Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
by Bernard (bernard) on Sat Jan 2nd, 2021 at 06:50:31 PM EST
23 January 2020: Wuhan and the surrounding Hubei province enters lockdown.

Wuhan marks its anniversary with triumph and denial - BBC

On 23 January last year, the Chinese authorities severed transport links out of Wuhan and confined the city's population to their homes.

The tough lockdown coincided with the annual spring festival celebrations and came too late to prevent the global spread of the disease - five million people had already left the city ahead of the holiday.

Doctors' warnings had gone unheeded and, in an outpouring of anger on the Chinese internet, the authorities stood accused of covering up the initial outbreak in the interests of political stability.

One year on, there's little sign of that anger in Wuhan today. In fact it's the humdrum normality that is striking - the traffic jams, the bustling markets and busy restaurants.

by Bernard (bernard) on Sat Jan 23rd, 2021 at 02:01:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Just like Boris and the 12 week wait between vaccinations.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
by ATinNM on Sat Jan 23rd, 2021 at 05:39:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

by generic on Sat Jan 23rd, 2021 at 05:56:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
23 January 2020: First COVID case in Europe.

In Bordeaux, Laurent Chu was the first Covid patient in Europe

It is, officially, the first Covid patient in Europe.

The Bordeaux native of Chinese origin Laurent Chu, 49, sales advisor in the wine world, was hospitalized on January 23, 2020 at the Bordeaux University Hospital, while returning from Wuhan, the focus of the epidemic in China, in the part of his work.

His Covid was officially declared the next day, January 24.

A year later, he tells how he "trembled" from his isolation room, seeing "the panic of the world".

"I didn't infect anyone," he insists.

I was the first patient, yes, but I did not infect anyone, "he said in an interview with the daily Sud Ouest on Friday.

Transferred to the Bordeaux University Hospital, in the infectious diseases department of infectious disease specialist Denis Malvy, Laurent Chu found himself 25 days in an isolation room, in intensive care, once the Covid was confirmed.

"We did not know the disease at that time, explains Professor Denis Malvy at 20 Minutes, we did not have information on the level of contagiousness, so we treated the very first patients in negative pressure rooms.

This is why we placed him in a sheave, with maximum precautions, since we dressed as if it were an Ebola, whereas from February this type of patient was taken care of on an outpatient basis... "

"They didn't know how to treat me," recalls "patient zero".

by Bernard (bernard) on Sat Jan 23rd, 2021 at 02:13:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Thu Jan 28th, 2021 at 08:10:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

'Sapere aude'
by Oui (Oui) on Tue Feb 2nd, 2021 at 06:54:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
or California's commission (AB-3121) because that might evoke judiciabl grievances brought to Congress by descendants of US slaves, subjected to federal violations of the Alien Tort Act of 1789 and 300 years of apartheid crime in the several states.

What was the question?
Did the President and Congress go beyond their war powers by implementing exclusion and restricting the rights of Americans of Japanese descent?

1944 Korematsu v. United States
6-3, "No"

1980 Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians, report and recommendations to the US Congress, 1983
notably, #3

1984 Korematsu v. United States, US District Court for the Northern District of California

A writ of coram nobis is an appropriate remedy by which the court can correct errors in criminal convictions where other remedies are not available.
The government has, however, while not confessing error, taken a position tantamount to a confession of error. It has eagerly moved to dismiss without acknowledging any specific reasons for dismissal other than that "there is no further usefulness to be served by conviction under a statute which has been soundly repudiated." (R.T. 13:20-22, November 10, 1983). In support of this statement, the government points out that in 1971, legislation was adopted requiring congressional action before an Executive Order such as Executive Order 9066 can ever be issued again; that in 1976, the statute under which petitioner was convicted was repealed; and that in 1976, all authority conferred by Executive Order 9066 was formally proclaimed terminated as of December 31, 1946. While these are compelling reasons for concluding that vacating the conviction is in the best interests of this petitioner, respondent and the public, the court declines the invitation of the government to treat this matter in the perfunctory and procedurally improper manner it has suggested.

On the other hand, this court agrees that it is not necessary to reopen the partially healed wounds of an earlier period in order to perform its role of conducting independent judicial review. Fortunately, there are few instances in our judicial history when courts have been called upon to undo such profound and publicly acknowledged injustice. Such extraordinary instances require extraordinary relief, and the court is not without power to redress its own errors.
The Commission found that military necessity did not warrant the exclusion and detention of ethnic Japanese. It concluded that "broad historical causes which shaped these decisions [exclusion and detention] *1417 were race prejudice, war hysteria and a failure of political leadership." As a result, "a grave injustice was done to American citizens and resident aliens of Japanese ancestry who, without individual review or any probative evidence against them, were excluded, removed and detained by the United States during World War II."

by Cat on Tue Feb 2nd, 2021 at 03:09:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series