Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IX *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

normanoffside

Boggles wrote: »

Smearing?

I have seen the videos, long anti vax speeches, violence, and singing anti vaccine songs, lizard people, grounding up babies, 5g, etc, etc.

It was the Commissioner who labelled them all a 'concerted mob'.

Nothing I have seen or heard has contradicted him.

If you have evidence to the contrary by all means fire it up and I'll gladly take a look.

Where did the commissioner say that everyone at the protest was part of a converted far right/left/whatever mob?
I haven’t seen that from Mr Harris, just you.

Boggles

francogarbanzo wrote: »

Why would the individual in charge of the force tasked with quelling a protest in which Gardai were attacked have any incentive to trivialise and discredit the group involved in that protest? What motivation could that person possibly have to try and reduce future instances or at least attendance of that same protest?

It doesn't matter anyway. You're still saying there were between 100 and 400 people there. You're off by an order of magnitude and you've been given the evidence which proves it, and you know it.

2 + 2 does not equal 5, no matter how much someone in a position of authority declares it so. If the commissioner says there were a few hundred people there, he's either mistaken or deliberately lying.

So I guess you are not offering any tangible evidence to the contrary because none exists, so what is left?

Diving head deep into Conspiracy Theories.

Predictable.

Boggles

normanoffside wrote: »

Where did the commissioner say that everyone at the protest was part of a converted far right/left/whatever mob?
I haven’t seen that from Mr Harris, just you.

In literally every publications since the "riot"

the demonstrators was a collaboration of groups made up of anti-lockdown protesters, anti-vaccine and anti-facemasks.

"This was groups working in concert together, as a mob.

Scuid Mhór

Klonker wrote: »

When some people say our restrictions are not far out of sync with the rest of Europe, I think they're being disingenuous. First of all I wouldn't agree as we are the only country in the EU with non essential construction closed. Secondly comparing a 5km limit to a nighttime curfew is not an equal comparison, the 5km limit is way more restrictive.

But apart from that my main issue and I think a lot of others is the restrictions as we move into summer. Obviously we don't know exactly what restrictions we'll have here or abroad in future but we can get a good idea from moves being made now and from comments from government officials.

Just to give context, Leo mentioned yesterday about outdoor dining for the summer. Also mentioned in the past is non essential retail won't open until May at earliest. We know for a fact nothing outside of schools will open before April, not even construction.

Now let's compare that to a few EU countries. In France non essential shops are currently opened inside of curfew hours. We probably won't have ours open until mid May.

In Germany, hairdressers are opened. We'll be lucky to be able to get a haircut in early June. They are also reviewing restrictions again on 7th March. Some small non essential retail shops are expected to be allowed open then. We are leaving 6 weeks between our reviews from late February until early April for reasons that was never explained and even worse has never been asked.

In Italy, restaurants are open in some regions (yellow zones) with lower cases until 6pm. Also in yellow zones, cinemas, theatres and concert halls can reopen from 27th March (with restrictions obviously). Honestly, when do you expect those to open here, August maybe?

I'm Netherlands, close contact professions such as hairdressers (excluding sex workers) are open since yesterday. Government advise not to travel abroad until at least 31st March. We've already been told not to expect to travel this year!

I'm Denmark, shop shops opened and sports allowed up to 25 people since 1st March.

Bulgaria has all shops, hairdressers and restaurants open from 1st March and nightclubs to open from April.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/explainers-53640249

What I'm just trying to highlight is we are already out of sync with Europe and it looks like it'll grow even more through March, April and May. My problem is less so the restrictions but the messaging about future restrictions. It doesn't make any sense when we are ahead of most of the EU on vaccine rollout plus also have one of the youngest populations.

I think it's very reasonable to question this especially when the vaccine effectiveness is even better than expected. No wonder people feel the need to protest when no political or mainstream media voice is even questioning any of this.

Is the bottom line not simply the fact that we have the lowest ICU bed per capita rate in Europe by a huge margin? All of the above countries can ease their restrictions because they have far more healthcare capacities than we do. You can’t compare the restrictions and leave out the reason for such differentials.

timmyntc

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

Is the bottom line not simply the fact that we have the lowest ICU bed per capita rate in Europe by a huge margin? All of the above countries can ease their restrictions because they have far more healthcare capacities than we do. You can’t compare the restrictions and leave out the reason for such differentials.

Even in the "massive" winter surge we just had, we did not run out of ICU capacity. Absurd to think that with vaccinations of the vulnerable and coming into the Summer that ICU beds would ever be an issue.

normanoffside

Boggles wrote: »

In literally every publications since the "riot"

Link please.
For a start there is a big grammatical error in what you quoted so I doubt that comes from a printed article.

SnuggyBear

I watched a video of the protestors walking to the gpo, very big crowd. No chants or signs about 5g or anti vax nonsense. It was all just anti lockdown stuff yet the whole crowd is painted as loonatics and scum. Also if people aren't dressed like they are going to a job interview they are considered scum and not worth listening to by some people.

Boggles

normanoffside wrote: »

Link please.
For a start there is a big grammatical error in what you quoted so I doubt that comes from a printed article.

People arrived intent on violence': Commissioner expects more arrests after Gardaí injured during protest

There were some 23 arrests that we have made already and those arrests are continuing. This operation is not over as we pursue individuals who engage in protest and illegal activity.

“They had no reasonable grounds for being there in the first place so we will pursue particularly those who formed a very hard core to deal with.

“You don’t carry a firework to a protest with any other purpose than to engage in violent conduct. We will follow through with an investigation to bring the perpetrators to justice.”

Mr Harris said they were aware that momentum had been gathering on social media in the lead-up to Saturday’s protest.

Mr Harris also said that garda officers were “very lucky” they were not seriously injured when a firework was fired directly at them.

“It was directed at that individual and so we are fortunate they didn’t suffer a serious injury, it was only the individual’s quick thinking that saved him,” Mr Harris said.

“We will follow through with a serious crime investigation into that incident.”

Mr Harris said the demonstrators was a collaboration of groups made up of anti-lockdown protesters, anti-vaccine and anti-facemasks.

“This was groups working in concert together, as a mob,” he added.

francogarbanzo

Boggles wrote: »

So I guess you are not offering any tangible evidence to the contrary because none exists, so what is left?

Diving head deep into Conspiracy Theories.

Predictable.

You asked "why would he lie" as if he has no incentive to paint the protest in a certain light which is in the interest of the Gardai.

Just to be clear, if someone says it was a only couple hundred people in attendence, that's absolutely untrue. (I don't know if he said this BTW, just basing this on what you're claiming.)

If someone says, "the vast majority of those who took part in the protest “belong to a number of factions including anti-vaccine, anti-mask and anti-lockdown protesters, far-right groups, and those intent on trouble and disorder”." well, that's harder to disprove, because part of that statement is obviously true. The vast majority of those people were anti-lockdown protesters. The untrue-ness is the subtle bucketing of the anti-lockdown people with the other adjectives (intent on trouble, far right, disorderly, anti-vaccine.)

But of course, "conspiracy theory".

Boggles

SnuggyBear wrote: »

I watched a video of the protestors walking to the gpo, very big crowd. No chants or signs about 5g or anti vax nonsense. It was all just anti lockdown stuff yet the whole crowd is painted as loonatics and scum. Also if people aren't dressed like they are going to a job interview they are considered scum and not worth listening to by some people.

Excellent, please link it up.

I have asked at least a dozen times for this type of evidence and yet, crickets.

So please when you are ready.

Klonker

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

Is the bottom line not simply the fact that we have the lowest ICU bed per capita rate in Europe by a huge margin? All of the above countries can ease their restrictions because they have far more healthcare capacities than we do. You can’t compare the restrictions and leave out the reason for such differentials.

ICU and hospital capacity should be part of the discussion but it hasnt been since early last year. We bought in last year to 'flatten the curve' but when was the last time you've heard NPHET or government use that term? Now it's 'suppress the virus'. Why has our goals changed?

Your comment makes sense when talking about our January surge where thanks to restrictions we avoided hospitals from getting overcrowded. They were still less crowded than most winters but I assume ICU numbers were higher this year. But why is Leo talking about outdoor dining all summer? This isn't protecting the hospitals. Why did pubs only open for 2 weeks here in September and not at all in Dublin? Did keeping the pubs closed last summer protect out hospitals? No, hospitals were more empty than usual and ICU was at about 20 people.

Also, its very hard compare ICU numbers with other countries as different countries seem to count them different in terms of what constitutes an ICU bed. But I think we can all agree however they're measured Ireland is shamefully last or if not very close to it.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Excellent, please link it up.

I have asked at least a dozen times for this type of evidence and yet, crickets.

So please when you are ready.

Even if there was no anti-vax element, no "mob", no violence etc., would you still be against holding protests against Tony Holohan's Personal Lockdown?

normanoffside

Boggles wrote: »

Excellent, please link it up.

I have asked at least a dozen times for this type of evidence and yet, crickets.

So please when you are ready.

I posted up lots of videos and an interview with the actual organiser which you have ignored.

the kelt

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

Is the bottom line not simply the fact that we have the lowest ICU bed per capita rate in Europe by a huge margin? All of the above countries can ease their restrictions because they have far more healthcare capacities than we do. You can’t compare the restrictions and leave out the reason for such differentials.

Is it fair to ask why didnt we do something about that when given the opportunity?

Was that not the WHO mantra, use lockdown to prepare and get yourself up to speed with facilities, capacity etc etc. Flatten the curve to buy time to get your house and capacity in order.

Did we do this in reality or have we just used lockdown as our primary response to this pandemic, something the WHO dont actually recommend

francogarbanzo

the kelt wrote: »

Is it fair to ask why didnt we do something about that when given the opportunity?

Was that not the WHO mantra, use lockdown to prepare and get yourself up to speed with facilities, capacity etc etc. Flatten the curve to buy time to get your house and capacity in order.

Did we do this in reality or have we just used lockdown as our primary response to this pandemic, something the WHO dont actually recommend

Yes.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Even if there was no anti-vax element, no "mob", no violence etc., would you still be against holding protests against Tony Holohan's Personal Lockdown?

You are better than that.

But I couldn't give a flying fúck what people are protesting, there should be none.

Potential super spread events given where we are and where want to go, is just going to jeopardize society, the economy and health in these fragile few months.

They can all get together in Summer and protest some cops in America being racist murderers or high speed internet access, I couldn't give a flute, but right now the degenerates and crazies and "legitimate protesters" need to stay the fúck at home.

Boggles

normanoffside wrote: »

I posted up lots of videos and an interview with the actual organiser which you have ignored.

I watched them Norman.

I sat through 2 anti vax speeches and a bunch yobs hurling abuse at the guards.

I didn't watch the organizer "talk" as someone pointed out she sounded like she had smoked herself retarded, so I skipped that one.

SnuggyBear

Boggles wrote: »

Excellent, please link it up.

I have asked at least a dozen times for this type of evidence and yet, crickets.

So please when you are ready.

https://youtu.be/BbgFY3yUzVY

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

You are better than that.

But I couldn't give a flying fúck what people are protesting, there should be none.

Well, that gets to the core of the matter, then.

Why you are arguing against the composition of the protest is beyond me, because even if it were composed of the finest people in society, you would still be against it.

normanoffside

Boggles wrote: »

People arrived intent on violence': Commissioner expects more arrests after Gardaí injured during protest

I'm surprised it went to print with such an obvious grammatical error.
However nowhere does anyone say that everyone present was part of a mob intent on violence.
You have leapt to that conclusion by yourself.
Most people were anti-lockdown protestors, most of those were ordinary decent people who are opposed to our current lockdown.

Sobit1964

SnuggyBear wrote: »

https://youtu.be/BbgFY3yUzVY

Yup thats debunked boogles. Thanks for fact checking his statement.

SnuggyBear

Sobit1964 wrote: »

Yup thats debunked boogles. Thanks for fact checking his statement.

Nice view of the crowd at 6 minutes

Boggles

SnuggyBear wrote: »

https://youtu.be/BbgFY3yUzVY

50 seconds in, they are great apart from the violence, and boasts how he got belted off the guards.

"Good People".

:pac:

Boggles

normanoffside wrote: »

I'm surprised it went to print with such an obvious grammatical error.

Yeah, that's exactly what you should be outraged over.

facehugger99

Klonker wrote: »

When some people say our restrictions are not far out of sync with the rest of Europe, I think they're being disingenuous.

100%

I traveled in both Spain and Italy last summer and it was striking how different both were to Ireland.

Northern Italy in particular, the supposed European epicenter of this deadly virus had swimming pools, water parks and nightclubs open. People were actually 'living with Covid'.

Meanwhile in backward Ireland people were still tuning in for the daily angelus misery-fest where case numbers were read out with po-faced solemnity and George Lee blubbed about R-numbers. We have a far higher proportion of the population under the age of 65 and we have cowered in terror from this social-media pandemic. We have a weak Government and weak-minded fools cheering them on

Ironically it's the lockdown-cheerleaders, who could have most done with seeing what is happening in other countries, that would have most benefited from coming out from under their beds and doing a bit of traveling.

francogarbanzo

SnuggyBear wrote: »

Nice view of the crowd at 6 minutes

ArthurDayne

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The public discussion has fallen down throughout the pandemic because it has failed to properly emphasise that we are balancing risks, as we are with the recurring conversations around lockdown restrictions and school reopenings. We should do more to acknowledge that there are no good options, only trade offs between different downsides. As a result, instead of recognising the difficulty of the situation, we have had too much of people on one side accusing the other side of being callous and uncaring.

I accept my blame in that at times.

To open up to the extent and speed demanded in this thread at all points would have increased the death toll and the pressure on the health service. Not to the extent originally estimated this time last year, sure - but leagues beyond what we have seen even in mid January. Would this have reduced those claiming PUP and saved some businesses and by extension reduced what you describe as the "tangible socioeconomic and humanitarian cost", sure - but not to the extent sometimes imagined in this thread. My position has always been that consumer confidence would be through the floor if our health service became overwhelmed and we were necessarily applying battlefield triage in our hospitals. People may be free to go to the bar in such a context, but my bet is they wouldn't to a dramatic extent that would sweep away jobs and businesses just the same.

This is where there are no good options. I have stated numerous times on this thread that I understand the economic reality for hospitality and service industry businesses. Many businesses will close and many specific jobs are lost forever. I think it was necessary (and again I think many of these would have gone anyway because of rock bottom consumer confidence, but hey ho - we may not agree there). I accept that this causes great pain and distress and will set back the lives of thousands. But financial strife can be recovered in time. The dead cannot rise again, and the anguish felt by their friends and family left behind can never be assuaged.

So ultimately I accept your view point. I disagree with it but I would not attempt to belittle it or pretend it is incorrect. It is real and tangible and most definitely the lived experience of a huge portion of the 25% of the workforce receiving PUP. You are willing to see a higher death toll as a trade off, and I think that is an arguable position.

Where this thread really falls down is when people pretend that we can reopen without an increase in severe illness and death. Or that we can reopen and save all those jobs and businesses, that somehow we can just wish things to be normal and it will be normal through sheer force of will. This is where the conversation becomes delusional. As delusional as zero covid in the context of our border arrangement with the U.K. is. I'm tired of the extremes on either side, as I'm sure you are too.

In the end, we all need to try and be more realistic and positive for the last few months of this thing. There is too much talk in the media about variants and too much comparisons of vaccine efficacy (even the worst vaccines to hand for Covid so far would be considered significant break throughs for other diseases). And any chat about restrictions next winter or what people won't be able to do after they're vaccinated needs to outright get in the sea.

We're really close to a clean exit from this mess. We can't undo the harm caused to livelihoods or long term health and we can't bring the dead back to life. But we absolutely must look forward to the post covid world with a positive and optimistic mindset. What other way is there to be?

It’s been a good discussion so I will try not to specifically combat any of your points in the hope of having “the last word”. Completely agree, and it has probably been the absolute major source of my frustration on this thread, that people are far far too quick to take moral high grounds on these threads. A lot of my posts on here are aimed specifically at trying to poke holes in the arguments of those who come on pointing fingers (like yesterday, those who claimed that young people meeting and partying “don’t care about who dies” etc). The inference is that they are the caring “good” people, and the opponents of lockdown are invariably uncaring and have no regard for suffering so long as they can have a pint.

If those who believe that the lockdown, or rather the duration and severity of it, was justified — they have been quick to make opponents of that view “own” the moral responsibility for those who die of Covid. Personally, I’ve never shied away from owning it, because I have to. It would be intellectual cowardice if I did not. But I am a believer in proportionality, and that proportionality extends to things that occur even in times of crisis. We must always remember that what spurred the call for lockdown last year was not an increase of 3,000 or so in the average annual deaths of mainly elderly people — it was the belief that the death toll would quickly spin into absolutely cataclysmic territory. People like Sam McConkey were talking tens of thousands and these kind of projections, after the initial shock of scenes In Italy, prompted the view that lockdown and all the destruction it would yield was still a better pathway. I simply do not believe that the measures we have taken have been proportionate to the risk — and while perhaps more understandable in urgency — after the passage of a year the continued imposition of a 5km travel ban (among other things) do not in my view stand between us and an utter sustained cataclysm. I doubt that you will agree with that, and I appreciate that in your own application of proportionality you have deemed the Irish strategy to be largely (and perhaps not perfectly) justified because it saved lives in the immediate short term.

So while I agree that we have to try move into the future positively, I think that this cannot be a slogan or means for people to disown the moral responsibility for the positions they advocate. Where poverty is exacerbated, where the quality and length of life of people is diminished by the immediate and long terms effects of the shutdown around the world — you must own the sense of moral responsibility, as I and many others have been made to own ours. As the consequences of lockdown unfold, and the extent of the suffering that an abruptly changed world will inflict mainly on the poor and the young (and in the full complexity of the world, it likely will lead to a least some level of death and perhaps conflict in certain places). Even if you believe that this suffering is a lesser evil than what might have been a higher Covid death toll, you still cannot shirk the moral responsibility by simply telling people that they have to be more positive and that bad things happen anyway.

But as I said, it’s been a good discussion and you argue well. If more people took the time to explore eachothers’ views on here, rather than claiming that NPHET are a tyrannical cult or that young people are uncaring degenerates for cracking up in a time of unprecedented and sustained suppression of what it means to be young, we would have much healthier discussion.

SnuggyBear

Boggles wrote: »

50 seconds in, they are great apart from the violence, and boasts how he got belted off the guards.

"Good People".

:pac:

Eh yes we already know there was violence I'm not trying to disprove there was violence.

I'm not sure how you define good people but I don't consider people complaining about violence "bad people"

normanoffside

normanoffside wrote: »

I'm surprised it went to print with such an obvious grammatical error.
However nowhere does anyone say that everyone present was part of a mob intent on violence.
You have leapt to that conclusion by yourself.
Most people were anti-lockdown protestors, most of those were ordinary decent people who are opposed to our current lockdown.

Amazing how many lap up the "they're all scumbags" narrative, other pro-NPHET/FG shills gleefully "hoping that Gardaí crack some skulls". This is the base level of discourse being pumped out, and the media should be held accountable for blatant distortion of the truth. Fear and discord is a powerful tool of manipulation, many impressionable sheep out there ripe for the economic abattoir.

Boggles

SnuggyBear wrote: »

Eh yes we already know there was violence I'm not trying to disprove there was violence.

I'm not sure how you define good people but I don't consider people complaining about violence "bad people"

He was boasting about violence.

I have seen that video, anyone and there was only a small minority wearing masks were told to take them off by the "good people" - I suppose when they are shouting vile abuse at the Guards it's clearer.