On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 15:22:38 +0100
Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 14:41 17 Jun 2021, said:
>
>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:30:34 +0100
>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>On 17/06/2021 12:49, NY wrote:
>>>> The anti-woke stance is a point of view and makes a refreshing
>>>> change from having "wokeness" rammed down your throat. (*) But GB
>>>> News's anti-vaccine stance is bizarre. Are they also anti-lockdown
>>>> and anti-mask? Do they want a
>>
>> Anyone with any sense is anti lockdown and anti mask now. Its not
>> 2020 anymore.
>>
>>>> Sweden-like free-for-all lack of restrictions? Did the Swedish
>>>> stance
>>
>> Despite all the dire warnings swedens approach hasn't resulted in
>> bodies in the streets and overloaded hospitals. Yet the BBC never
>> talk about it these days. Isn't that odd?
>
>We can't all be like uncrowded Sweden where ha;f the population lives on
>their own.

Oh please, that the best you've got? Do you think these people never go to
shops, gyms, theatre, public transport? Stockholm has a population of 1m so
if all the doom mongering by Chicken Little morons like Ferguson was even
vaguely correct there should have been a massive casualty rate.

>The main thing to say about Sweden's approach to Covid is that it
>resulted in many more deaths than it's comparable immediate neighbours.

Not that many and most of them were old and sick who would have died soon
anyway. Just like everywhere else. In sweden they simply departed earlier.

On 15:43 17 Jun 2021, said:

> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 15:22:38 +0100
> Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On 14:41 17 Jun 2021, said:
>>
>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:30:34 +0100
>>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>On 17/06/2021 12:49, NY wrote:
>>>>> The anti-woke stance is a point of view and makes a refreshing
>>>>> change from having "wokeness" rammed down your throat. (*) But
>>>>> GB News's anti-vaccine stance is bizarre. Are they also
>>>>> anti-lockdown and anti-mask? Do they want a
>>>
>>> Anyone with any sense is anti lockdown and anti mask now. Its not
>>> 2020 anymore.
>>>
>>>>> Sweden-like free-for-all lack of restrictions? Did the Swedish
>>>>> stance
>>>
>>> Despite all the dire warnings swedens approach hasn't resulted in
>>> bodies in the streets and overloaded hospitals. Yet the BBC never
>>> talk about it these days. Isn't that odd?
>>
>>We can't all be like uncrowded Sweden where ha;f the population
>>lives on their own.
>
> Oh please, that the best you've got? Do you think these people never
> go to shops, gyms, theatre, public transport? Stockholm has a
> population of 1m so if all the doom mongering by Chicken Little
> morons like Ferguson was even vaguely correct there should have been
> a massive casualty rate.

Almost four times as many one person households in Sweden, as a
percentage, than the UK counts for nothing? How strange.

>>The main thing to say about Sweden's approach to Covid is that it
>>resulted in many more deaths than it's comparable immediate
>>neighbours.
>
> Not that many and most of them were old and sick who would have died
> soon anyway. Just like everywhere else. In sweden they simply
> departed earlier.

Swedes are the Germans of Scandinavia and didn't need the government
to pass regulations for them to change their behaviour.

You have clearly been relying on old news reports about Covid in
Sweden. The Swedish Covid "miracle" turned out to be a flop before
2020 came to an end. It's a wonder anyone is still flogging that dead
horse.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 10:58:44 +0100, Pamela
<pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:

>How on earth is it possible to flunk a long-planned and well-resourced
>launch with such technical shortcomings? Cheeky chappie Alex Belfield on
>YouTube blows GB News away by using a handheld iPhone in his living room.

I think it shows that the best way to get people to listen to you is
first to have something important or interesting to say, and to be
able to say it in an interesting an/or humorous way. If you can get
the fundamentals right, nothing else matters very much.

The bulk of what traditional telly now puts on our screens could be
described in the most charitable terms as "style over content".
Perhaps this is the result of modern technology making the
presentation techniques that once separated professional from amateur
production so push-button easy that anyone can make any old rubbish
look slick on the screen. Unfortunately slick rubbish is still
rubbish. It doesn't take long for the viewers to see through this, but
perhaps the makers of it who are the products of media courses have
been blinded by their own enthusiasm.

Rod.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:39:24 +0000 (UTC),
MrSpook_aoA71kJu@hzlhoz5kajk5t_7hjvk.biz wrote:

>On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:33:20 +0100
>MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>On 17/06/2021 13:49, Tweed wrote:
>>> The same thing has happened with gay rights. Not too long ago being gay was
>>> considered to be awful and criminalised. Then it became just about
>>> acceptable as long as you kept quiet about it and now it is considered
>>> perfectly acceptable to be gay by most people.
>>
>>With much of radio and TV now, it seems to be essential to be camp even
>>if not actually homosexual.
>
>It seems to be TV rules now that any couples reality show must have a gay
>couple, preferably every episode. Location LL on C4 seems to be particularly
>prone to this. I suspect because a lot of people in TV are gay they think its
>much more prevelant in mainstream society than is actually the case.

There seems to be a statutory requirement for at least one homosexual
or transsexual in every drama, despite the fact that most of us will
live our entire lives without ever knowingly meeting one. As a
representative of the remaining 90% of humanity I now find it
difficult to identify with much of what I see on the screen. I
couldn't care less what people are motivated to get up to in their
personal lives or what they are anatomically qualified to do it with,
but modern TV drama no longer looks like the world I actually live in.

Rod.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 12:02:16 +0100, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

>"Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>news:ij0eifF7fhqU2@mid.individual.net...
>> On 17/06/2021 09:05, TonyGamble wrote:
>>> Briliant.
>>>
>>> Any more Mark?
>>>
>> Yep, this one, where the BBC lunchtime news falls apart, but everyone
>> keeps it going !
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uocWx1-7Uo
>
>How common is it for recorded/filmed inserts not to be available on-cue in a
>news bulletin *and for the director not (apparently) to know about this
>until the moment the insert is cued*? Ideally you'd expect all the inserts
>to be ready at the time that the running order and autocue script are
>finalised, but failing that you'd expect the director to have a *bit* of
>notice that an insert is not ready.

I remember once while being shown round a BBC regional TV centre
everyone was in a bit of a flap because, I was told, the motor in the
telecine machine was overheating and they only had a few hours till
the early evening news programme to fix it. I queried if I had heard
correctly and was told that yes, it really was *the* telecine machine.
Incredibly there was only one machine, for that whole BBC region.
Presenters had to be capable of verbally ad-libbing for 20 minutes in
case it happened that they had nothing visual to show.

Rod.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 16:05:30 +0100
Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 15:43 17 Jun 2021, said:
>> Oh please, that the best you've got? Do you think these people never
>> go to shops, gyms, theatre, public transport? Stockholm has a
>> population of 1m so if all the doom mongering by Chicken Little
>> morons like Ferguson was even vaguely correct there should have been
>> a massive casualty rate.
>
>Almost four times as many one person households in Sweden, as a
>percentage, than the UK counts for nothing? How strange.

If people catch covid at home then lockdowns a bit pointless isn't it?

>> Not that many and most of them were old and sick who would have died
>> soon anyway. Just like everywhere else. In sweden they simply
>> departed earlier.
>
>Swedes are the Germans of Scandinavia and didn't need the government
>to pass regulations for them to change their behaviour.

Whatever.

>You have clearly been relying on old news reports about Covid in
>Sweden. The Swedish Covid "miracle" turned out to be a flop before
>2020 came to an end. It's a wonder anyone is still flogging that dead
>horse.

So its the zombie apocalypse over there is it? Dead in the streets, hospitals
unable to cope? No, didn't think so.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 16:32:21 +0100
Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>couldn't care less what people are motivated to get up to in their
>personal lives or what they are anatomically qualified to do it with,
>but modern TV drama no longer looks like the world I actually live in.

I remember a few years back there was a docudrama about the Norman conquest
with Dan Snow. They hired a black actor to play William the conquerers page.
Thats when I realised the mainstream channels had jumped the shark and now
existed mainly to push a political viewpoint. I switched off.

On 17/06/2021 14:41, MrSpook_xphzu9V3d@16xcsz.edu wrote:
>
> Anyone with any sense is anti lockdown and anti mask now. Its not 2020 anymore.

Anyone with any *REAL* sense is a *LOT* more cautious. Take a look at
the stats, they all look exactly like the beginning of the second wave,
and suggest that we are now entering a third. Most worryingly:
Nation R-Number
England 1.2-1.4
Scotland 1.2-1.4
NI 0.9-1.2
Wales 0.8-1.0 The only nation with an acceptable level

UK daily new cases are currently around 11,000, which was the rate
around Sept 29/30th last year. At that time daily deaths had reached
58, whereas currently they stand at 19, which, while certainly better
than 58, is still a significant fraction of their former level, when you
consider look what happened next, with more people dying in the second
wave than in the first.

Any talk of this being 'over' is highly premature.

It really is alarming how rank stupid some people can become as a result
of watching irresponsible fake 'news' channels.

>>> Sweden-like free-for-all lack of restrictions? Did the Swedish stance
>
> Despite all the dire warnings swedens approach hasn't resulted in bodies in
> the streets and overloaded hospitals. Yet the BBC never talk about it these
> days. Isn't that odd?

Because it's irrelevant. Stay in after school and write out 1,000
times: "A statistical sample of one in insignificant, even if it
happens to be called Sweden!"

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 17/06/2021 16:58, MrSpook_e3t_4j0@8qi.info wrote:

[snip the usual irrelevant crap]

The point is that Sweden is a statistical sample of just one, and is
unlike the UK in many, many important social and political respects, and
therefore it is not useful to compare us to it. In past threads, you
and others have been shown link after link that refutes any idea that
Sweden is a suitable model to follow, including but not limited to ...

- During the first wave they had the worst death rate in the world
- Scientists in Sweden have criticised the government's approach
- Their own monarch called it a disaster, or words to that effect

.... but the simple truth is that your political bigotry prevents you
seeing the truth, and so you have to bore the arse off everyone here by
raking it all over again. That horse has been flogged to death already,
and you're wrong, get used to it.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 17/06/2021 17:01, MrSpook_dvgz8@vxkc45_bdcprf.co.uk wrote:
> I remember a few years back there was a docudrama about the Norman conquest
> with Dan Snow. They hired a black actor to play William the conquerers page.
> Thats when I realised the mainstream channels had jumped the shark and now
> existed mainly to push a political viewpoint. I switched off.

Also annoying is when they find a reference to one person in a large
army who could have been black and next thing we are being told that
most of the army was black.

On 17/06/2021 19:29, MB wrote:
> On 17/06/2021 17:01, MrSpook_dvgz8@vxkc45_bdcprf.co.uk wrote:
>> I remember a few years back there was a docudrama about the Norman
>> conquest
>> with Dan Snow. They hired a black actor to play William the conquerers
>> page.
>> Thats when I realised the mainstream channels had jumped the shark and
>> now
>> existed mainly to push a political viewpoint. I switched off.

On the face of it, this doesn't seem realistic, but, not forgetting that
the Romans marching all over Europe moved many people from various
Mediterranean and other countries around as legionaries, including
blacks, does history relate how many black people remained around in
Europe at the time? I suspect not, but it's certainly not impossible
that William The Conker's page was a black, just unlikely.

> Also annoying is when they find a reference to one person in a large
> army who could have been black and next thing we are being told that
> most of the army was black.

This sounds like stereotypical bias, which programme, when broadcast?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 18:31 17 Jun 2021, Java Jive said:

> On 17/06/2021 16:58, MrSpook_e3t_4j0@8qi.info wrote:
>
> [snip the usual irrelevant crap]
>
> The point is that Sweden is a statistical sample of just one, and is
> unlike the UK in many, many important social and political respects,
> and therefore it is not useful to compare us to it. In past
> threads, you and others have been shown link after link that refutes
> any idea that Sweden is a suitable model to follow, including but
> not limited to ...
>
> - During the first wave they had the worst death rate in the world
> - Scientists in Sweden have criticised the government's approach -
> Their own monarch called it a disaster, or words to that effect
>
> ... but the simple truth is that your political bigotry prevents you
> seeing the truth, and so you have to bore the arse off everyone here
> by raking it all over again. That horse has been flogged to death
> already, and you're wrong, get used to it.

Mr Spook evidently doesn't let facts get in the way of his beliefs.

Covid deniers and anti-vaxxers badly needed a country which had
miraculously avoided deaths from the virus by doing nothing and Sweden
was force-fitted into this role.

On 17/06/2021 16:46, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>
> I remember once while being shown round a BBC regional TV centre
> everyone was in a bit of a flap because, I was told, the motor in the
> telecine machine was overheating and they only had a few hours till
> the early evening news programme to fix it. I queried if I had heard
> correctly and was told that yes, it really was *the* telecine machine.
> Incredibly there was only one machine, for that whole BBC region.
> Presenters had to be capable of verbally ad-libbing for 20 minutes in
> case it happened that they had nothing visual to show.
That doesn't surprise me at all. In the 1970s BBC  South Today sometimes
would just have 3/4 minutes of single camera headlines, and then crash
back to the London/SE part of Nationwide. Some evenings it didn't appear
at all, because of 'technical difficulties'

The BBC English regions have always been the 'Cinderellas', and they
still are today (c.f still in SD etc)

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 20:05:06 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:

>>> I remember a few years back there was a docudrama about the Norman
>>> conquest
>>> with Dan Snow. They hired a black actor to play William the conquerers
>>> page.
>>> Thats when I realised the mainstream channels had jumped the shark and
>>> now
>>> existed mainly to push a political viewpoint. I switched off.
>
>On the face of it, this doesn't seem realistic, but, not forgetting that
>the Romans marching all over Europe moved many people from various
>Mediterranean and other countries around as legionaries, including
>blacks, does history relate how many black people remained around in
>Europe at the time? I suspect not, but it's certainly not impossible
>that William The Conker's page was a black, just unlikely.

It's also possible that if history doesn't recall which people were
black, it's because in those days nobody cared. Alternatively, maybe
what we would call racism today was an unspoken attitude so deeply
ingrained in everyone that nobody assumed it was worth mentioning in
any written records.

It would be interesting to see a properly researched account of the
truth of this subject, rather than the all too frequent attempts to
weave somebody's bigoted viewpoint into works of fiction. The more we
let entrenched feelings rather than evidence or logic govern what can
be said or seen, the more difficult it is to know what we can trust,
which does no service to anyone of any colour.

Rod.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 18:04:48 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:

>Anyone with any *REAL* sense is a *LOT* more cautious. Take a look at
>the stats, they all look exactly like the beginning of the second wave,
>and suggest that we are now entering a third. Most worryingly:
> Nation R-Number
> England 1.2-1.4
> Scotland 1.2-1.4
> NI 0.9-1.2
> Wales 0.8-1.0 The only nation with an acceptable level

I've yet to see a convincing explanation of where this magic "R"
number comes from, or how anyone thinks it can be known with any
accuracy. I understand that it's defined as the average number of
people who become infected by any individual who is already infected
(something like loop gain or secondary emission ratio, to translate it
into electronic terms) but I also see a lot of doubt and confusion
about how accurately we determine who is infected, who has been in
contact with whom, and what people really died from. If the raw data
is questionable, then the same can surely be said of anything derived
or estimated from it.

Rod.

On 18/06/2021 09:41, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 18:04:48 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Anyone with any *REAL* sense is a *LOT* more cautious. Take a look at
>> the stats, they all look exactly like the beginning of the second wave,
>> and suggest that we are now entering a third. Most worryingly:
>> Nation R-Number
>> England 1.2-1.4
>> Scotland 1.2-1.4
>> NI 0.9-1.2
>> Wales 0.8-1.0 The only nation with an acceptable level
>
> I've yet to see a convincing explanation of where this magic "R"
> number comes from, or how anyone thinks it can be known with any
> accuracy. I understand that it's defined as the average number of
> people who become infected by any individual who is already infected
> (something like loop gain or secondary emission ratio, to translate it
> into electronic terms) but I also see a lot of doubt and confusion
> about how accurately we determine who is infected, who has been in
> contact with whom, and what people really died from. If the raw data
> is questionable, then the same can surely be said of anything derived
> or estimated from it.

There's not much actual detail, but ...

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-r-value-and-growth-rate
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52473523

None of which alters the fact that unfortunately this thing is not as
'over' as people want to believe.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 18:04:48 +0100
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>On 17/06/2021 14:41, MrSpook_xphzu9V3d@16xcsz.edu wrote:
>>
>> Anyone with any sense is anti lockdown and anti mask now. Its not 2020
>anymore.
>
>Anyone with any *REAL* sense is a *LOT* more cautious. Take a look at

Go hide under the bed wearing your PPE wetwipe, meanwhile the rest of us will
go back to normal. I'm sick to death of your sort and I'm tired of these
debates.

>Because it's irrelevant. Stay in after school and write out 1,000
>times: "A statistical sample of one in insignificant, even if it
>happens to be called Sweden!"

And happens to be an entire country. Whatever. Thats probably what some people
said when covid broke out in china , only 1 country.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 19:29:30 +0100
MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>On 17/06/2021 17:01, MrSpook_dvgz8@vxkc45_bdcprf.co.uk wrote:
>> I remember a few years back there was a docudrama about the Norman conquest
>> with Dan Snow. They hired a black actor to play William the conquerers page.
>> Thats when I realised the mainstream channels had jumped the shark and now
>> existed mainly to push a political viewpoint. I switched off.
>
>Also annoying is when they find a reference to one person in a large
>army who could have been black and next thing we are being told that
>most of the army was black.

And when filming out and about, particularly in schools, they'll film and
interview the ethnics and ignore the majority white kids. The BBC is
particularly good at this.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 20:05:06 +0100
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>On 17/06/2021 19:29, MB wrote:
>> On 17/06/2021 17:01, MrSpook_dvgz8@vxkc45_bdcprf.co.uk wrote:
>>> I remember a few years back there was a docudrama about the Norman
>>> conquest
>>> with Dan Snow. They hired a black actor to play William the conquerers
>>> page.
>>> Thats when I realised the mainstream channels had jumped the shark and
>>> now
>>> existed mainly to push a political viewpoint. I switched off.
>
>On the face of it, this doesn't seem realistic, but, not forgetting that
>the Romans marching all over Europe moved many people from various
>Mediterranean and other countries around as legionaries, including
>blacks, does history relate how many black people remained around in
>Europe at the time? I suspect not, but it's certainly not impossible
>that William The Conker's page was a black, just unlikely.

In the intervening 600 years they'd have interbred with the white natives
and vanished as an ethnic group. Plus the romans had north africans in their
legions, not sub saharan negros. Any suggestion there were any negros whatsoever
in the norman invasion, never mind as close staff of the king, is so beyond
absurd no sane person would countenance it.

>> Also annoying is when they find a reference to one person in a large
>> army who could have been black and next thing we are being told that
>> most of the army was black.
>
>This sounds like stereotypical bias, which programme, when broadcast?

https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=dan+snow+docudrama+1066

On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 21:13:41 +0100
Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 18:31 17 Jun 2021, Java Jive said:
>> ... but the simple truth is that your political bigotry prevents you
>> seeing the truth, and so you have to bore the arse off everyone here
>> by raking it all over again. That horse has been flogged to death
>> already, and you're wrong, get used to it.
>
>Mr Spook evidently doesn't let facts get in the way of his beliefs.
>
>Covid deniers and anti-vaxxers badly needed a country which had
>miraculously avoided deaths from the virus by doing nothing and Sweden
>was force-fitted into this role.

You only need 1 example to prove a theory - ie that lockdown and all the
other restrictions were and are pointless. But hey, inconvenient facts eh?

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 10:13:04 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:

>On 18/06/2021 09:41, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 18:04:48 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone with any *REAL* sense is a *LOT* more cautious. Take a look at
>>> the stats, they all look exactly like the beginning of the second wave,
>>> and suggest that we are now entering a third. Most worryingly:
>>> Nation R-Number
>>> England 1.2-1.4
>>> Scotland 1.2-1.4
>>> NI 0.9-1.2
>>> Wales 0.8-1.0 The only nation with an acceptable level
>>
>> I've yet to see a convincing explanation of where this magic "R"
>> number comes from, or how anyone thinks it can be known with any
>> accuracy. I understand that it's defined as the average number of
>> people who become infected by any individual who is already infected
>> (something like loop gain or secondary emission ratio, to translate it
>> into electronic terms) but I also see a lot of doubt and confusion
>> about how accurately we determine who is infected, who has been in
>> contact with whom, and what people really died from. If the raw data
>> is questionable, then the same can surely be said of anything derived
>> or estimated from it.
>
>There's not much actual detail, but ...
>
>https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-r-value-and-growth-rate
>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52473523
>
>None of which alters the fact that unfortunately this thing is not as
>'over' as people want to believe.

I've stayed mostly at home for over a year and now had both my
vaccinations, so as far as I'm concerned it *is* over, otherwise what
was the point of the vaccinations? I'm over 70 so don't know how much
time I've got left, but I'd rather *live* the rest of my life than
waste it cowering in terror from something that is very unlikely to
kill me. There's no escape from the fact that something is going to
kill me one day anyway, but I don't think it will be this.

If I go out and about, anyone else I meet will be either already
vaccinated themselves, or too young to need to worry (and probably
attending school), or will have made their own choice about the risks
they are prepared to take.

Rod.

On 18/06/2021 10:19, MrSpook_l5k_yp@khn7w6f4x3x_g.gov wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 20:05:06 +0100
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 17/06/2021 19:29, MB wrote:
>>> On 17/06/2021 17:01, MrSpook_dvgz8@vxkc45_bdcprf.co.uk wrote:
>>>> I remember a few years back there was a docudrama about the Norman
>>>> conquest
>>>> with Dan Snow. They hired a black actor to play William the conquerers
>>>> page.
>>>> Thats when I realised the mainstream channels had jumped the shark and
>>>> now
>>>> existed mainly to push a political viewpoint. I switched off.
>>
>> On the face of it, this doesn't seem realistic, but, not forgetting that
>> the Romans marching all over Europe moved many people from various
>> Mediterranean and other countries around as legionaries, including
>> blacks, does history relate how many black people remained around in
>> Europe at the time? I suspect not, but it's certainly not impossible
>> that William The Conker's page was a black, just unlikely.
>
> In the intervening 600 years they'd have interbred with the white natives
> and vanished as an ethnic group.

Not necessarily.

> Plus the romans had north africans in their
> legions, not sub saharan negros.

Again, not necessarily. Slavery has moved people against their will
around the world from prehistory until the present day. The Vikings
took slaves from the British Isles; in medieval times Mediterranean
slavers came out through the straits of Gibralter and raided Atlantic
coastal towns as far away as Britain. In particular, African tribes
have been taking slaves since prehistory - it was a preexisting trade
that was industrialised by Britain and converted into the infamous
transatlantic slave trade - and remnants of slavery still linger in
Africa today, for example in the kidnapping of children to enslave in
the cocoa trade, concerning which, as it happens, there's a news item
today. The slave trade could have introduced black people to Europe for
the Romans to take on as legionnaires, or the Romans could have bought
black slaves from Arab traders, and then later set them some of them
free. All this is at very least perfectly possible, perhaps even probable.

> Any suggestion there were any negros whatsoever
> in the norman invasion, never mind as close staff of the king, is so beyond
> absurd no sane person would countenance it.

As above, not necessarily, AFAIAA there is no hard evidence either way.

>>> Also annoying is when they find a reference to one person in a large
>>> army who could have been black and next thing we are being told that
>>> most of the army was black.
>>
>> This sounds like stereotypical bias, which programme, when broadcast?
>
> https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=dan+snow+docudrama+1066

Specifically to the point, I watched that when first broadcast, and in
no way was I led to believe that most of the Norman invasion was black.

More generally, that's the sort of reason I don't like that style of
dramatised documentary, because important points of history get lost in
people's perception of the drama, rather than concentration on the
actual history. They tend to corrupt history in the same that war films
do, though admittedly to a lesser extent.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 18/06/2021 10:20, MrSpook_g42aadw@wcjf.net wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 21:13:41 +0100
> Pamela <pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 18:31 17 Jun 2021, Java Jive said:
>>> ... but the simple truth is that your political bigotry prevents you
>>> seeing the truth, and so you have to bore the arse off everyone here
>>> by raking it all over again. That horse has been flogged to death
>>> already, and you're wrong, get used to it.
>>
>> Mr Spook evidently doesn't let facts get in the way of his beliefs.
>>
>> Covid deniers and anti-vaxxers badly needed a country which had
>> miraculously avoided deaths from the virus by doing nothing and Sweden
>> was force-fitted into this role.
>
> You only need 1 example to prove a theory - ie that lockdown and all the
> other restrictions were and are pointless. But hey, inconvenient facts eh?

"The earth is a habitable planet, therefore all other planets must be
habitable also." I think not.

Your grasp of logic, even numeracy, let alone statistics, are all
virtually non-existent.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 18/06/2021 11:24, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 10:13:04 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 18/06/2021 09:41, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 18:04:48 +0100, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Anyone with any *REAL* sense is a *LOT* more cautious. Take a look at
>>>> the stats, they all look exactly like the beginning of the second wave,
>>>> and suggest that we are now entering a third. Most worryingly:
>>>> Nation R-Number
>>>> England 1.2-1.4
>>>> Scotland 1.2-1.4
>>>> NI 0.9-1.2
>>>> Wales 0.8-1.0 The only nation with an acceptable level
>>>
>>> I've yet to see a convincing explanation of where this magic "R"
>>> number comes from, or how anyone thinks it can be known with any
>>> accuracy. I understand that it's defined as the average number of
>>> people who become infected by any individual who is already infected
>>> (something like loop gain or secondary emission ratio, to translate it
>>> into electronic terms) but I also see a lot of doubt and confusion
>>> about how accurately we determine who is infected, who has been in
>>> contact with whom, and what people really died from. If the raw data
>>> is questionable, then the same can surely be said of anything derived
>>> or estimated from it.
>>
>> There's not much actual detail, but ...
>>
>> https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-r-value-and-growth-rate
>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52473523
>>
>> None of which alters the fact that unfortunately this thing is not as
>> 'over' as people want to believe.
>
> I've stayed mostly at home for over a year and now had both my
> vaccinations, so as far as I'm concerned it *is* over, otherwise what
> was the point of the vaccinations? I'm over 70 so don't know how much
> time I've got left, but I'd rather *live* the rest of my life than
> waste it cowering in terror from something that is very unlikely to
> kill me. There's no escape from the fact that something is going to
> kill me one day anyway, but I don't think it will be this.
>
> If I go out and about, anyone else I meet will be either already
> vaccinated themselves, or too young to need to worry (and probably
> attending school), or will have made their own choice about the risks
> they are prepared to take.

Yes, yes, we've heard these selfish arguments ad nauseam already, but
the *FACTS* are as I outlined them. For the current level of about
11,000 cases a day and rising, the current death rate is a third of what
it was last time we had a similar case rate and rising, which was at the
end of September 2020. The cumulative death toll was then 42,458, now
it's 127,945, which means that 85,487 died in the second wave. If we
assume that the current figures are typical of what is to come, then we
should expect that a third of that figure would die in a third wave,
which would be another 28,946 deaths.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 18/06/2021 10:13, MrSpook_hsx@xlb9ds0j4zezapmmx3obln04.tv wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 18:04:48 +0100
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 17/06/2021 14:41, MrSpook_xphzu9V3d@16xcsz.edu wrote:
>>>
>>> Anyone with any sense is anti lockdown and anti mask now. Its not 2020
>> anymore.
>>
>> Anyone with any *REAL* sense is a *LOT* more cautious. Take a look at
>
> Go hide under the bed wearing your PPE wetwipe,

Again abuse rather than rational argument.

> meanwhile the rest of us will
> go back to normal.

No matter how you like to bluster and bolsh it, actually the rest of you
will do what you are told to do by the government, and that is continue
the lockdown for another month.

> I'm sick to death of your sort and I'm tired of these
> debates.

Then why do you keep re-igniting them only to lose them again?

>> Because it's irrelevant. Stay in after school and write out 1,000
>> times: "A statistical sample of one in insignificant, even if it
>> happens to be called Sweden!"
>
> And happens to be an entire country.

An entire country that is very different in many important respects from
this entire country, as you have been told countless times before.

> Whatever. Thats probably what some people
> said when covid broke out in china , only 1 country.

That may have been what some people like you said, but not anyone who
applied any real thought to the matter.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk