-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Coronavirus
- Thread starter Tigers of Old
- Start date
Your emphasis above.
Then the contradictory claim.
What was that about not making s*** up?
You need to take your own advice about dropping this line of argument, the more you say the deeper you go.
DS
How the *smile* would they know? The protester returned a positive five days after the protest on June 11, which is at the short end of the average incubation period for the virus.
Claiming this person was definitely not infectious at the time of the protest is absolute horsesh!t, as is claiming they definitely didn't contract the virus at the protest. They have no way of knowing.
You can eat the horsesh!t if you want to. I refuse.
Maybe they have another potential source for infection for these cases, which makes more sense given the timing. They are pretty clearly saying they think they were infected but asymptomatic when attending the protest.
You can never know these things 100%, but your campaign to blame BLM above all else is, indeed, horseshit. Enjoy the aroma.
How the *smile* would you know? The protester returned a positive five days after the protest on June 11, which is at the short end of the average incubation period for the virus - which tells us the protest is very unlikely to be the source, gee that must be why the health officials (who have more data and expertise than you) are saying the connection is just not there.
Claiming this protest was definitely the cause of the current spike is absolute horsesh!t, you have no way of knowing.
You can produce the horsesh!t if you want to. I prefer not to.
DS
If you fixate on one potential cause (BLM) because you disagree with the purpose of the protest, you are doomed to overlook actual evidence and you see any counter-evidence or lack of evidence as a conspiracy.
That's a pretty dumb place to put yourself.
That's a pretty dumb place to put yourself.
I had moved on. Of all the people to bob up and pour petrol on, it's the poster who resurrected the subject. If you're going to troll me, at least be funny.
Don't really care if you had "moved on" or whether you feel "trolled" or not, you keep posting personal opinion that runs against any evidence. People will respond to your posts, if you don't want that, don't post.
I've posted plenty of evidence to suggest the protest is a significant contributing factor to the sh!thole we're all in. If you want to discuss those points instead of just calling them rubbish or throwing up strawmen, go ahead.
Drive-bys like "your idiotic BLM protest caused this" add nothing. They just mark you as a troll.
You've provided no evidence that the BLM protests caused any spike in infection. Feel free to point out where I might have missed this.
Your continual name-calling is tiresome. I attack arguments, not individuals and suggest you do the same. It's pretty simple.
Victorian Labor votes to dodge scrutiny over virus handling (paywalled)
Rachel Baxendale
The Australian
July 6, 2020
The Labor chair of Victoria’s Parliamentary Accounts and Estimates Comittee has used her casting vote to prevent the committee from scrutinising the Andrews government’s handling of Victoria’s coronavirus crisis until August.
The committee is currently the only parliamentary body with authority to call the Premier, ministers and bureaucrats to account for their actions, but is made up of five Labor MPs, three Coalition MPs, a Green and a Liberal Democrat.
Despite Labor having the casting vote on the committee, the body played a key role in shedding light on the Andrews government’s handling of the COVID-19 cluster at Melbourne abattoir Cedar Meats when it last held inquiries.
Committee members met on Monday morning to vote on a motion calling for an inquiry to be held on July 27, with evidence to be given from Premier Daniel Andrews, Health Minister Jenny Mikakos, Chief Health Officer Brett Sutton, his deputy Annaliese van Diemen, Police and Emergency Services Minister Lisa Neville, Police Chief Commissioner Shane Patton, Emergency Management Commissioner Andrew Crisp and Treasurer Tim Pallas.
The proposal follows a second wave of COVID-19 cases which is already worse than the first, with a high proportion of cases genomically linked to the government’s bungling of its hotel quarantine system.
The outbreak in Melbourne has sparked panic buying once again, with supermarket shelves cleared of toilet paper.
The Australian understands Liberal MPs Richard Riordan and Bridget Vallence, Nationals MP Danny O’Brien, Greens MP Sam Hibbins and Liberal Democrat David Limbrick all voted in favour of the motion, but the vote was tied when Labor MPs Lizzie Blandthorn, Gary Maas, Pauline Richards, Tim Richardson and Ingrid Stitt all opposed it, with Chair Ms Blandthorn using her casting vote.
Daniel Andrews with Labor MP Lizzie Blandthorn in 2019. Picture: Supplied
Asked why his government was avoiding scrutiny, Mr Andrews denied responsibility for the decision of his MPs.
“I cannot provide you with any update as to the business of a Public Accounts and Estimates Committee today,” Mr Andrews said.
“I am neither a member of the Public Accounts and investments committee, nor have I been briefed or played any role in the deliberations of that parliamentary committee.
“I’ve had a fair bit to get on with today. That committee is a committee of the parliament and constituted by a vote of the parliament, and if you want to know what they’ve done, then you would need to speak with them, because I certainly haven’t. I’ve got lots of other things to do.”
Rachel Baxendale
The Australian
July 6, 2020
The Labor chair of Victoria’s Parliamentary Accounts and Estimates Comittee has used her casting vote to prevent the committee from scrutinising the Andrews government’s handling of Victoria’s coronavirus crisis until August.
The committee is currently the only parliamentary body with authority to call the Premier, ministers and bureaucrats to account for their actions, but is made up of five Labor MPs, three Coalition MPs, a Green and a Liberal Democrat.
Despite Labor having the casting vote on the committee, the body played a key role in shedding light on the Andrews government’s handling of the COVID-19 cluster at Melbourne abattoir Cedar Meats when it last held inquiries.
Committee members met on Monday morning to vote on a motion calling for an inquiry to be held on July 27, with evidence to be given from Premier Daniel Andrews, Health Minister Jenny Mikakos, Chief Health Officer Brett Sutton, his deputy Annaliese van Diemen, Police and Emergency Services Minister Lisa Neville, Police Chief Commissioner Shane Patton, Emergency Management Commissioner Andrew Crisp and Treasurer Tim Pallas.
The proposal follows a second wave of COVID-19 cases which is already worse than the first, with a high proportion of cases genomically linked to the government’s bungling of its hotel quarantine system.
The outbreak in Melbourne has sparked panic buying once again, with supermarket shelves cleared of toilet paper.
The Australian understands Liberal MPs Richard Riordan and Bridget Vallence, Nationals MP Danny O’Brien, Greens MP Sam Hibbins and Liberal Democrat David Limbrick all voted in favour of the motion, but the vote was tied when Labor MPs Lizzie Blandthorn, Gary Maas, Pauline Richards, Tim Richardson and Ingrid Stitt all opposed it, with Chair Ms Blandthorn using her casting vote.
Daniel Andrews with Labor MP Lizzie Blandthorn in 2019. Picture: Supplied
Asked why his government was avoiding scrutiny, Mr Andrews denied responsibility for the decision of his MPs.
“I cannot provide you with any update as to the business of a Public Accounts and Estimates Committee today,” Mr Andrews said.
“I am neither a member of the Public Accounts and investments committee, nor have I been briefed or played any role in the deliberations of that parliamentary committee.
“I’ve had a fair bit to get on with today. That committee is a committee of the parliament and constituted by a vote of the parliament, and if you want to know what they’ve done, then you would need to speak with them, because I certainly haven’t. I’ve got lots of other things to do.”
Could've gone in either. I chose this one.
Maybe you can copy it to the other thread if you'd prefer to discuss it there.
