Former senior British judge Jonathan Sumption
Can you think of one ex-judge of the Irish Courts who has spoken up for the rights and liberties of the citizen in the face of the State’s onslaught against them?https://t.co/FcerKBW0SC
— Kealan Flynn (@Flyck66) May 24, 2021
Anyone?
Getty
Sponsored Link
Don’t think it was folly to prevent the swamping of high-dependency and intensive care units.
Annnd there we have it- paint as extreme as possible- ‘IF Then’ is the only narrative to be tolerated.
IF you dissent from the medical junta’s rule of law THEN you must be a selfish tin hat wearing far right conspirataloon- no other option. Criticism will be silenced, otherwise God knows where we would end up- err democracy maybe?
The ordasity of a supreme court judge to speak on such matters- who does he think he is?
* ordacity
It’s simply ordacious! Semi-literate fringe paranoiacs who’ve never been taught how to critically analyse a source and can’t help sticking their hand back in the fire, unite! Please continue to shout shrilly into the void! Shine on you crazy diamond! I, for one, am finally convinced by your impotent rage! Where do I sign up? Do I need to wear a hat?
IF THEN so
I was looking at the march in London weekend before last- estimates vary but it was BIG- about 1 in 3 seemed to be POC- finally putting the alt right nonsense to bed.
Of course POC are more likely to work lower end of the private sector which was hammered most by the junta- but sure we don’t talk about those workers in people eh? They just don’t matter.
*audacity
Thank you Lush. The very ordacity of it.
I couldn’t help myself.
One spelling mistake and nobody can understand anythin acocrding 2 da prirmary scohol tecachers.
‘medical junta’… lols. we have reached peak Covid Edgelord.
The ordasity of your complete lack of self wareness!
I think this, for me, is the point at which I leave behind the ridiculous and childish comments sections behind these clickbait articles. It was funny for a very short while. Then it was really annoying, then it was infuriating. Now its just tragic and boring.
So voicing support for a respected supreme court judge is tragic and boring now is it?
Reminds me of a debate going on in Tiktok- apparently if you describe yourself as masculine and you are looking to meet other masculine men- masc for masc- then you are homophobic.
Being attracted to other men is now officially homophobic- such is the world we live in.
Some Old Gammon.
The way I read it is Nilbert wasn’t arguing with you “voicing support for a respected supreme court judge ”
It was the hyperbole: “medical junta’s rule of law “
I like that term, its very appropriate- © to me.
The owdossity of disagreeing with a supreme court judge. They answer only to God.
I just wanna say BAWW BAWW BAWW. and before any of you libtard right wing anti vaccine government stooges start trotting out the old ‘BAWW BAWW BAWW’ line let me remind you that BAWW BAWW BAWW.
End of.
Going to be a long day… commence the experting comment section
*adjusts glasses*
Welcome to the Broadsheet Armchair Expert Collective, folks. Today we’ll be discussing the semantics of mask-wearing, the minutiae of with covid vs of covid and rehashing everyone’s favourite chestnut, lockdowns; do they work?
All this and more, today on the Broadsheet Armchair Expert Collective. I’m your host and bag lady extraordinaire, Millzer McGuffin.
as an anthropologist i feel there are many lessons to be learnt from other cultures as to how they have dealt with the pandemic. why, some amazonian tribes have sensitively and compassionately drowned their elderly members in order not to listen to them nagging on about what a balls we’ve made of things, and that it would never have happened in their day. i feel it’s important to have this conversation, for the sake of nuance and balance.
totally
Well I for one think it’s essential that as ordinary citizens in a supposed democracy we openly discuss the government’s Covid response. Every conscientious citizen should be doing their best to seek out a range of expert opinion in order to inform their own. Considering that these draconian measures are directly impacting on all of us – and some a lot more than others it has to be said – isn’t only proper that we should express an opinion about it and engage in honest debate with others? To think otherwise is to suffer from an inferiority complex.
Perhaps you mean to say that you wish the standard of discussion was better – that is to say, to keep focused on the bigger picture and less of the bad faith comments that snipe at others without offering much else?
It was a joke.
I agree we should seek expert opinion. I wish the standard of discussion was better.
Unfortunately we get the likes of the grifter Ivor Cummins and other snake-oil men like that making a fortune out of pushing covid¹ misinformation. We get the “it’s just the flu” people; the “PCR tests give 95% false positives”; the “WHO change the rt guidlines”; the “don’t look at cases; look at hospitalisations… (they increase).. I mean don’t look at hospitalisations look at deaths (they increase)… don’t look at deaths look at excess deaths (they increase) don’t look at excess deaths – they are allcaused by lockdown” [rinse and repeat]
¹Oops my bad, Obviously I mean “SARS-CoV-2”
Thanks for providing a great example of the kind of negative discourse I was referring to. Terms of abuse like “snake oil salesmen”, “it’s just the flu people”. Alleging that a person is somehow making a fortune of from “Covid misinformation” with no evidence to back that up. Please engage in a more productive form of discourse
You can’t demand somebody grant credibility to someone they don’t find credible. Doing so might qualify as ‘positive’ but it ain’t good discourse.
I’m not demanding anyone do anything. It’s just a plea to engage in a more positive form of discourse. If a person doesn’t find someone credible and wants to express an opinion about it, then they should present a case as to why, preferably supported with a reference to expert opinion where relevant. But repeatedly resorting to attacking a person’s character and motives is not arguing good faith.
I have provided evidence on all these before.
And I’m sick of hearing the same lies from the same people.
@f_lawless – you are one of the few that will discuss these topics in a reasonable matter – but most don’t.
If you’re going to keep demanding people explain why they find someone not credible over and over again that’s just wasting everybody’s time and energy. Acting as if this hasn’t been an ongoing conversation here since this thing started and regular commenters have made their positions and their reasons clear is disingenuous.
Yes but….you have been arguing all along that 1 + 1 = 6 or anything at all except 2
Basically if you read your posts 99% of your arguments/points are for “alternative facts” and when you attempt to make a point every time its “alternative facts” you argue in favour of.
Hint..there is no such thing as an alternative fact :)
1+1 really equals 2
P.S. It must be frustrating that you are in a tiny minority but don’t worry give it another year and things will be back to the old normal.
We’ve been in a social experiment never tried before called lockdowns which have no scientific basis- how could they if there is no precedent?
Now, we are expected to take a fast tracked vaccine for something which if under the age of 70 is comparable to the flu- and the risk is way lower than that for young people.
And then, when people ask the most obvious questions, it is inferred and sometimes openly stated that they are not fully compos mentis.
Meanwhile when people like Vera Sharav, a woman who has been through the literal wars speaks out about what they see- they are ignored.
Pharma is a trillion dollar industry with a history of sketchy poo- they should not be trusted.
it’s a shame you don’t trust ‘big pharma’, cos you could really use a chill pill.
I rant on here instead- feel great after it.
I smiled.
Wait till we see how much was spent on covid infrastructural projects.
I’m really curious why the garda needed all those extra cars as an example. That chap with the ventilators couldn’t be the only one.
“why the garda needed all those extra cars as an example” – they were earning a bit extra doing take away deliveries during lockdown… smart move
I wonder where he got his medical degree from?
I’m sorry, I didnt realise that rights and the rule of law can be ignored if you have a medical degree
Em… Many of the WHO advisors on lockdowns don’t have medical degrees.
I should hope not. You’d want experts on logistics and crisis management and communications and epidemiology (though maybe that counts as a medical degree?) and probably a whole bunch of other non-medical specialities.
And printer engineers.Thank you for expanding my point.
Got your back, bro.
The judge must be a ratlicker
Thanks for the article I enjoyed it and agree with him on police.Numbers are starting come out here on effects of lockdowns,they not good with many vulnerable groups devastated to keep few old sick people alive a bit longer,we have reached herd immunity here,Cumo killed off all the old and sick and are we are now back to being New York.
“Although nationwide 2020 data won’t be available until later this year, health researchers predict at least a 27 percent jump in fatal overdoses compared to 2019, which would be the largest single-year percentage increase in the past two decades. Experts say a major factor was the pandemic, which left many isolated from treatment as well as family and friends even as jobs dried up and schooling went online.“
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/05/23/dc-maryland-virginia-opioid-deaths/
And is my concern about the HSE hack- everything bar the bad weather will get blamed on it.
But these are not difficult figures to calculate- take cancer diagnosis for example- the top five most common- break it down by phase and then compare against a five year average of each. Percentage up or down- basic KPI spreadsheet stuff.
Why do you put a hyphen at the end of some words?
Was up in DCU last Saturday to get the Jansen vaccine, after all was done and dusted , I was standing outside, this woman arrived and in a raised voice, not aggressive , she started to tell us we were all mad, and the vaccine would do noting for us this winter with variants.
My only thought was , to wonder why someone would get out of bed and head up to DCU to set us straight. Strange phenomena I thought , Internet is one thing, but the effort of doing it in public , was kinda impressed …
Apparently there is rumblings of major protests in the US when they start jabbing children- whatever about adults, for many that is a line crossed.
*there ARE
che)o(eky
They’re already on to 12-15 year olds and not a hint of any ‘major protests’ so I wouldn’t get too excited.
Where?
The US.
They’ve been doing so in CA since may 12th – earlier in some counties. I think we have a fabulist in our midst. By which I mean you make lots of things up.
A clip of Michael McDowell speaking recently in the Seanad about the government’s vote to further extend the duration of their Covid powers . No review of whether the measures have been effective to date or not, no risk-benefit analysis carried out in order to inform the decision on the vote.
https://twitter.com/JRD0000/status/1396921363106091011
“This should not be coming before this house in these circumstances. This day has been clear for a long, long time. It’s not a mystery that the sunset clause was coming today. This amendment is not just to bring things out to next November, it is to put in place the power to keep re-extending these powers ad nauseum. Let’s be clear about this. That is what this bill does. It isn’t a time-limited measure at all because the Houses of the Oireachtas when they’re confronted with a motion to extend, it’s a binary choice, yes or no. No inquiry as to whether it was good, bad or indifferent or whether the regulations worked well or didn’t work well, whether right things were done or wrong things were done. None of that just simply vote yes or no and the party whips will see it through..
.These Houses of the Oireachtas have failed miserably over the last year. The Oireachtas Commission should not be proud of what it has done. The fact that we are attributing a couple of hours today and an hour tomorrow to this legislation is a scandal and should be called out for what it is. It’s a scandal “
The bill to extend the powers was passed by the Seanad by 29 votes to 3. Labour voted with the Govt; SF abstained; only Michael McDowell, Sharon Keogan and Rónán Mullen voted against..
Surely every clear-thinking person can see that’s there’s something deeply wrong with all of this?
It depends on how you look at it.
You align to the 3 that voted against. I align to the 29 that voted for it.
Perhaps you are in a minority and most people don’t agree with you? It is a vocal minority, and if you go on social media it can be overwhelming – but a lot of is just an echo-chamber.
Perhaps 90% of us are just content with how the process has been handled?
That’s quite a jump Cian. 90% of ‘us’. Who is the ‘us’ Unless of course you are a member of the Seanad, which I doubt.
I’m suggesting that the vast majority of the people agree with the general way things are going.
The 90% came from the 3/29split in the Seanad – so I’m suggesting that it might mirror society.
And for once you are correct. I’m not a member of the Seanad.
ah you are very patient with him, really.
That’s of course if 90% of people voted for the members of the Seanad. Which they didn’t.
I’m generally correct mind you. You probably didn’t notice with all of that diversion etc. that you were doing. :-)
Cian why are you distracting from the essential point being made – ie that such extreme government policy measures should require a proper performance review and a comprehensive risk/benefit analysis should be produced before any vote is made to extend them?
Why this? why now? What is a “proper performance review” or a “comprehensive risk/benefit analysis”? Who would produce these? and do you think they would really change anything?
This doesn’t happen for any other legislation.
Because it’s an extension of time on what was to have been time-limited. Sunset clause. It should therefore have been discussed and debated. Other legislation normally doesn’t have a sunset clause, so there’s no need for further discussion and debate as that would have been done already. Poor attempt yet again at diversion and distraction.
Good old Sumption https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/jan/19/less-valuable-experts-unconvinced-by-lord-sumptions-lockdown-ethics Not all lives matter, especially the less valuable like cancer patients and those with underlying conditions. QALYS sounds dangerously close to eugenics.
William Shakespeare is dead.
A stroke.