placnx

It was later reported that the first policeman who tried to pull Nichols out of his car, tasered him as well, was white. As this incident developed, there were quite a few other police and first reponders present. That makes it all the more shocking.

More like Biden licking N's boots!

Unfortunately at the moment the video is not available: https://www.aljazeera.com/program/101-east/2021/5/6/swedens-thai-berry-pickers

It will be interesting to learn the background of these wayward cops. People with an authoritarian bent are not good candidates for community policing, so more care should be taken in hiring people who have served in the military, where the "us vs them" mentality is perhaps understandable after posting in Afghanistan or Iraq. Maybe existing policemen should be individually and thoroughly examined by psychiatrists to determine whether they are fit to be in contact with the public.

From the linked article: "Genomic tests can aid in the diagnosis of difficult diseases such as cancers. Genomics is the study of an organism’s entire genetic makeup, including all of its DNA sequences. By analyzing an individual’s genome, scientists can identify genetic variations that may be associated with a particular disease, leading to a precise diagnosis." This is modern medicine. Cancers may arise through genetic pathways in certain individuals, so analyzing a patient's genome may indicate which treatment is appropriate. Furthermore, immunological approaches to cancer treatment depend on sequencing the cancerous cells to produce a tailored upgrade to that patient's immune system. Moderna and BioNTech are working on cancer vaccines as well, which presumably would deal with more common cancers.

The article mentioned nominees (who front for foreigners).

If the Chinese arrive at Angkor temples by the busload as they were doing when I was there is 2015, you have to get up around 5 AM and finish your touring of popular sites by 8:30. Then continue at sites not visited by them.

I went yesterday to the Neurological Hospital around 11 AM. There was hardly anyone there, and the whole process getting a Pfizer booster took less than 30 minutes.

Maybe the sensible solution is only to allow individual travelers from China. Also, if there is any faking of vaccination certificates, that would be in the tour groups.

From the link ThaiPBS world: "At Chiang Mai International Airport, the first direct flight from China will land on March 15th. There will be about 200 flights during the three-month period, with 42 flights in January, 84 in February and 74 in March." So when are flights coming to Chiang Mai from China? Are the flights in January coming via Hong Kong?

The older mRNA vaccines work in reducing incidence of severe disease, hospitalization, etc, but are not very effective in preventing infection and transmission.

Rapid tests and swabs of the positives for sequencing could make up somewhat for the lack of transparency on the Chinese side. Thailand could be the sentinel for the dangerous variant the proves the exception to the rule of decreasing lethality. Chinese refusal to accept mRNA vaccines from the EU is very shortsighted considering the inadequately vaccinated population and insufficent facilities to treat serious cases.

The owner of the dogs should go to jail.

A certain number of excess deaths could have been caused by people who went untreated for other diseases because the health system was overburdened by COvid, etc.

Maybe he mixed up with Rick Scott, the Florida senator.

Florida is such a litigious state that the big insurance companies will no longer insure homes there. So now he wants to accomplish what by creating more phobias about vaccines? De Santis complains about misrepresentation. It's ironic because he had a 2-hour televised presentation with the three academics promoting the Great Barrington Declaration which advocated that unvaccinated people get infected while isolating old and other vulnerable people. Experience with infected nursing homes, long Covid, and multiple infections of the unvaccinated showed that Great Barrington was bogus, yet De Santis gave these people another opportunity to mislead ignorant Floridians.

I read the JHU article and reviewed the referenced Science article . The inference of early cases in proximity does not take into account the other virology lab located 300 yards from the market. These articles are by no means a "death knell for any alternative theories". It seems too late to uncover any smoking gun on site, but further understanding of differences between wild strains and the Wuhan virus may help to understand how the Wuhan virus emerged. This review is a good analysis of spillover vs lab leak: https://inquisitivebiologist.com/2022/02/11/book-review-viral-the-search-for-the-origin-of-covid-19/#more-16352 Here is another that has generated a lot of interest: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/10/covid-origins-investigation-wuhan-lab

There is no firm evidence for zoonotic transmission, and direct transmission from bats to humans was known by Batwoman for several years before the pandemic.

The last time I looked, Fedex was going to cost around $100, so I was going to try USPS Priority Mail International ($42 and up), said to take around 10 days. It was sent instead by regular international mail and finally came a month or so later. While waiting for that and being in a hurry I tried Priority Mail Express International ($71 and up). That took just a few days, and there was tracking. https://www.usps.com/international/priority-mail-express-international.htm#2 https://www.usps.com/international/priority-mail-international.htm

Just to maintain the context, we are discussing Lindsey Graham's proposed Federal law limiting abortion to 15 weeks. The Court could just as well declare an Act of Congress unconstitutional as declare a previous opinion of the Court as wrongly decided, since it has now created a precedent based on originalism and the power to regulate abortion now goes to the states by default (10th Amendment). So the law formalizing a right for same-sex marriage was drafted so as not to infringe on the newly created Dobbs precedent. The debate about states' rights go back to the beginning. The original attempt to unite the states was the Articles of Confederation, in which the states were sovereign. During the drafting of the Constitution, there were concerns about the Federal government being a threat to individual rights, so the first ten amendments, the Bill of Rights, were passed in 1791. While the main concern was individual rights, the 2nd and 10th Amendments clearly concerned the rights of the states. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#To_maintain_slavery Court decisions (until recently) and Federal law have generally tended to protect individual rights, in conflict with state laws that were/are oppressive. This is a total turnaround from the expectations when the Constitution was promulgated. After all the machinations of the Republican-controlled Senate in preventing Obama from appointing to two Court vacancies, I suggest that it's no longer the GOP but rather the ROP, the Reactionary Opportunist Party. Just as with the Senate, the "principles" that you mention, can be flipped by the Court depending on the opportunity presented by lower courts. I'm not clear which decision you are thinking of when you mention "voting rights" (Voting Rights Act of 1965?).

The Court just threw out Federal regulation of abortion with the rationale that you mention, among other reasons. It has devolved law regarding abortion to the states. It's the same issue whether the time frame is 15 or 26 weeks. I must admit not having seen the text of Graham's bill. It could contain a workaround, but then that would open the door for the states to override this proposed law, as some have preemptively done in their state constitutions. It was anyway grandstanding to get out the vote for the midterms.

It's ironic that Graham was pushing a Federal law so that all states would have to limit abortions to the first 15 weeks. That logic would be unconstituional under the Court's thinking.

Since Trump was in power there have been quite a few cases that were designed to reach the Supreme Court. Cases under the remit of the 5th Circuit Appeals Court (e.g. Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas), whose decisions reliably support the reactionary line. Trump appointed 6, Bush Jr appointed 4, and Reagan appointed 2 of the 16 current judges. Especially where there would be competing cases brought in other (liberal) circuits, the Supreme Court has to get involved to resolve contradictory decisions. With the newly installed reactionaries on the Supreme Court, the Court has killed two birds with one stone. Besides not deciding the issue at hand and opting to overturn Roe outright, they have elevated states' rights to a new level. This turns the clock back to the 1890's and the Jim Crow era. The gay marriage law was worded in such a way as not to give the Court the opportunity to declare it unconstitutional, based on their originalism line giving the states sovereignty over matters that were previously subsumed under the Commerce clause of the Constitution. So now we may have states where God's law is sovereign over secular law. The gay marriage law does not block states from prohibiting gay marriage in their law even though they have to recognize gay and interracial marriages performed in other states. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8404/text

Support for upholding a woman's right to choose was 77% (including some who favor additional restrictions). https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/730183531/poll-majority-want-to-keep-abortion-legal-but-they-also-want-restrictions

There was a great program on BBC World recently about Christian Nationalism. Evangelicals in the program said that US laws should conform to the injunctions of the Bible, so will Barrett, Alito et al stop at their Dobbs coup?