JonnyF

3 minutes ago, Emdog said:

I'm sure this will make Thai news. Be more careful than usual if you happen to be white here. It only takes one punk thinking he's giving "payback" to end your life. It's wrong, it's stupid, but perhaps that POS that did the killings justified for same insane reason. It doesn't matter if 99% of Thais might not hold that view. Only takes one. So stay frosty.

You raise a valid point. One of many reasons that it's so irresponsible to label this a race hate crime against Asians until all the facts are known.

We have enough race issues at the moment without adding to them.

11 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 As I say in my previous post, as it says in the OP; those countries who have suspended the use of this vaccine have done so on the advice of their own medical authorities and against that of the EU.

Not for the first time, you have shown that you blame the abject failure of Brexit on what you perceive as the EU's spite and vindictiveness. That you'll you'll latch onto anything which you think proves that point; whilst at the same time ignoring the facts prove you wrong.

You have ignored the fact of the EMA's advice not to suspend the use of the vaccine. 

You have ignored the fact that this started in a country which is not an EU member.

You have ignored the fact that non EU members have suspended the vaccine's use.

Most telling of all, you have ignored the fact that the FDA in the USA has not yet approved the use of this vaccine and are conducting further trials before they do so.

I was referring to EU countries, not the EU.

The fact the USA is still in the approval process has nothing to do with it. They are way outperforming the EU (who isn't!) on vaccine rollout so they can take their time.

How has Brexit failed? We only left the withdrawal period a few weeks ago. Sterling has risen by almost 4% against the Euro in 2021 since we left that mess behind once and for all. The EU vaccine rollout has been one disaster after another. By contrast the UK is leading the world with the speed and efficiency of their rollout.

I'd be worrying about the EU if I was you, not Britain, especially if EU countries refuse to vaccinate their own people with a perfectly safe vaccine simply because of it's links to the UK. 

4 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

There was no evidence at that time either way because such data for the over 65 age group was very sparse.

Even the UK's MHRA said that the number of older people contracting the virus in the AstraZeneca trial was "too few to draw conclusions on efficacy". (Source)

Subsequent data has shown that it is effective for the over 65s, and the French government authorised it's use for the over 65s on the 2nd March.

Did you not read the OP? Had you done so you would know that it is also against the EU's advice via their EMA!

You forget that this all started following a report from Norway's Medicines Agency; and Norway is not an EU member.

You also forget that not all EU members have suspended the use of the vaccine whilst some non EU members have.

Whilst the USA have still not even authorised it's use in the first place. Do you also believe the USA has some political axe to grind with us and is taking it our via not approving this vaccine?

 

So far 13 EU countries have stopped using it due to zero evidence of a link to blood clots.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/16/more-eu-countries-halt-astrazeneca-shot-as-ema-reviews-side-effects-.html

It could just be a coincidence that so many EU countries have stopped. Maybe coincidence that it was Macron who made the inaccurate claims about it's ineffectiveness. That's the thing, when you continuously act with spite and vindictiveness towards something it's possible that you are incorrectly labelled as spiteful and vindictive in the future.

Doctors appear as baffled as I am.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/16/astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-doctors-react-as-eu-countries-suspend-shot.html

8 minutes ago, John Drake said:

 

It does seem massage oriented. He left the first massage parlor and went 30 miles to the next two, one of which was right across the street from the other. If it were just a matter of going after Asians, I would think there are bigger targets that are closer to each other, such as restaurants, temples, etc.  

Yep, somewhere like Atlanta Chinatown would have been easier than driving 30 miles to different massage parlors if he simply wanted to kill Asians.

http://www.atlantachinatown.com/

28 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Nothing to do with being pedantic. You correct someone, rightfully so, with an incorrect statement. Also yours was simply incorrect. 'Not all were Asians' would have been correct.

Context. The CAPS should have given it away if it all got too confusing for you.

5 hours ago, robblok said:

I agree its just a small chance, but if other vaccines don't have that risk then it might be better to choose the other variant. Though if you can't get the other vaccine then this is better then noting. 

But they have to alley fears so they don't get accused later.

It also might be a cover up for the late rollout so they have something to blame. Not sure personally if i were in charge id just keep vaccinating people as the Covid risk is higher.

Other vaccines aren't as effective.

Sinovac for instance. 

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Your meaning is completely different from the facts. I presume you mean 'not all were Asians'.

That would be true, but with 6 of the 8 being Asians, and the last 4 killed being Asians, it really looks like Asians were the target.

Yes. the poster said all were Asians but actually 3 were not Asian, so I said 'No, all were NOT Asians'. As a standalone comment you could argue that was confusing if you were being pedantic, but bearing in mind the comment I was replying to and that my quote included the fact that 2 Asians were killed in the first attack, I think it's pretty obvious what I meant.

It appears that at least 6 of the 8 were involved in the sex trade. So sex workers being the target would be an equally valid conclusion at this stage.

Let's wait and see. Better not to jump to conclusions especially in the current climate of race baiting, rioting etc.

2 minutes ago, ballpoint said:

That was in the first place he attacked, outside Atlanta, which happens to be called "Young's Asian Massage".  He then killed four more women - all Asian, in two other spas in Atlanta.  This wasn't a spur of the moment attack on one massage parlour by a disgruntled customer.  Six of the eight victims were Asian, and the first place has a decidedly Asian name.  I'm sure the police will be including the possibility of it's being race related in their investigations.

Jeffr2's claim that all his victims are Asian is factually incorrect. 

Race is one possibility. Or maybe he hates sex workers? Maybe he caught HIV in there? Maybe one or more of the workers is an ex girlfriend? Many the massage parlours have a common owner who he has beef with and is one of the victims?

There are many potential motivational factors for such an attack. I'm not ruling out race, but it's a bit early to conclude this is a racially motivated attack like Jeffr2 did, especially when he also killed 2 Whites and shot a Mexican during the same rampage. 

49 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

The EU will facilitate a trade deal very quickly, of this I am sure.

Why would we not be able to work out a deal with rUK? Do you think that the rUK government can lose it's third largest trading partner without feeling pain?

If rUK was to act hostile, do you not think that there may be some problems as a result?

What evidence do you have that the EU will facilitate a deal quickly. It's not exactly their MO for trade deals now is it? It's not like Scotland does represents a huge chunk of their trade. They move at a glacial pace. 4 and a half years for the UK deal was considered rapid.

The rest of your post seems to be the same as the Brexiteer argument for getting a deal with the EU, you know, the one you've been arguing against for 5 years. ????

9 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Negotiations will result, hopefully, in an acceptable, mutually agreed share of the UK debt being allocated to all parties involved. It serves nobody any good to try to threaten to walk away from their obligations, like Johnson did with the EU.

But no to the Scottish taxpayers paying for the corrupt contracts issued by our corrupt Tory government; all others will be forensically inspected to ensure that they are above board and reasonable. Just to repeat - your country voted tory; your country's taxpayers must pay for their corrupt acts. 

The article you cite overlooks several key facts. Firstly, independence means that we are not required to follow the same fiscal policies of the current government; our spending commitments will be for us to decide, not for another country to dictate; our economy will be released from the death grip of Westminster and we will be able to develop it to suit our own needs, not those of city speculators. Basically, when you are going to throw  out all the bad old stuff, don't use the data that the bad old stuff generated to forecast the future with new, improved things. 

You'll have no trade deals with the EU or the UK (your biggest trading partners). And all the trade deals that the UK has made since Brexit will also be lost. Oil prices are rock bottom. The fallout from Covid will continue. You'll have very limited control over your monetary policy due to using our currency. And you think those are the ingredients for an economy to improve? Are you serious?

By the time the EU checks your finances in about 10 years from now you'll be close to bankrupt. They don't need any more charity cases.

It's a suicide mission. But hey, good luck.????

21 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

What estimates are you referring to in respect to notional Scottish debt? 

Here is one.

https://www.centreonconstitutionalchange.ac.uk/news-and-opinion/scottish-independence-debt-and-assets

It's 4 years old but still valid. It's pre Covid financial destruction, but even at this stage you are well over the 60% for joining. Since then debt has increased to over 2 trillion, so your share would be more like 160 Billion with your GDP at 205 Billion you're still looking at around 80% compared to the 60% the EU wants.

3 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

What estimates are you referring to in respect to notional Scottish debt? 

I have no intention of advocating that my country walk away from its LEGAL obligations, but I would expect that every single line item was backed up with receipts - and all those billions you paid for your useless covid phone app and your corrupt PPE contracts, we won't be paying a brass farthing towards those. 

How many times does the Spanish government need to make clear that they would have no issue with an independent Scotland joining the EU if it left the UK through legal means? It has been stated by various Spanish representatives on more than one occasion, yet still the message seems not to have sunk in.

Well debt isn't going to fall, is it? You won't be in a position to choose which parts you want and which parts you don't. But if you want to pretend you can walk away from your debt that's not really a conversation worth continuing.

So how about the public spending deficit? 8.6% when the EU rules state 3%. Doesn't sound too promising.

https://dailybusinessgroup.co.uk/2020/08/scotlands-deficit-higher-than-nhs-budget/

Just now, RuamRudy said:

So this debt has not been calculated, yet this was the reason you went with - the ratio of income against a debt which has not been calculated? With the debt an unknown, therefor the product of the ratio must be unknown. Hence, it cannot be used as a reason to suggest that an independent Scotland would not meet EU entry criteria.

Try again.

I'm talking realistic estimates here based on uk current debt which has skyrocketed with covid. It's still rising and will continue to do so until you (might) leave in a few years time so the sky is the limit and it's impossible to put a number on it  but I've seen  no estimates that put you anywhere near the rules.

Follow all that with 10 years of isolationism.

What estimates have you seen that put you anywhere near the EU criteria?

Last time I raised it with rookie he claimed scotland would just walk away from their share. Are you proposing the same?

You think the EU will inflame the catalan issue to accommodate you? No chance. Dreaming.

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I believe that he's our Prime Minister.

Ian Blackford got promoted?

2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

We have the highest GDP per capita in the UK with the exception of the City of London and the South East.

We have no debt.

I see your delusions are wider spread than I thought. If you think you'll walk away from  the uk without taking your share of the debt then think again. 

25 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

Odd....report does not tells us his nationality, race or religion.......may be they don't know yet....he was white though!!!

So what? Would you be shouting from the rooftops if he was black ?

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

What are those reasons?

Debt to gdp ratio for starters.

55 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Actually its up to scotland. If they decide not to, up to them. If they decide to, up to them.

whether accepted or not is a separate issue. 

Hold your horses. You need a second referendum first. Then win it.

2 massive hurdles. Then you could apply and likely be rejected. 

11 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

Scotland decides if it wants to join, of course. The EU would not refuse entry.

It would have to  break a lot of its membership rules to allow scotland to join. 

It would also cause issues with Spain and the Catalan separation issues.

Why would the EU do that for another net recipient?

4 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Quite fortunate you were allowed to leave without asking them if you can.

Nothing fortunate about it. It was built into the terms. It wasnt luck. It was law.

1 minute ago, Sujo said:

Actually its up to scotland. If they decide not to, up to them. If they decide to, up to them.

whether accepted or not is a separate issue. 

Scotland doesn't decide if it joins the EU. 

It might decide to apply. The EU will decide if it joins  and on what terms. Here's a hint, in the unlikely event they accepted your application the terms would be brutal for Scotland because scotland would have no choice but to accept.

The EU would use that to screw you against the wall and you'd be begging for the type of deal you have in the UK.

3 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

...and yet the UK was so big.....it had everything going for it....and was calling many of the shots.......to what? .......join up with some serious heavyweights 12,000 miles away......pfft!

We weren't calling any shots. France and Germany do that.

Cameron tried to even things up and they refused. So we left. 

Just now, Sujo said:

To join or not to join. Up to them.

Actually it's up to the EU. I wouldn't bet on the EU saying yes, there are more reasons to refuse Scotland than allow them.

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

For me, you are correct - I have always recognised that Scotland receives a poor deal in the UK. For others, however, Brexit has woken them up to the lack of fairness within the union, and how Scottish opinions mean nothing at all. Whether Brexit confounds the world and is actually not the unmitigated disaster predicted then and is still predicted now, the fundamental problem remains unresolved  - that is how Scotland must fall in line with whatever the English electorate decides.

And if you were to join the EU you would have to fall in line with what Brussels decides, which will basically be whatever Germany and France wants.

You're never going to be the country calling the shots in any major union because you are so small.

Maybe better accept it than destroy your country by seeking the unobtainable.

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

Sorry - I have no desire to hang around to continue to suffer the negative effects of the decisions of another country, just on the off chance that the red faced angry white men and hedge fund crooks who facilitated that decision were right and that the vast majority of economics experts were wrong. 

Looks like you're SOL then, doesn't it?

Let's face it, if Brexit proved to be an undisputed massive success you'd still claim it was a disaster and want to leave. Brexit is just a convenient excuse to try again.