THREAD: Research Fellow @hu_rdman writes about the attack on Aden airport on Dec 30, 2020, when he and other colleagues narrowly escaped death at what should have been a celebratory occasion welcoming the arrival of the newly formed Yemeni government.
More from Government
The Government is making the same mistakes as it did in the first wave. Except with knowledge.
A thread.
The Government's strategy at the beginning of the pandemic was to 'cocoon' the vulnerable (e.g. those in care homes). This was a 'herd immunity' strategy. This interview is from
This strategy failed. It is impossible to 'cocoon' the vulnerable, as Covid is passed from younger people to older, more vulnerable people.
We can see this playing out through heatmaps. e.g. these heatmaps from the second
The Government then decided to change its strategy to 'preventing a second wave that overwhelms the NHS'. This was announced on 8 June in Parliament.
This is not the same as 'preventing a second wave'.
https://t.co/DPWiJbCKRm
The Academy of Medical Scientists published a report on 14 July 'Preparing for a Challenging Winter' commissioned by the Chief Scientific Adviser that set out what needed to be done in order to prevent a catastrophe over the winter
A thread.
The Government's strategy at the beginning of the pandemic was to 'cocoon' the vulnerable (e.g. those in care homes). This was a 'herd immunity' strategy. This interview is from
Government #coronavirus science advisor Dr David Halpern tells me of plans to \u2018cocoon\u2019 vulnerable groups. pic.twitter.com/dhECJNbmnI
— Mark Easton (@BBCMarkEaston) March 11, 2020
This strategy failed. It is impossible to 'cocoon' the vulnerable, as Covid is passed from younger people to older, more vulnerable people.
We can see this playing out through heatmaps. e.g. these heatmaps from the second
Here are the heatmaps for Covid detected cases, positivity, hospitalizations, and ICU admissions. This is for the week to 3 January 2021.
— Dr Duncan Robertson (@Dr_D_Robertson) January 7, 2021
I have marked a line on 21 September, when SAGE recommended a circuit breaker, so you can see how the situation has deteriorated since then. pic.twitter.com/SEEVgUVK4j
The Government then decided to change its strategy to 'preventing a second wave that overwhelms the NHS'. This was announced on 8 June in Parliament.
This is not the same as 'preventing a second wave'.
https://t.co/DPWiJbCKRm
The Academy of Medical Scientists published a report on 14 July 'Preparing for a Challenging Winter' commissioned by the Chief Scientific Adviser that set out what needed to be done in order to prevent a catastrophe over the winter
One thing civil servants learn is to write things down. Here is @acadmedsci's 14 July report commissioned by @uksciencechief. For the record.
— Dr Duncan Robertson (@Dr_D_Robertson) September 17, 2020
I don't normally do threads like this but I did want to provide some deeper thoughts on the below and why having a video game based on a real world war crime from the same people that received CIA funding isn't the best idea.
This will go pretty in depth FYI.
The core reason why I'm doing this thread is because:
1. It's clear the developers are marketing the game a certain way.
2. This is based on something that actually happened, a war crime no less. I don't have issues with shooter games in general ofc.
Firstly, It's important to acknowledge that the Iraq war was an illegal war, based on lies, a desire for regime change and control of resources in the region.
These were lies that people believed and still believe to this day.
It's also important to mention that the action taken by these aggressors is the reason there was a battle in Fallujah in the first place. People became resistance fighters because they were left with nothing but death and destruction all around them after the illegal invasion.
This is where one of the first red flags comes up.
The game is very much from an American point of view, as shown in the description.
When it mentions Iraqi civilians, it doesn't talk about them as victims, but mentions them as being pro US, fighting alongside them.
This will go pretty in depth FYI.
I couldn't possibly guess why Six Days in Fallujah is being revived at a time when US army recruitment is at an all time low.
— Daniel Ahmad (@ZhugeEX) February 11, 2021
This reboot is from the same people that worked with the FBI and CIA on training systems and is basing its game on excusing US war crimes. pic.twitter.com/5H8vVqKh9s
The core reason why I'm doing this thread is because:
1. It's clear the developers are marketing the game a certain way.
2. This is based on something that actually happened, a war crime no less. I don't have issues with shooter games in general ofc.
Firstly, It's important to acknowledge that the Iraq war was an illegal war, based on lies, a desire for regime change and control of resources in the region.
These were lies that people believed and still believe to this day.
It's also important to mention that the action taken by these aggressors is the reason there was a battle in Fallujah in the first place. People became resistance fighters because they were left with nothing but death and destruction all around them after the illegal invasion.
This is where one of the first red flags comes up.
The game is very much from an American point of view, as shown in the description.
When it mentions Iraqi civilians, it doesn't talk about them as victims, but mentions them as being pro US, fighting alongside them.
