Eh? You said 'you do realise that you have confirmed that you personally haven't looked at any reports never mind understood the content and context, and are basing your opinion on not a lot of fact at all don't you?'. So I looked at the 'reports' you cited, pointed out that they don't all support the anti-lockdown point of view and that you don't appear to have read some of them, and you're still not happy. Bless.
You read the articles about the reports. You need to lay out the specific elements that you feel are wrong, and the evidence that you have put together to support that. The question at hand is, did lockdowns help or hinder? That includes all of the consequences of those lockdowns. I think it's very difficult for anyone to claim that they were needed or a success, and the evidence in the reports that I have read point to a far more effective system being one of better information and supporting individual responsibility and control, particularly for the at risk groups to avoid situations, while the majority cracked on and kept the economy going. This view was voiced well before the lockdown by many people, who got shouted down as 'deniers' by some more ignorant people.
Just like any government policy there has ever been, fans of the government support it, fans of the enemy oppose it. Doesn’t matter how good or effective it turned out to be, at the end of the day that’s all it boils down to which side of the line you fall on.
Yep, apperently i'am that far down the Rabbit Hole, turn's out the few of us that spoke up against lockdowns were right on multiple fronts.
I think that's distinctly untrue here. I think there's a lot of people like me, who can't stand this government, believe we had the worst possible prime minister at the time for a serious public health emergency and that they got loads of stuff horrendously wrong during covid, but not that they implemented lockdowns and vaccines. And on the other side of things, there are a great number of people who are generally right wing and support this government for their rhetoric on issues like refugees and Brexit, but also strongly disagree with their implementation of lockdowns and vaccines. It's always been a fascinating thing about this situation. Personally, I've long wished that the latter group would focus their anti-establishment scepticism on issues where it's really needed rather than on easily disprovable conspiracy theories, because there really are plenty of serious issues to be angry about if you have that energy going spare.
Under normal circumstances that's the way it pans out...But these weren't normal circumstances? I won't delve deeply into politics but let's just say that I was against a lot of decisions made(by your workings I really shouldn't have been).Certain schemes,benefits and hand-outs didn't favour me and millions of others who had no choice but to work through it. I suppose the most relevant part of your post to me is the 'fans of the enemy' part. That ,(no matter which party governs), is the stark reality these days and it has played a huge part in the downfall of our once proud Country... Until such times come when they can grow up and work together on important issues,we're all ****ed!!!
Politics is the most childish and immature industry there is. It’s just a big game of oneupmanship where all they do is bicker and point score over pointless technicalities. The less you care, the happier you will be.
Not big brother at all….. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...eneghan-counter-disinformation-unit-telegram/ Secret government unit collected Telegram posts about Covid policy critic Writing in The Telegraph, Prof Carl Heneghan reveals the chilling effects of being monitored by No 10’s Counter-Disinformation Unit ByInvestigations team7 June 2023 • 9:30pm please log in to view this image A secretive government unit collected posts from a secure messaging app about a scientist who questioned Number 10’s Covid policies, The Telegraph can reveal. The Counter-Disinformation Unit (CDU), which was set up by ministers to tackle supposed domestic “threats”, amassed posts from Telegram about Prof Carl Heneghan, an epidemiologist who was critical of lockdown measures, data released by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) revealed. The document showed that the CDU loggedwhat were described as “sample Telegram posts” which made reference to the scientist’s views, including on the efficacy of face masks in stopping the spread of coronavirus. Telegram is a secure messaging app which works in a similar way to WhatsApp and is often used by people who want an increased level of privacy in their online communications. Much of the app is encrypted. It also has both a private chat function and channels where anyone can read the messages posted. It is understood that the data held by the DCMS, which refers to Prof Heneghan, was taken from public Telegram channels. Sources said that the purpose of gathering the posts was to “better understand how to analyse narratives on social media” and that the CDU did not regard it as “an attempt to identify disinformation”. please log in to view this image The CDU logged what were described as ‘sample Telegram posts’ which made reference to the scientist’s views CREDIT: Kirill Kudryavtsev/AFP via Getty Images However, while a spokesman said that the CDU “has never tracked the activity of individuals” and that Prof Heneghan was “never monitored”, the disclosure about the range of information amassed by the unit is likely to provoke questions about transparency. There is growing speculation that the intelligence agencies may have been involved in the work of the CDU as officials have cited national security as a reason for the lack of transparency. On Wednesday, Prof Heneghan told The Telegraph that “the effect of these tactics is chilling”. Writing for the website, below, he said: “The Counter-Disinformation Unit’s tactics included looking at posts from ‘popular channels’ on Telegram, a platform we didn’t use. It’s likely these were groups, but it’s not clear to us how they were identified or how they gathered the material. “The effect of these tactics is chilling. They raise serious questions about the true extent of the Government operations – who and what was captured within their spying net.” Last week, The Telegraph disclosed that the CDU worked with social media companies in an attempt to curtail discussion of lockdown policies during the pandemic. The Telegraph also revealed that another unit, the now-defunct Rapid Response Unit, which was part of the Cabinet Office, hunted online for content it considered to be disinformation.
Doesn’t that simply say they copied some posts that he’d posted on a public forum? No fan of this type of stuff, and I’ve no doubt they do all sorts we wouldn’t like, but on this particular story am I missing something?
I suppose it’s more why did they think they needed this unit to spy on academics, not where they sourced that individual material from
It's not a unit to spy on academics is it. It's the covid disinformation unit. For combating disinformation on covid, because there was and still is absolutely **** loads of it. Outlets like the Telegraph love to promote covid disinformation and here they have taken the opportunity to report on something totally trivial but put a dramatic headline on it to twist it into sounding like something very different. Conspiracy folk love to criticise the "mainstream media" but then happily swallow whatever the more ridiculous media outlets such as The Telegraph tell them to think.
yes spying….”There is growing speculation that the intelligence agencies may have been involved in the work of the CDU as officials have cited national security as a reason for the lack of transparency.”
The last two Telegraph articles you've posted don't actually say anything of note. They just refer to the 'possibility of', or 'speculation that', they're both poorly written articles with eye-catching headlines and absolutely nothing in the articles to back them up.
well it’s impossible to say the SIS did this or that, probably illegal to do so. Possibility or speculation is probably as strong as they can go
The disinformation seems to largely come from government and international agencies, that about-turned 180 degrees later on most of what they put out. 1) shake hands, don't avoid ppl 2) travel doesn't spread the disease 3) don't wear masks as they don't work 4) eat out in restaurants 5) it comes from a fish market or a pangolin 6) you need just one vaccine 7) the vaccine will prevent you passing it on 8) vaccine passports will have to be tolerated forever now 9) don't sit on park benches with others And I could go on... Another issue was the strength of anger and division created towards those that disagreed with the experts at any certain point. It was unhealthy, divisive and a worrying sign of how easy it is to turn many against each other. A bit of humility and acceptance of unnecessary extreme reactions and emotions wouldn't go amiss, promote healing and be a lesson for the future.
There's no evidence of anything, they're just speculating that something could have happened, both articles are a waste of ether.
how do you know that there’s no evidence? Might be plenty of evidence but cannot publish. You are speculating without having any information, they are speculating with contacts & info. we will prob never know the truth but to dismiss it is very naive
