Cyprus-Forum.com

[erolz66]

Army guards? Gee, a bit over the top.

So you would be ok with this if the guards were not armed ? Or would you prefer no guards and no enforcement of the quarantine at all ?

I don't have a problem with 14 days of isolation which covers any incubation period.

So you have no problem with what is actually happening.

What's the worse thing ever is restricting everyone's movement indefinitely until this crisis is over. That could be anything up to 2 years. So basically keeping everyone under house arrest other than shopping for essential items or for work.

What you are 'concerned' about is something that has not happened and that there is no realistic sign will happen - that lock down in it's current form, which is nothing like real 'house arrest' at all, will remain in place for two years ? Have I understood you correctly ? What were you saying about 'media hysteria and exaggeration' before ?

[Paphitis]

Army guards? Gee, a bit over the top.

So you would be ok with this if the guards were not armed ? Or would you prefer no guards and no enforcement of the quarantine at all ?

I don't have a problem with 14 days of isolation which covers any incubation period.

So you have no problem with what is actually happening.

What's the worse thing ever is restricting everyone's movement indefinitely until this crisis is over. That could be anything up to 2 years. So basically keeping everyone under house arrest other than shopping for essential items or for work.

What you are 'concerned' about is something that has not happened and that there is no realistic sign will happen - that lock down in it's current form, which is nothing like real 'house arrest' at all, will remain in place for two years ? Have I understood you correctly ? What were you saying about 'media hysteria and exaggeration' before ?

I said I have no problem with 14 days of isolation. I do have a problem with armed guards.

I do have a problem with ongoing restrictions and isolation and the calls for these restrictions to remain in place indefinitely. I also have a problem with forcing certain groups like the elderly in isolation and only allowing them out to shop.

In my view, all these restrictions must be removed as soon as possible. I am fearful that they will not be, and that life as we know it may change forever.

[erolz66]

I said I have no problem with 14 days of isolation. I do have a problem with armed guards.

So again I ask. If they were not armed would you still have a problem ? Or are you saying you would only be happy with such restriction right now if there were no guards at all of any kind ?

I do have a problem with ongoing restrictions and isolation and the calls for these restrictions to remain in place indefinitely.

Is there a government anywhere that has even suggest such restrictions remain indefinitely ? If there is I have not see it. What there is is a range of views on how long such restrictions should remain and how to transition from them to being in place to them not but NO ONE I know of is talking about keeping them indefinitely.

I also have a problem with forcing certain groups like the elderly in isolation and only allowing them out to shop.

This is what has been happening in the UK and both parts of Cyprus to everyone, if by 'forcing' you mean potential monetary fines for non compliance. I do not know of anyone in uk or Cyprus whop has been imprisoned for breaking these temporary measures. Tomorrow these restrictions are lifting in the part of Cyprus I am in, in line with reduction of reported new cases to zero for a number of days and in a gradual process of opening up things like bars and cafes in addition to just food shops and supermarkets. All hopefully to be done with continued testing and watchfulness as to the impact in terms of new cases and infection spread that might result from this. All this seems entirely sensible to me. None of it is compatible with your 'hysteria' about indefinite restrictions and forcing vulnerable groups in to isolation imo.

In my view, all these restrictions must be removed as soon as possible. I am fearful that they will not be, and that life as we know it may change forever.

The devil is in what you mean by 'possible'. As fast as possible that does not lead to infection rates climbing again. Your worry is about what 'might' happen. Not about what has happened. imo It is not a worry without any grounding but it can and is used as an excuse by those who like to see restrictions lifted regardless of if that leads to an increase in infection spread and rate of such. That is my worry.

[Get Real!]

Not so long ago you were lauding Australia refusing to allow cruise ships to dock in Australia even to let off Australian citizens, let alone any others and condemning such people to remain locked on ships where it was known the virus was spreading. Human rights indeed.

The hypocritical koala caught with its pants down again!

[Paphitis]

Not so long ago you were lauding Australia refusing to allow cruise ships to dock in Australia even to let off Australian citizens, let alone any others and condemning such people to remain locked on ships where it was known the virus was spreading. Human rights indeed.

The hypocritical koala caught with its pants down again!

I just told you I have no issue with the temporary closing of borders or the stopping of cruise ships.

International travel across international borders by air or sea is not a human right. That is up to the country you plan to visit to allow them to enter. They are not citizens.

If we didn't ban these ships, we would be in dire trouble right now, but now, we are standing neck to neck with South Korea.

The Shipping companies tried to defy Australian National Emergency Laws and as a result, captains of these boats have been arrested and charged and another 9 ships were forced to turn around after initially refusing, after the Navy had to intercept them.

Australia takes measures like this for a lot less - such as fruit fly.

What I have an issue with is ongoing restrictions and the complete over reaction internationally for something I am yet to be convinced is more dangerous than any other virus or the common flu.

[Paphitis]

I said I have no problem with 14 days of isolation. I do have a problem with armed guards.

So again I ask. If they were not armed would you still have a problem ? Or are you saying you would only be happy with such restriction right now if there were no guards at all of any kind ?

I do have a problem with ongoing restrictions and isolation and the calls for these restrictions to remain in place indefinitely.

Is there a government anywhere that has even suggest such restrictions remain indefinitely ? If there is I have not see it. What there is is a range of views on how long such restrictions should remain and how to transition from them to being in place to them not but NO ONE I know of is talking about keeping them indefinitely.

I also have a problem with forcing certain groups like the elderly in isolation and only allowing them out to shop.

This is what has been happening in the UK and both parts of Cyprus to everyone, if by 'forcing' you mean potential monetary fines for non compliance. I do not know of anyone in uk or Cyprus whop has been imprisoned for breaking these temporary measures. Tomorrow these restrictions are lifting in the part of Cyprus I am in, in line with reduction of reported new cases to zero for a number of days and in a gradual process of opening up things like bars and cafes in addition to just food shops and supermarkets. All hopefully to be done with continued testing and watchfulness as to the impact in terms of new cases and infection spread that might result from this. All this seems entirely sensible to me. None of it is compatible with your 'hysteria' about indefinite restrictions and forcing vulnerable groups in to isolation imo.

In my view, all these restrictions must be removed as soon as possible. I am fearful that they will not be, and that life as we know it may change forever.

The devil is in what you mean by 'possible'. As fast as possible that does not lead to infection rates climbing again. Your worry is about what 'might' happen. Not about what has happened. imo It is not a worry without any grounding but it can and is used as an excuse by those who like to see restrictions lifted regardless of if that leads to an increase in infection spread and rate of such. That is my worry.

I am ex military but I don't support having personnel out on the streets with arms guarding civilians like criminals. At best, I am supportive of the military taking on duties as part of disaster relief or as in the case in Australia, helping out law enforcement with taking people to their isolation. They are unarmed. No reason at all for them to carry arms of any kind when dealing with the general public.

I have an issue with the restrictions on clubs, pubs, sporting events and forcing people to isolate for no apparent reason. If you come from overseas, then all well and good. Isolate for 14 days. The parameters are clearly defined. In 14 days, it's all over. I have a problem with telling people over the age of 70 to isolate indefinitely or until this is all over. No one knows when it will be over. It could go on for years, but you all made your beds now like good little plebs. Imagine telling a 95 year old to isolate indefinitely. Who is the Government to tell someone like that to stay home until Chy-na Virus is all over? Why can't such a person go about his life in peace for however long they have on planet earth?

Yes I do have an issue with heavy restrictions such as those imposed in Cyprus. I am glad that in Australia, we have not been forced into isolation and apart from Sweden, we probably have the most lax restrictions of any country, unless you have come back home from overseas. That's where it gets a bit tougher, but we accept that.

Our schools have been open, and people who have jobs are still going to work. Only sporting events, restaurants and bars have been closed and personally, I disagree with that. They should have stayed open. Australia would have been just fine, if they didn't stuff up and let in 2 ships. Or rather those 2 ships defied instructions and because they did that, they paid the price for it. 2 captains arrested. Another 9 ships turned around by our Navy. Sends a very clear message to everyone. P&O now facing Federal Court and possible sanctions. They also face heavy fines and the Australian Government sending the bill to these firms for the military response. They don't have to pay, which means, they can strike Australia off their visitors list indefinitely. In other words, such companies who tried every trick in the book to undermine Australia, are no longer welcome here. Coming to Australia (our home) isn't a human right. They are visitors to our home, and as such, when the home owner tells them not to come, they better listen or there will be repercussions.

How dare those imbeciles put our sailors in harms way!

[erolz66]

The discussion point is if such restrictions on our liberty are appropriate. But then you knew that...

Your claim is that you 'seek discussion' on if restrictions like these are appropriate or not. I find that claim dubious. I think there is real chance that despite what you say, you do not really want to discuss such things. That what you really want is just try and reinforce a narrative that they are, by chucking out 'comments' that you think serve that purpose, without any discussion. Do feel free to prove me wrong cyprus47395.html Vote and lay out your case for why you think 14 day quarantine on entry to RoC from UK is not an appropriate measure. That would be discussion.

[cyprusgrump]

The discussion point is if such restrictions on our liberty are appropriate. But then you knew that...

It is a fundamental of liberty that restriction of such by CONSENT is not the same as restriction without consent. No one forced your friends on to a flight that would require them to enter quarantine on arrival. They chose to get on that flight knowing that the quarantine would be a condition on arrival.

So you think that fundamental liberty means that a state should not have the right to require that someone entering the country from a virus hot spot during a global pandemic of this nature, do you ? Cause I did not see much comment from you when USA and countless other places were imposing such restrictions all the way back to January.

Good to see you have given up your sham position of ‘being the seeker of the truth’ at last while the rest of us hold biased, partisan views…

It is clear from your posts and your poll that you do believe that the virus is deadly and the lock-down and subsequent loss of liberty are appropriate measures.

My position has been consistent. I don’t believe the World-wide lock-down and resulting loss of liberty is justified by the World-wide numbers – still less than 4m infected and 1m of those recovered. Many scientists agree and Tim and I have posted links to some of the dissenting voices.

I think media and governments have run a scare campaign that will be very difficult to roll back. People really are scared now and it will have long lasting implications. I saw a petition yesterday to prevent schools re-opening.

My fear is that having given up our liberties so easily it will be very easy for government to take them away again in the future.

As for my friends. Yes, I think it unreasonable that they should be confined in one room for 14 days for the ‘crime’ of returning home to see her dying mother.

Ultimately, as Kiks said in a previous post, only time will tell if these measures and the resulting economic effects have been appropriate or not.

[erolz66]

It is clear from your posts and your poll that you do believe that the virus is deadly and the lock-down and subsequent loss of liberty are appropriate measures.

That the virus is deadly is known. What is unknown is exactly how deadly. I think there is a balance that needs to be struck. On the specific temporary measure of requiring 14 day quarantine for those entering RoC from places like the UK, I do think that measure is appropriate and strikes the right balance. I have yet to see anyone who disagrees with this, other than from you with your 'implied' disagreement in your post about your friends chosing to return to RoC from UK. Even then yopu appear reluctant to just clearly state you think this measure is not appropriate by voting. Why is that ?

My position has been consistent. I don’t believe the World-wide lock-down and resulting loss of liberty is justified by the World-wide numbers – still less than 4m infected and 1m of those recovered. Many scientists agree and Tim and I have posted links to some of the dissenting voices.

]

Your position is consistent but the 'logic' of looking at the worldwide numbers and then when they get past a certain trheshold and only then, should measures be taken, is so fundamentally flawed that there is little point in expanding on why.

My fear is that having given up our liberties so easily it will be very easy for government to take them away again in the future.

A valid fear. The degree to which this happens and can happen is related to the degree of effort people are prepared to take to stop it. We can and have consented to temporary restrictions and we can remove that consent.

As for my friends. Yes, I think it unreasonable that they should be confined in one room for 14 days for the ‘crime’ of returning home to see her dying mother.

But you accept presumably that if 51% do consider such temporary measures appropriate, they should happen. 60 % , 75 % ?

Ultimately, as Kiks said in a previous post, only time will tell if these measures and the resulting economic effects have been appropriate or not.

And the simple reality that you can not apply such measures with 'hindsight' still applies.

[Kikapu]

In most parts of the world, the power is with the people, which “we the people” elect those in the government to handle matters for us domestically and internationally. It is not unreasonable for our elected representatives to take measures such as “lockdowns” to prevent the spread of a virus which is not understood 100% of it’s potential deadliness, therefore, we forgo our liberties for a short while until more is learned and understood. Once we do understand everything on this virus, and not just from governmental sources but also from independent sources, “we the people” are able to decide for ourselves on any future lockdowns if deemed unwarranted based on the results of the present ones, regardless what the government says in order to control our movements, because “we the people” will not accept the government imposing draconian measures unjustly.

Those who believe the present worldwide lockdown is all a ploy to impose the “One World Order” are out of touch with reality of human nature, which is, we never agree on anything 100%, let alone agree to give up on our freedoms and liberties.

In short a message from “we the people” to our elected representatives is, “Fuck me once, shame on you. Fuck me twice, shame on me”! A serious social unrest often lead to revolution and off with their heads!