-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
.thumb.jpeg.d2d19a66404642fd9ff62d6262fd153e.jpeg)
-
4
-
5
-
-
-
Latest posts...
-
431
-
1
-
11
The New F1 season. 🏁
It looks very likely that McLaren will win both championships. The only real question which of their driver will win the WDC. -
271
Fun Quiz > Covid-19 mRNA Vax harm denial - At which stage are you?
It's not emotive language, it's the textbook definition. "Take the jab or lose your job" is coercion. The emotive language was heard when people screamed at other people for not wearing a mask, or when political leaders and the media said that the unvaccinated were immature, selfish idiots. -
271
Fun Quiz > Covid-19 mRNA Vax harm denial - At which stage are you?
I'm with you all the way on this - right up until the moment a virus emerges with a 30% case fatality rate and the transmissibility of influenza.... ... At that point, one could reasonably argue that those refusing to vaccinate and continuing to transmit the virus might bear some degree of criminal or civil responsibility -or, at the very least, should be required to self-isolate. It's a deeply complex debate, because it forces us to confront the uncomfortable tension between individual autonomy and collective survival. In such a scenario, the usual moral frameworks erode, and the discussion shifts from what is ethically ideal to what is existentially necessary... Those who bear the burden of decision-making power often face choices that many of us could scarcely imagine making ourselves. While it may be somewhat hyperbolic to invoke Churchill’s decision to allow Coventry to be bombed - sacrificing thousands to protect the secret that Allied forces had cracked German codes - the weight of such impossible decisions is always subject to intense scrutiny from critics and the lens of history. In the context of COVID-19, it is now being asked: would it have been better to simply do nothing and isolate only the vulnerable, creating a two-tier society? With the clarity of hindsight, perhaps. But at the time, no one truly knew. The uncertainty was profound, and the decisions had to be made with incomplete information, balancing public health, ethics, and survival in real time. 20/20 hindsight gives us the luxury to critique decisions fully equipped with all the facts and outcomes, something those making choices in the moment simply didn’t have -
20
FRANCE 24, RFI among 130 press groups calling for ‘immediate’ access to Gaza
Cute. Some were indeed not actually journalists. Others were killed when militant military targets were eliminated. The "journalists" were often aware they shared premises with Islamic jihad and accepted the risks of acting as cover for the military groups. Why not direct your question at Islamic jihad and Hamas and ask them why they intentionally located their communication and command centers in buildings and then offered the buildings as sites to journalists. Hamas, and Islamic jihad knew what they were doing and welcomed the death of these people as it provide excellent propaganda opportunities. Again, you point your finger accusingly, and refuse to acknowledge or hold Hamas and others responsible for intentionally putting people at risk of injury.
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
.thumb.jpg.3ee24d9400fb02605ea21bc13b1bf901.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now