• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Gutter Boy said:
I think the Spanish enclaves are pretty well barriered - big walls land-facing and fences that go out to sea. The issue this week has been force of numbers overwhelming those.

There's a Spurs connection btw - Nayim is from Ceuta, hence him being a North African who played for Spain
Click to expand...

It seems a planned disruption more than an "invasion" to come to the mainland, if they wanted to do that they could have set off from Morocco itself. No one is swimming the 14km
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
It seems a planned disruption more than an "invasion" to come to the mainland, if they wanted to do that they could have set off from Morocco itself. No one is swimming the 14km
Click to expand...
Apparently there was a ruling by the Spanish Supreme Court in the last few weeks that anyone swimming around the barrier could claim asylum, whereas anyone climbing over the barrier would have their claim rejected. Sounds like a loophole in the wording of the applicable Spanish law that has now been exploited (although the majority by far it seems have tried the climb-the-fence route).
A bit more explained in the thread of this X post (but NB, I haven't fact checked it, just taking at face value) :

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
Apparently there was a ruling by the Spanish Supreme Court in the last few weeks that anyone swimming around the barrier could claim asylum, whereas anyone climbing over the barrier would have their claim automatically rejected. Sounds like a loophole in the wording of the applicable Spanish law that has now been exploited (although the majority by far it seems have tried the climb-the-fence route).
A bit more explained in the thread of this X post (but NB, I haven't fact checked it, just taking at face value) :

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I will have a read over my lunch time sausage sarnie
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
Thanks, I will have a read over my lunch time sausage sarnie
Click to expand...
To your earlier point about it seeming planned, that does sound like the case.
There's a lot of [conspiracy or otherwise) theories floating around about how it's the Moroccan king who endorsed it, politically motivated, backing of the US etc. etc.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
To your earlier point about it seeming planned, that does sound like the case.
There's a lot of [conspiracy or otherwise) theories floating around about how it's the Moroccan king who endorsed it, politically motivated, backing of the US etc. etc.
Click to expand...

I just don't see the rationale of breaking into "Spain" to swim over when they could have done that from Morocco. I suspect they will let them run their course, round them up and march them back over the border
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
Lets also be really fair, I suspect that the world over did not know for example if social distancing or lockdowns would be the correct path but did so because of what was happening in Italy and for what was largely an unknown. I imagine if you were to check the notes and transport back in time, the world over, you would have advisers saying to Governments behind closed doors or have it in their notes that they were unsure if the measure would be effective but taking a decision to mitigate the risk etc. As I say, I imagine alot of decisions were made because of the unknown, bar a handful of countries we all followed the same measures, and from memory the US was fairly late with it, so it wasn't like the were leading the "science" on it.

As for where it originated, as I say, does it matter when the president said he already knows where and how it started? Are we not to take his world for it? Or I ask again, was he lying at the time?

Its not an Anti Trump rhetoric, none of us can control what comes out his mouth, if you want to relive scary and fcuked up, get your chops round this https://apnews.com/article/virus-ou...emics-health-dbddbcf6cb4b17420e4a08820b73d4be
Click to expand...

Should their notes directly contradict a message they’ve give to the public days later?
 
robp135 said:
Should their notes directly contradict a message they’ve give to the public days later?
Click to expand...

Probably not, but again I suspect they were taking actions against their own beliefs because of the unknowns.

Look at the facts, countries all battled with the idea of what to do until there was a uniform approach of dealing with it, hence why some took longer with it. Do you honestly think there were experts and leaders who didn't battle with thoughts and feelings in their diaries OR behind closed doors but did something different outwardly? I would say given the times, it happened more than just with Fauci, I actually think we saw it played out in public at times with "experts" given their different views on how things should play out.

Ultimately though the power to enforce measures sat with more powerful people than Fauci, people who are now contradicting their own comments at the time (as outlined in the link posted)
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
Probably not, but again I suspect they were taking actions against their own beliefs because of the unknowns.

Look at the facts, countries all battled with the idea of what to do until there was a uniform approach of dealing with it, hence why some took longer with it. Do you honestly think there were experts and leaders who didn't battle with thoughts and feelings in their diaries OR behind closed doors but did something different outwardly? I would say given the times, it happened more than just with Fauci, I actually think we saw it played out in public at times with "experts" given their different views on how things should play out.

Ultimately though the power to enforce measures sat with more powerful people than Fauci, people who are now contradicting their own comments at the time (as outlined in the link posted)
Click to expand...

I think Fauci being told by his counterpart in China that lab leak was most likely, then hosting a conference call where 10/12 worlds leading virologists beleive the lab leak was the likely origin of Covid, with 1/2 remaining privately believing it lab leak was most likely but still writing a paper suggesting the opposite. Which was then used by Fauci to discount the lab leak as a conspiracy theory, means he can no longer be classed as an expert.
 
robp135 said:
I think Fauci being told by his counterpart in China that lab leak was most likely, then hosting a conference call where 10/12 worlds leading virologists beleive the lab leak was the likely origin of Covid, with 1/2 remaining privately believing it lab leak was most likely but still writing a paper suggesting the opposite. Which was then used by Fauci to discount the lab leak as a conspiracy theory, means he can no longer be classed as an expert.
Click to expand...

I think people should likely just move on TBH. I am not sure people can lay the blame for measures taken during Covid at one mans door (not saying you have but some are) considering it followed the global response. Neither do I think Fauci should be held accountable for the origins of the leak. I suspect legally he can't be given that Trump and the intelligence service (two higher standing powers) have both at one time asserted they know the origins, with Trump claiming to have seen the evidence. What Fauci believed or didn't becomes obsolete when the President makes these kind of claims
 
Last edited:
MartyFunkhouser said:
I think people should likely just move on TBH. I am not sure people can lay the blame for measures taken during Covid at one mans door (not saying you have but some are) considering it followed the global response. Neither do I think Fauci should be held accountable for the origins of the leak. I suspect legally he can't be given that Trump and the intelligence service (two higher standing powers) have both at one time asserted they know the origins, with Trump claiming to have seen the evidence. What Fauci believed or didn't becomes obsolete when the President makes these kind of claims
Click to expand...

I’ve not disagreed with the measures taken. Or even brought them up. Were there major contradictions in Faucis diary relating to that? Yes. But I’ve not brought them up.

Criticism of Fauci is a MAGA conspiracy. That’s what’s been said in this thread yesterday. That’s very clearly not a valid thing to say if you have any ounce of objectivity.
 
robp135 said:
I’ve not disagreed with the measures taken. Or even brought them up. Were there major contradictions in Faucis diary relating to that? Yes. But I’ve not brought them up.
Click to expand...

I know and I clearly said that in my post

My point bringing it up was to have the wider convo given what I have seen from the hearing and comment on that whilst garnering you views.

robp135 said:
Criticism of Fauci is a MAGA conspiracy. That’s what’s been said in this thread yesterday. That’s very clearly not a valid thing to say if you have any ounce of objectivity.
Click to expand...

Thats fine, I haven't said that, I have just tried to understand why one guy is seemingly say on a committee being shouted at for ruining lives when the powers that made the decision are seemingly not being asked to attend and state their position.

I still don't really understand why the hearing took or is taking place

Will leave the subject there, Covid was a long time ago now, as I say people should likely move on with their collective bruised egos
 
robp135 said:
I think Fauci being told by his counterpart in China that lab leak was most likely, then hosting a conference call where 10/12 worlds leading virologists beleive the lab leak was the likely origin of Covid, with 1/2 remaining privately believing it lab leak was most likely but still writing a paper suggesting the opposite. Which was then used by Fauci to discount the lab leak as a conspiracy theory, means he can no longer be classed as an expert.
Click to expand...

I was going to leave this alone despite reading the paper and the long chat download.

Nothing in what you posted shows his Chinese counterpart saying it was from a lab that I can see. The fact it wasn't from the wet market is not the same as confirming it was from a lab.

The chat exchange and paper you posted doesn't support your conclusion about lab leak being the most likely. They both come to the conclusion that there is not enough evidence to disbar either theory but that both remain possible but what do they do confirm is that it was not created or manipulated in a lab. They start from a position thinking lab origin is most likely but then investigate different results and conclude that it can't be confirmed or denied and a natural origin is significantly possible.

You possibly deliberately mix up 'possible' and 'probable' in your terminology as well to reframe what they have said. Massive difference scientifically between the two words.

Your starting point of 12 experts who said they thought it was from a lab was before they did any digging or analysis. They are allowed to change their positions based on research. You then focus on the 3 who do the further research. What opinions did the other hold after the data had been explored?

You cherry pick quotes from Anderson to support your argument. Yes, she said it was friggin' likely to be from a lab and that they had been doing this work but then further on she says how everything that they thought suggested lab could be explained in natural origins.

I assume you understand how peer review works to get a paper published in Nature? It isn't perfect but there will have been other experts who would have looked at all their data, their analysis and conclusions and questioned anything that didn't add up.

What they did agree on from their work was that it didn't originate in the wet market. That is not the same as saying it came from a lab. This was also, I think, Fauci's position.

They compared it to related virus spreads and concluded that the distance from possible bat origin to Wuhan was within distance for natural transmission but the journey could not be shown with data.


This supports why Fauci took the 5th IMO. People will take certain bits from all this and fit it to a narrative that I don't think is there.
 
Lost Mango said:
I was going to leave this alone despite reading the paper and the long chat download.

Nothing in what you posted shows his Chinese counterpart saying it was from a lab that I can see. The fact it wasn't from the wet market is not the same as confirming it was from a lab.

The chat exchange and paper you posted doesn't support your conclusion about lab leak being the most likely. They both come to the conclusion that there is not enough evidence to disbar either theory but that both remain possible but what do they do confirm is that it was not created or manipulated in a lab. They start from a position thinking lab origin is most likely but then investigate different results and conclude that it can't be confirmed or denied and a natural origin is significantly possible.

You possibly deliberately mix up 'possible' and 'probable' in your terminology as well to reframe what they have said. Massive difference scientifically between the two words.

Your starting point of 12 experts who said they thought it was from a lab was before they did any digging or analysis. They are allowed to change their positions based on research. You then focus on the 3 who do the further research. What opinions did the other hold after the data had been explored?

You cherry pick quotes from Anderson to support your argument. Yes, she said it was friggin' likely to be from a lab and that they had been doing this work but then further on she says how everything that they thought suggested lab could be explained in natural origins.

I assume you understand how peer review works to get a paper published in Nature? It isn't perfect but there will have been other experts who would have looked at all their data, their analysis and conclusions and questioned anything that didn't add up.

What they did agree on from their work was that it didn't originate in the wet market. That is not the same as saying it came from a lab. This was also, I think, Fauci's position.

They compared it to related virus spreads and concluded that the distance from possible bat origin to Wuhan was within distance for natural transmission but the journey could not be shown with data.


This supports why Fauci took the 5th IMO. People will take certain bits from all this and fit it to a narrative that I don't think is there.
Click to expand...

None of this goes against a clear pattern of Fauci leading with natural origin publicly when lab leak was the concencus view.

You can understand why he would give certain advice to the public when he knew it was incorrect as it was at a time when the public needed reassurance and some direction. Even the stuff with vaccine effectiveness and a symptomatic people can be somewhat justified.

But you cannot justify why he is going so strongly against the lab leak without running in to his clear conflict of interest.

Everything else you can put down to him trying to protect the public and in some cases he got it right in some cases he got it wrong if you want to be generous to him.

But there is no benefit to the public in playing down the lab leak and playing up natural origin as the scientific concencous. That benefits him.

If you want to be generous to Fauci and to put a spin on it. He is a Terry Venables figure. Very good at what he did, but often put himself before the club financially and the digger you dig the worse it looks.
 
robp135 said:
None of this goes against a clear pattern of Fauci leading with natural origin publicly when lab leak was the concencus view.

But there is no benefit to the public in playing down the lab leak and playing up natural origin as the scientific concencous. That benefits him.
Click to expand...

Has this stance changed? They seemingly can't get to the bottom of it?

1785512416804.png
Another suggests they will never know without collaboration with China
1785512518495.png
robp135 said:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Click to expand...

Some of the responses to other questions makes you fear for the future of humanity
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back