Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Coronavirus outbreak


CBH1926

Recommended Posts

Just now, gurn said:

No wonder he, and this guy share a special relationship.

 

Harper cowboy.jpg

Harper is trying too hard there. 

 

I just think it would be a good thing for Kenney to do. I get his base wants him to be quiet about it but thats not real leadership. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be clear idgaf how people get their freak on, just would be great if people didn't feel the need to hide who they are, for fear of:

 

 

lost prestige

lost income

lost time in a hospital from a beat down

lost time from being killed

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

Same thing as when Fauci said masks don't work then later admitting to lying to the public about it purposely. (When a realistic solution was just tell people to make their own face coverings, ala scarves/bandana's/exc. which many ended up doing anyways) 

When did this happen? Can you post a source for that, because I don't recall seeing it......?

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

These articles aren’t about lies.  They are about the evolution of science understanding a novel virus, and the value of mask wearing.  

  • Hydration 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Neither of those links support your claim of Fauci " admitting to lying to the public about it purposely".

 

He admitted that he made a mistake, partly because they thought there would be a shortage of PPE and that they would be needed by medical professionals....and partly because they didn't know the extent of the virus' method of transmission at that time.

 

You should actually listen to the interview...

  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Alflives said:

These articles aren’t about lies.  They are about the evolution of science understanding a novel virus, and the value of mask wearing.  

 

1 minute ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Neither of those links support your claim of Fauci " admitting to lying to the public about it purposely".

 

He admitted that he made a mistake, partly because they thought there would be a shortage of PPE and that they would be needed by medical professionals....and partly because they didn't know the extent of the virus' method of transmission at that time.

 

You should actually listen to the interview...

 

I listened to it, he admits the reason they were against masks + their effectiveness for the overall public was due to what they felt would be a shortage. Not b/c they were ineffective - he called that the "critical issue" just in that video.

 

And even if they were still in wait and see more so than the shortage issue, this whole thing has been the ultimate exercise in the pre-cautionary principal, yet it doesn't apply here?

 

I hyperbolized it initially, but it's effectually semantical.

  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

 

I listened to it, he admits the reason they were against masks + their effectiveness for the overall public was due to what they felt would be a shortage. Not b/c they were ineffective - he called that the "critical issue" just in that video.

 

And even if they were still in wait and see more so than the shortage issue, this whole thing has been the ultimate exercise in the pre-cautionary principal, yet it doesn't apply here?

 

I hyperbolized it initially, but it's effectually semantical.

I was looking and listening for the part where he admits that he was lying, as you claimed. It's not there.....

 

No-one is disputing that mistakes were made.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hamhuis Hip Check said:

Cue drummer4now to come and whine about constitutional rights being violated for that

Yeah sure if you like constitutional rights to be changed or amended on the fly… 

 

What is the point of having a charter of rights if it can just be changed or modified at please? 
 

WE Are guaranteed mobility rights within the provinces and territories and according to the charter it is unhindered. 
 

My judgement is purely based on what is written in law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, drummer4now said:

Yeah sure if you like constitutional rights to be changed or amended on the fly… 

 

What is the point of having a charter of rights if it can just be changed or modified at please? 
 

WE Are guaranteed mobility rights within the provinces and territories and according to the charter it is unhindered. 
 

My judgement is purely based on what is written in law.

When those rights were guaranteed, no one thought Alberta would unleash biological weapons against the rest of the country.  Maybe wexit might be useful after all if it g creates a hard border between us and those morons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

When those rights were guaranteed, no one thought Alberta would unleash biological weapons against the rest of the country.  Maybe wexit might be useful after all if it g creates a hard border between us and those morons.

We take Washington and Oregon. Montana absorbs Alberta and Sask. Everybody wins.

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, drummer4now said:

Yeah sure if you like constitutional rights to be changed or amended on the fly… 

 

What is the point of having a charter of rights if it can just be changed or modified at please? 
 

WE Are guaranteed mobility rights within the provinces and territories and according to the charter it is unhindered. 
 

My judgement is purely based on what is written in law.

 

I'm pretty sure that a pandemic is a situation where the emergencies act applies.   Definitely is legislation that was passed decades ago that allows temporary measures. 

 

 

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/e-4.5/page-1.html

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, drummer4now said:

Yeah sure if you like constitutional rights to be changed or amended on the fly… 

 

What is the point of having a charter of rights if it can just be changed or modified at please? 
 

WE Are guaranteed mobility rights within the provinces and territories and according to the charter it is unhindered. 
 

My judgement is purely based on what is written in law.

Aren't mobility rights as laid out in the Charter about moving to and taking up residence in any province and not family vacations?

 

In fact if you read the charter there are several Limitations to mobility rights.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, EOTM said:

We take Washington and Oregon. Montana absorbs Alberta and Sask. Everybody wins.

I like Alaska.  Can we have Alaska?  Northern California is nice too.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...