Jump to content
DOSBODS
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Poll - Reason for Governments tyranny


Continuing authoritarian rule  

91 members have voted

  1. 1. Do the continuing rules have anything to do with public safety ?

    • Yes
      8
    • No
      67
    • Unsure
      16


Recommended Posts

Forgetting the initial phase back in March - let's be generous and assume they acted in our interests O.o

Do you think these continuing rules, laws and generally authoritarian rule have anything to do with public health?

I'm keeping this poll very simple. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Quite agree but in this case the virus/parasite challenge is not determining the new behaviour. Instead it is dictated by some clown puppets under orders from unknown globalist sources. 

The way I see it, we are having a debate we might both learn a little about the other arguments Debate is good and stifled to often in the UK now  We may disagree on things but it is nothing

I am going to disagree, I think the public see the chaos at the moment, different laws in different parts of the UK for no real reason -the pandemic is over we have no excess deaths really and very ba

Posted Images

1 minute ago, stokiescum said:

They just followed other country’s terrified that not doing so might turn the public against them if the death rate got to high.i don’t think there’s a master plan for a new world order.

This is what happens when you can have no losers in life and no risk.

Most of the UK population are totally pathetic, our political leaders are a mirror image of the electorate.

I'm not sure if there's a NWO or it's just Politicians and Billionaires like Jeff Bezos taking advantage of the situation to enrich themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Democorruptcy said:

I'd prefer if it said "are really" instead of "anything". Your "anything" gives them a bit of leeway. "are really" is a definite no, "anything" could sucker a protect old folk or the NHS vote.

I'm just keeping it simple. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wokingham thinking of "going to tier-2". God I hate even using their stupid verbiage.

What they really mean = we are brassic because we stupidly invested spunked so much on buying shopping centres. We are willing to play along with tier-something in return for that sweet government cash.

They let the cat out of the bag though:
 

Quote

At Wednesday’s meeting, councillor John Halsall, leader of the council, called on councillors to “mobilise the whole borough to change their behaviour”.

“It’s not certain that we will ever find a vaccine.

“It’s not certain that we will ever come out of the current situation.

The only option for us is to change our behaviour 

That is most definitely what they want. Control.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Funn3r said:

Wokingham thinking of "going to tier-2". God I hate even using their stupid verbiage.

What they really mean = we are brassic because we stupidly invested spunked so much on buying shopping centres. We are willing to play along with tier-something in return for that sweet government cash.

They let the cat out of the bag though:
 

That is most definitely what they want. Control.

 

Bevahioural changes in response to the arrival of a new parasite or virus wouldn't be a novel evolutionary response by humans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Hopeful said:

 

Bevahioural changes in response to the arrival of a new parasite or virus wouldn't be a novel evolutionary response by humans.

Quite agree but in this case the virus/parasite challenge is not determining the new behaviour. Instead it is dictated by some clown puppets under orders from unknown globalist sources. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ccc said:

Forgetting the initial phase back in March - let's be generous and assume they acted in our interests O.o

Do you think these continuing rules, laws and generally authoritarian rule have anything to do with public health?

I'm keeping this poll very simple. 

No they have tasted power and they liked it. Sadly the majority of people in the UK seem to be happy with being confined to the house, for now until the money runs out

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Funn3r said:

Quite agree but in this case the virus/parasite challenge is not determining the new behaviour. Instead it is dictated by some clown puppets under orders from unknown globalist sources. 

....responding to the virus.

Our response may swing back the other way, take a new turn, but in time to come it will all be part of the response, no?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hopeful said:

....responding to the virus.

Depends what you mean by responding. Using it as cover, justification, excuse, to achieve an unrelated objective.

Doesn't really fit the definition of the word responding.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ccc said:

Forgetting the initial phase back in March - let's be generous and assume they acted in our interests O.o

Do you think these continuing rules, laws and generally authoritarian rule have anything to do with public health?

I'm keeping this poll very simple. 

 

They think the rules will keep hospitals 'empty-ish' and consequently, maintain law and order, and so ensure the public's view of both being safe in Tory hands (or the party holding the reins). I think that is their purpose.

 

Edited by Hopeful
Link to post
Share on other sites

I see it as a consequence of a several factors aligining themselves in turn proffering the abuse of power. Or the concentrating of power with little counterbalance.

The virus and its likely targets are farely well described now. Reexposure and muatation could hold some surprises along with the vaccines in some way in the future. Its management should be clear but with likes od Drakefords dictats on what you can buy, the mysteries of how to drop down a lockdown tier, clearly it isnt.

The COVID Act and its powers for 2 years duration (is there a six month review now?) Of which we have 18 ish months left, was unaminously ploughed through parliment. There were clear issues raised that it could be used in an authoritarian manner. At that stage parliment felt it was worth the risk given the view at that point of what COVID could bring. A strong government was needed for the difficult days ahead.

A limp wristed opposition along with a thumping Tory majority, cemented this power.

BJs style of governence, was only enhanced by such circumstances making any questioning or ability to negotiate terms, all but impossible. The errors that arose from such unchallenged power became apparent ..nursing home death/ PPE/testing and whatever.

The background music of the Brexit trade negotations adds to the governments store of the power aphrodisiac. Here though, I am in a slight bind as i would want a strong hand at such negotiagions but see the circumstances and consequences of the same approach with the COVID handling. Hoping this strongman method works in the trade deals as at home it appears to be alienating a growing number of people, as say compared to March when we were all facing the unknowns.

In essence powers gone to their head. Power hungry, and thats backed up with a huge majority and the COVID Act.

That said. If they pull off decent deals with the trade, notably after the US presidentials and agreements with the US. EU deals might change after a US agreement. Then I might backtrack. Theres a heck of lot of ifs and hopes there that I dont think will all come off and we will be left with a power hungry government at home and their COVID Marshals, with an economy wrecked.

Maybe we need a war. Thats always good for such a government.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Hopeful said:

 

They think the rules will keep hospitals 'empty-ish' and consquently, maintain law and order, and so ensure the public's view of both being safe in Tory hands (or the party holding the reins). I think that is their purpose.

 

I am going to disagree, I think the public see the chaos at the moment, different laws in different parts of the UK for no real reason -the pandemic is over we have no excess deaths really and very bad reporting of the statistics and deaths. 

For example testing positive more than once counts in some cases. Deaths begin recorded for any reason as covid if you die in 28 days of a test etc

Michael Yeardon has written an excellent destruction of it all, he is an ex respiratory scientist and ran his own company doing  so

https://lockdownsceptics.org/what-sage-got-wrong/

Hell even airline pilots are seeing it is all bollocks 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dear-members-parliament-brian-cattle/?trackingId=TEqt8AKvSGO00EjFDUC3Lw%3D%3D

We have destroyed the economy, opened the door to totalitarianism, trashed mental health, killed hundreds of thousands as the NHS is effectively closed, and damaged a generation of school kids. All for something with a 99% recovery for those under 70 

Fucking well done the cure was much worse than the disease 

 

 

EjqPoWwVkAEk8O7.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, ad_ceng said:

I am going to disagree, I think the public see the chaos at the moment, different laws in different parts of the UK for no real reason -the pandemic is over we have no excess deaths really and very bad reporting of the statistics and deaths. 

For example testing positive more than once counts in some cases. Deaths begin recorded for any reason as covid if you die in 28 days of a test etc

Michael Yeardon has written an excellent destruction of it all, he is an ex respiratory scientist and ran his own company doing  so

https://lockdownsceptics.org/what-sage-got-wrong/

Hell even airline pilots are seeing it is all bollocks 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dear-members-parliament-brian-cattle/?trackingId=TEqt8AKvSGO00EjFDUC3Lw%3D%3D

We have destroyed the economy, opened the door to totalitarianism, trashed mental health, killed hundreds of thousands as the NHS is effectively closed, and damaged a generation of school kids. All for something with a 99% recovery for those under 70 

Fucking well done the cure was much worse than the disease 

 

 

EjqPoWwVkAEk8O7.jpg

 

i confess that I was suprised you gave me a rep :)

We differ in that I think it hasn't gone. I can't see why it would have done. I might be blind to why.

But if we take the CDC numbers above and work on per 100,000. I'm doing this quickly so might make a gaff ... That's 3 + 20 + 500 + 6400 = 6943 mortalities / 100,000.

The following won't happen, but as a starting point, if the CDC numbers apply to the UK (population ~76.8 million) and if the virus rips through and everyone catches it this winter, that's ~4.4 milllion UK deaths most of which will require hospitalisation first. The current population of Manchester is 2.7 million. So that could be anything up to 175k, again it won't be that. I think Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust has ~80 critical care beds (that was 2010 data)

Now that won't of course happen, everybody won't be exposed at once, but what proportion might catch it and would that overwhelm some places' hospital capacity?

Having just done those sums, the numbers look big and I'm wondering if I've bodged the maths and made a stupid error.

 

I did a post on numbers based upon just the over 75s before using UK data

 

Edited by Hopeful
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hopeful said:

 

i confess that I was suprised you gave me a rep :)

We differ in that I think it hasn't gone. I can't see why it would have done. I might be blind to why.

But if we take the CDC numbers above and work on per 100,000. I'm doing this quickly so might make a gaff ... That's 3 + 20 + 500 + 6400 = 6943 mortalities / 100,000.

The following won't happen, but as a starting point, if the CDC numbers apply to the UK (population ~76.8 million) and if the virus rips through and everyone catches it this winter, that's ~4.4 milllion UK deaths most of which will require hospitalisation. The current population of manchester is 2.7 million. So that could be anything up to 175k, again it won't be that. I think Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust has ~80 beds (that was 2010 data)

Now that won't of course happen, everybody won't be exposed at once but what proportion might catch it and would that overwhelm some places hospital capacity?

Having just done those sums, they look big and I'm wondering if I've bodged the maths

 

I did a post on numbers based pon just the over 75s before using UK data

 

The way I see it, we are having a debate we might both learn a little about the other arguments

Debate is good and stifled to often in the UK now 

We may disagree on things but it is nothing personal and I would still buy you a beer lol

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Funn3r said:

Wokingham thinking of "going to tier-2". God I hate even using their stupid verbiage.

What they really mean = we are brassic because we stupidly invested spunked so much on buying shopping centres. We are willing to play along with tier-something in return for that sweet government cash.

They let the cat out of the bag though:
 

That is most definitely what they want. Control.

And every fucker on social lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hopeful said:

 

i confess that I was suprised you gave me a rep :)

We differ in that I think it hasn't gone. I can't see why it would have done. I might be blind to why.

 

 

You have also differed with me before on the same basis.

When I say it's over, I don't think "it's gone" however.  I think it was never there [never existed as described]. It was never severe enough to merit the action the govs took [are taking].

The death percentages from the post you quote are all that need to be looked at.

In March we weren't sure of those percentage fatality [because we only had numbers from China] and there was an argument [for THREE WEEKS only] to lockdown just in case and to create contingency plans-facilities-preparedness / avoid NHS meltdown. THAT is what is over and why the bollocks from gov should stop now.

The reason for measures now is not to keep the public safe from cv19. It may be to keep us safe from something we don't know about [best kept international secret ever so seems unlikely]. It may be the answer is follow the money [when was it ever not?]

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, BWW said:

You have also differed with me before on the same basis.

When I say it's over, I don't think "it's gone" however.  I think it was never there [never existed as described]. It was never severe enough to merit the action the govs took [are taking].

The death percentages from the post you quote are all that need to be looked at.

In March we weren't sure of those percentage fatality [because we only had numbers from China] and there was an argument [for THREE WEEKS only] to lockdown just in case and to create contingency plans-facilities-preparedness / avoid NHS meltdown. THAT is what is over and why the bollocks from gov should stop now.

The reason for measures now is not to keep the public safe from cv19. It may be to keep us safe from something we don't know about [best kept international secret ever so seems unlikely]. It may be the answer is follow the money [when was it ever not?]

 

But, given the death percentages and the numbers I tallied up, wouldn't that even cause concern for our current hospital capacity?

You may have said that we should have prepared sufficient ICU capacity (someone commented that to me) and I'd agree (but I don't know if we could have done), I also think we could have had a much better stab at preventative health, such as a focus on obesity, vit d [if Vit D makes the difference some reports suggest), there is loads we could have done in the 6 months that summer gave us, such as we could have prepared the country to look after the vulnerable in their homes over winter

but all it seems the Government did was wait for winter and then rely upon the same measures. Having said that the Government has been shouted at and bullied all summer to do this and do that, justify this justify that, much time has been wasted on responding to the media. Essentially the government seem to have have been reactive rather than proactive - at least that is how it seems. (In my opnion we also have an inadequate healt secretary.) A huge caveat is that we never know what is truly going on behind the scenes.

And again, having said all that, we're all still learning about the virus, on a daily basis research papers are coming out, so perhaps we also expect too much of the government to be any further ahead?

 

Edited by Hopeful
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hopeful said:

The following won't happen, but as a starting point, if the CDC numbers apply to the UK (population ~76.8 million) and if the virus rips through and everyone catches it this winter, that's ~4.4 milllion UK deaths most of which will require hospitalisation first.

I would disagree, if we assume that the UK population is evenly spread across the ages of 0-85 ( which I doubt as I suspect that their are a lot less 85 year olds than their are 1 year olds) then using the CDC numbers and a UK populaton of 75m (which again I doubt - wikipedia estimates about 67m) then I get about 808,000 deaths.

This is clearly not good (unless you are an undertaker) but 715,000 of the deaths would be of people over the age of 70.

 

EDIT

I have just found some data which breaks down the UK population in a very convenient manner, using this data, I estimate (based in the CDC data) that around 573,000 people would die - 487,000 of these would be over the age of 70.

It is about 15 month of a normal years deaths -I would be quite relaxed with this.

Edited by Bornagain
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, M S E Refugee said:

This is what happens when you can have no losers in life and no risk.

 

On the one hand I agree to the ''no losers in life'' political philosophy that exists these days, but on the other hand there definitely are losers in society today... the PAYE full time working/lower middle classes, especially those that are also prudent savers who live modest, debt free lifestyles within their means.

Edited by Royston
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ccc said:

Forgetting the initial phase back in March - let's be generous and assume they acted in our interests O.o

Do you think these continuing rules, laws and generally authoritarian rule have anything to do with public health?

I'm keeping this poll very simple. 

I think this guy nails it,  he`s got the credentials to back it up and the balls to call out the government he`s the guy bhind the mails front page today 

image.thumb.png.ea3f6b42050b6e403f0060446b500ef7.png

 

This podcast  really is a must listen to 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...