Mrs Roops

Rather reminiscent of WWII, cabinet makers and joinery sheds churning out mosquitos...

Interesting, which countries have stated this? I don't know whether its sad or endearing the way you flit from one tangent to another each time a fake news assertion is refuted.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52135816

On the contrary, WHO Sitrep no.3 23/01/2020 mentions in its summary, --o0o-- Questions are being asked as to why WHO have not been critical of China's early dishonesty. It may have something to do with China being WHO's second largest financial contributor and that they pay their subs on time. The largest, The USA, is notably late on two annual payments which are still outstanding...OTOH, The World Health Organisation role is to collate and report on the facts as they are known and to give best public health advice and should not be involved in passing politicised opinion and judgement.

No one is doubting China's tardiness is reporting a new strain of pneumonia of unknown etiology and your FOX-type op-ed piece doesn't sit with the fact that on the 12th January China had made available the genetic sequence of Covid-19 so countries could make specific diagnostic kits so clearly everyone knew that this could be transmitted from human to human. We've all seen Trump disagree with his own experts (he did it again on Friday re face masks) and play down the seriousness of the situation. This is not a time to spin out false optimism.

He won an out of court settlement.

I'm well aware of China's appalling human rights record, but you seem to have flown off a tangent. The issue was American politicians advocating prosecuting their Chinese counterparts, remember? You know, the story that you thought was fake news. AFAIK, Huawei is not responsible for the crisis in China. I realise you think Trump is the second coming and is clearing up after Clinton, Bush and Obama but the fact is that in May 2018 your hero disbanded the National Security Council's and the Department of Homeland Security's entire global health security units. For good measure he also reduced the headcount from 49 to 10 of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. After the Ebola scare Obama charged the three govt agencies to develop policies and procedure in the event of another health pandemic. This also included stockpiling medical equipment and PPE. Your boy pared it back. Since covid-19 came to international attention Trump initially called "hoax" then he told his country there was nothing to worry about as coronavirus would "magically disappear". Once he realised the game was up he commenced on his daily spin blaming everyone one but himself for America's lack of preparedness. As I recall he gave himself a ten out of ten.

The difficulty with that argument is that for the first two years of President Trump's term the Republicans had control of both Houses. It wasn't 'til January last year that the GOP lost control of the House of Representatives. I take your point for the present situation but Trump and the Republicans run the risk of being accused of getting priorities wrong. There is the understandable notion that the administration were not only slow off the ball but they gave out what can only be charitably described as mixed messages at the outset of the crisis. With eleven Republican Governors yet to issue lockdown measures and a distinct lack of federal leadership, questions would be rightfully asked as to whether politicians should concentrate on sorting issues closer to home rather than making empty gestures in seizing assets of Chinese government individuals accused of suppressing information that should have been made available to the world. Its a good distraction but the "well known companies" have very little to do with the Chinese leadership's and bureaucrats non-disclosure.

There is a lot of misconception about US Presidential executive orders as many Presidents have found to their cost. Executive Orders are no more than formal instructions to government departments and agencies and such directives are only legitimate if the president has been mandated by congressional legislation. This is why his executive order to "build the wall" came unstuck in a hurry - Congress wouldn't give him the money and Trump was forced to go to the Supreme Court to allow him to siphon some cash from the Defense (sic) budget to fund building a small section of wall.

Just to clarify, the American legislature, "Congress" comprises of a lower house, "The House of Representatives" and the upper house, "The Senate". Either house can introduce legislation except in matters of revenue and taxation which only the HoR can introduce. There is no fast track which can bypass the HoR. Whatever the outcome, this is gesture politics and in all probability be impossible to enforce.

Twice is less than 24 hours. So much for seeking help...

...which sure beats having them 650 miles away.

Not quite there yet, and I still have all my teeth.

You need to sort out your cliché dependency.

Lame and desperate. Move on.

As I previously intimated, sabs come from all walks of life, all socio-economic classes and professions. Whilst there may be the odd student, anarchists are not welcome. Aside from being physically fit, sabs need to be disciplined and focus on the crew's safety, protecting the quarry by any legal means and recording evidence for submission to the authorities with a view to obtaining a criminal conviction. The last thing we need is a sab going rogue by instigating violence. You appear to have a fascination with tory ladies and members of the WI. I won't enquire as to what event in your life piqued your interest but I append an image for your delight and delectation. Regrettably, its not recorded if any of the ladies last experienced carnal knowledge around the time of Goose Green, or indeed were "gagging for it" at the time the photograph being taken.

Ah, the terrier men, usually recruited from estate workers and rural council estates, usually found tearing up and down country roads on quad bikes with terrier boxes, nets and spades fixed to front and back of the their favoured mode of transport. Hunt masters are beginning to rein them in 'cos their predisposition to violence doesn't look good in the on-line PR war.

Slapped you down many times, King Billy. You are the saggy arse.

You really should refrain from making assumptions based on nothing in particular. Anyone can join a hunt so long they have a horse, a little riding skill and some money. Anti-hunt sabs are from all walks of life and are far removed from jam and Jerusalem as can be.

Spooky, I have a compulsive urge to slap people who regurgitate half-baked nonsense gleaned from bonkers YouTube vids.

Yes that remains a mystery. It could be something in the viruses RNA (sic) that makes males more predisposed to contagion or something more prosaic like men paying less attention to personal hygiene. I'm sure the answer will eventually come out in the wash.

Well no to that as you probably know. As for fox-hunting I abhor cruelty to animals. I have no issues with hunting as long as hunters are prepared to eat what they kill. Fox hunting with hounds causes unnecessary suffering in the name of sport and despite what the Countryside Alliance says, provides zero conservation benefits.

Partially correct. Punters are given a bit more leeway but rules concerning paedo allegations and members' families have always been subject to zero tolerance.

This subject was actually addressed by the ONS two day's ago when they issued notes on the disparity between their stats and those issued by the NHS. Yesterday's larger than normal daily death rate was due to the "death at home" data being added to the usual "death in hospital" figs. There will always be a catch-up on reconciling the two sources.