to keep their feet up and playing fuck-you politics with the Federal Government.

Yeah, he - like ScoMo - has done a reasonable job, but I think he's been a bolshy smug cunt about it, and I don't like the way he's communicated with us throughout the crisis.  

Still, that's democracy I guess, and you reap what you sow at the ballot box.  Or not.

And I'm just one smug cunt with a questionable opinion most times myself, I guess.  

footnote: I was approached by Andrews' Labor ad agency a few years back to write ads on the Federal election campaign that Turnbull ended up winning. They asked whether I'd work 24/7 for 6 weeks during the campaign, and whether it was OK if they didn't pay me until some time after the election (with some vague mention of a "bonus"). They obviously didn't like my response to those fairly one-sided financial terms, because I never heard from them again.

 

[Jose Jones]

1 hour ago, skaro said:

 

Fair enough, Cev.

Permission to be childish occasionally though, please.

The governments have done a reasonable job down here, yes, but the 3 stage response that 8 States and Territories can implement at different times and stages to suit themselves fuels my particular hatred of our being comfortably the most over-governed country on earth (1 in 30 people is a public servant).

I don't like ScoMo much, and I particularly dislike Dan Andrews.

Personally, I think he is grand-standing a bit, pandering to some unions who are happy to keep their feet up and playing fuck-you politics with the Federal Government.

Yeah, he - like ScoMo - has done a reasonable job, but I think he's been a bolshy smug cunt about it, and I don't like the way he's communicated with us throughout the crisis.  

Still, that's democracy I guess, and you reap what you sow at the ballot box.  Or not.

And I'm just one smug cunt with a questionable opinion most times myself, I guess.  

footnote: I was approached by Andrews' Labor ad agency a few years back to write ads on the Federal election campaign that Turnbull ended up winning. They asked whether I'd work 24/7 for 6 weeks during the campaign, and whether it was OK if they didn't pay me until some time after the election (with some vague mention of a "bonus"). They obviously didn't like my response to those fairly one-sided financial terms, because I never heard from them again.

 

Interesting to see how people can see things in a completely different light.

 

I think Andrews is probably the most effective political leader in my time (14 years) in Australia. He rarely bullshits or grandstands and just tends to get on with stuff.

 

Also there has been very little political nonsense between Victoria and the Feds through this. When both Andrews and Morrison have been given the chance to stir the pot, they have instead praised each other mightily.

 

Finally, whilst I would normally agree that Australia has a stupid amount of duplicate and obsolete government, the benefit of it has actually been shown here.

 

Because the states are responsible for hospitals, schools etc, they were able to stop the partisan knobbers (of both stripes) in Canberra leading us down the US/UK path.

[s(k)aturation]

13 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Interesting to see how people can see things in a completely different light.

 

I think Andrews is probably the most effective political leader in my time (14 years) in Australia. He rarely bullshits or grandstands and just tends to get on with stuff.

 

Also there has been very little political nonsense between Victoria and the Feds through this. When both Andrews and Morrison have been given the chance to stir the pot, they have instead praised each other mightily.

 

Finally, whilst I would normally agree that Australia has a stupid amount of duplicate and obsolete government, the benefit of it has actually been shown here.

 

Because the states are responsible for hospitals, schools etc, they were able to stop the partisan knobbers (of both stripes) in Canberra leading us down the US/UK path.

 

As a self-confessed person of questionable opinion, yep, perhaps I'm seeing and hearing what I want see and hear - there is, after all, ample opportunity for selectivity of opinion.

I reckon there's just as many both-striped knobbers at State level too, though - certainly too many, in my book, to justify having so much government

Anyhow, in this crisis they've all been pretty good - as you would hope and expect any half-decent leaders to be... 

Let's hope it augurs well for the next 100 years of government, but when things go back to "normal", I somehow doubt it.