RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Lock them up!
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 8487



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/21/21 6:32 am    ::: Lock them up! Reply Reply with quote

The Daily Mail got a hold of some of Hunter Biden's laptop files and found out that

Quote:
former FBI directory Louis Freeh gave $100,000 to a private trust for Joe Biden's grandchildren and spoke with the then vice president in 2016 'to explore lucrative future work options' with Hunter as the middle man.


Freeh was also a former judge. His ethics sound on the money for a judge and FBI director.

Quote:
The 71-year-old (Freeh), who served as FBI director under Bill Clinton and George Bush, ran a consultancy firm with highly controversial clients including a now-jailed Malaysian prime minister who stole billions of dollars from his country, a Romanian real estate tycoon convicted of bribery, and a French-Israeli diamond magnate later convicted of bribery and a $145 million property graft.


This story is likely banned on Facebook and Twitter as only the New York Post is running it in the USA. Their story on Hunter Biden leaving the laptop at the repair shop (his interview story is that it could have been stolen, his laptop could have been hacked, or it could be 'Russian Intelligence') was killed on social media in the fall. And only FoxNews and the New York Post interviewed and talked about Tony Bobulinkski about the messages between them and the deals the Biden's were doing with him.


PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 15682
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/21/21 11:23 am    ::: Re: Lock them up! Reply Reply with quote

I don't believe anything that any Murdoch news source says about anything. Full stop.


jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20862



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/21/21 11:53 am    ::: Re: Lock them up! Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:
I don't believe anything that any Murdoch news source says about anything. Full stop.


That was fine… when the rest of the mainstream media was still invested in reporting the objective (as it were) truths. But the information and facts world we’re living in now is very often upside down.

For instance, the lab leak hypothesis is out of the bag now. It’s coming soon to a brain near you like it or not. After over a year of it being so unmentionable and considered irrefutably racist Trump rabble it is now being discussed openly as an ever more likely scenario for how a dark ages level pandemic that has killed probably tens of millions already and with no end in sight came to be.

BUT, as of yet, the most prominent public voices espousing the lab leak storyline are Mike Pompeo and Republicans in Congress.

What are you gonna do? lol. We are REALLY and TRULY now living in a world where those who have been given the great privilege and accompanying opportunities to provide the people with facts and truth and leadership are in such a perpetual political tug of war that they literally can’t admit to facts that we all desperately need to have in our possession. Neither side cares. Or the way I should probably put it to those who might be stuck in 2010 thinking, neither side cares NOW.

It really used to be better. And it’s never been worse than it is now. The pandemic really revealed the depths we have sunk to in terms of media, information, and political leadership.



_________________
Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 13623
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/21/21 4:03 pm    ::: Re: Lock them up! Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
The Daily Mail got a hold of some of Hunter Biden's laptop files and found out that
Quote:
former FBI directory Louis Freeh gave $100,000 to a private trust for Joe Biden's grandchildren and spoke with the then vice president in 2016 'to explore lucrative future work options' with Hunter as the middle man.

Freeh was also a former judge. His ethics sound on the money for a judge and FBI director.
Quote:
The 71-year-old (Freeh), who served as FBI director under Bill Clinton and George Bush, ran a consultancy firm with highly controversial clients including a now-jailed Malaysian prime minister who stole billions of dollars from his country, a Romanian real estate tycoon convicted of bribery, and a French-Israeli diamond magnate later convicted of bribery and a $145 million property graft.

Hmmmm....
Quote:

Freeh was not involved in their corruption offenses or implicated in the charges against them

I see you neglected to include THIS snippet along with the others. Rolling Eyes
tfan wrote:
This story is likely(?) banned on Facebook and Twitter as only the New York Post is running it in the USA.

Your supposition, or is there any real evidence to that effect? Cuz....sometimes social media doesn't choose to give oxygen to things that are unsubstantiated, like they don't post "The Election Was Stolen" as a real idea.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20862



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/21/21 5:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

They also were banning people on Twitter Howee during the last year who were asserting the possibility of a lab leak. Sure. Unsubstantiated to this very moment. But we don’t know the answer at this point and social media platforms taking a stand on one hypothesis over another to the point of banning private citizens voicing their belief in one over the other is a GREAT example of how egregious this sort of thing is becoming.

And, of course, should the lab leak hypothesis become the lab leak theory and then the lab leak fact then we should all (I know I’m dreaming) then understand how a bias in both the news media and on social media platforms, reflecting a large very vocal trend of resistance to the last guy and everything he said or stood for, how that all got in the way of our sources of information, the news media, and our resources of exchanging information amongst ourselves on social media, allowing for the truth to be tabled, discussed, and explored.

I say the truth. If it turns out that way. The truth. With bodies piling up by the tens of millions. Wasn’t even allowed to be discussed. If that doesn’t send chills up your spine I don’t know what would.



_________________
Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 8487



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/21 7:05 am    ::: Re: Lock them up! Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
tfan wrote:
The Daily Mail got a hold of some of Hunter Biden's laptop files and found out that
Quote:
former FBI directory Louis Freeh gave $100,000 to a private trust for Joe Biden's grandchildren and spoke with the then vice president in 2016 'to explore lucrative future work options' with Hunter as the middle man.

Freeh was also a former judge. His ethics sound on the money for a judge and FBI director.
Quote:
The 71-year-old (Freeh), who served as FBI director under Bill Clinton and George Bush, ran a consultancy firm with highly controversial clients including a now-jailed Malaysian prime minister who stole billions of dollars from his country, a Romanian real estate tycoon convicted of bribery, and a French-Israeli diamond magnate later convicted of bribery and a $145 million property graft.

Hmmmm....
Quote:

Freeh was not involved in their corruption offenses or implicated in the charges against them


I see you neglected to include THIS snippet along with the others. Rolling Eyes


I don't care if he was convicted or arrested. Giving $100,000 to Biden's grandchildren was enough, but I decided to add a bit extra about the type of people the judge/FBI-man - who doesn't need money - is content to do business with. And I see you neglected to include THIS snippet along with the others. Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes

Quote:
Freeh brought up the idea again a month later – and mentioned that he was working for the then-Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak, who was in the midst of a scandal over one of the world's biggest financial frauds, and was later sentenced to 12 years in prison in 2020.


Howee wrote:
tfan wrote:
This story is likely(?) banned on Facebook and Twitter as only the New York Post is running it in the USA.

Your supposition, or is there any real evidence to that effect? Cuz....sometimes social media doesn't choose to give oxygen to things that are unsubstantiated, like they don't post "The Election Was Stolen" as a real idea.


I said "it is likely". You can't come back with "is that your supposition?" In the words of your guy Joey B. : Come on, man!! I know you were trying to hit the ball towards the idea that they didn't block it because it was damaging to Biden, but because it was unsubstantiated. But that isn't much of a difference. If it was about Trump and unsubstantiated it wouldn't have been blocked. Nothing about Russia-gate was off limits. Someone could and can make any kind of connection between Trump and Putin and Trump and Russia that they want to. In fact, has it ever happened that people were banned from saying unsubstantiated things about Trump (or a prominent Republican)? But social meda may also work based off of what the Democratic media is doing - and they are not touching anything with regard to the Hunter laptop other than to give him a few softball questions while he promotes his book.

But if it was Trump it would be fully substantiated since the the FBI (who has the laptop) would be leaking the most damaging contents of that hard drive directly to the press. And they would be interviewing Tony Bobulinski, the person mentioned in the emails on the laptop who came forward and substantiates what had been leaked (by I think Giuliani).




Last edited by tfan on 05/22/21 8:10 am; edited 2 times in total
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 8487



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/21 7:55 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
They also were banning people on Twitter Howee during the last year who were asserting the possibility of a lab leak. Sure. Unsubstantiated to this very moment. But we don’t know the answer at this point and social media platforms taking a stand on one hypothesis over another to the point of banning private citizens voicing their belief in one over the other is a GREAT example of how egregious this sort of thing is becoming.

And, of course, should the lab leak hypothesis become the lab leak theory and then the lab leak fact then we should all (I know I’m dreaming) then understand how a bias in both the news media and on social media platforms, reflecting a large very vocal trend of resistance to the last guy and everything he said or stood for, how that all got in the way of our sources of information, the news media, and our resources of exchanging information amongst ourselves on social media, allowing for the truth to be tabled, discussed, and explored.

I say the truth. If it turns out that way. The truth. With bodies piling up by the tens of millions. Wasn’t even allowed to be discussed. If that doesn’t send chills up your spine I don’t know what would.


I have been planning to do a thread on the lab leak fiasco. I mentioned before how it originally was "made in a lab and released/escaped" but after people claimed definitively (possibly all based off a nature article by a few folks) that the virus was not man made, you hear very little man-made talk. Almost all just "lab leak". But Democrats still dismissed any suggestion of "lab leak" with "it isn't man made!!", as if natural viruses brought into and being studied at the Wuhan Institute of Virology couldn't infect the workers.

And now it turns out that they actually do play around with these viruses in what is euphemistically titled gain of function research, purposely making viruses more adaptable to humans.

From the Alliance for Human Research Protection:

Quote:
Ostensibly, GoF research is conducted for biodefense purposes. These experiments, however, are extremely dangerous. Those deadly science-enhanced pathogens can, and do escape into the community where they infect and kill people. What’s more, this line of research can be used for biological warfare.


And I saw an article the other day where some (I think retired) virus expert thinks that the virus was manipulated in a lab. He mentioned specific characteristic(s) of the virus that were different than the similar viruses they were seeing in nature. And a group of scientists wrote an article asking for the lab leak theory to be studied. Followed by another group requesting the same thing.

The crazy thing is that with all the folks, including the WHO (but not the head) saying that extremely unlikely to have been a lab leak and that it is very likely a zoonotic (virus jumps from animal to human) event, there is zero evidence to support that theory. It is still a hypothesis, despite it being generally accepted as the cause. I read they tested 80,000 animals in China and haven't found any that have the SARS-2 virus.

But since China took at least a month and a half to admit the virus was transmissible human-to-human, destroyed the wet market, and won't let anyone in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, it's no wonder that we have to speculate about the origin. And yet, China won't get even a slap on the hand for their behavior.

One odd thing about the "zoonotic event inside wet market is the most likely cause" claims - the same people don't appear to be calling for the world to ban "wet markets".


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 13623
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/21 3:59 pm    ::: Re: Lock them up! Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
Howee wrote:
tfan wrote:
The Daily Mail got a hold of some of Hunter Biden's laptop files and found out that
Quote:
former FBI directory Louis Freeh gave $100,000 to a private trust for Joe Biden's grandchildren and spoke with the then vice president in 2016 'to explore lucrative future work options' with Hunter as the middle man.

Freeh was also a former judge. His ethics sound on the money for a judge and FBI director.
Quote:
The 71-year-old (Freeh), who served as FBI director under Bill Clinton and George Bush, ran a consultancy firm with highly controversial clients including a now-jailed Malaysian prime minister who stole billions of dollars from his country, a Romanian real estate tycoon convicted of bribery, and a French-Israeli diamond magnate later convicted of bribery and a $145 million property graft.

Hmmmm....
Quote:

Freeh was not involved in their corruption offenses or implicated in the charges against them


I see you neglected to include THIS snippet along with the others. Rolling Eyes


I don't care if he was convicted or arrested. Giving $100,000 to Biden's grandchildren was enough, but I decided to add a bit extra about the type of people the judge/FBI-man - who doesn't need money - is content to do business with. And I see you neglected to include THIS snippet along with the others. Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes
Quote:
Freeh brought up the idea again a month later – and mentioned that he was working for the then-Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak, who was in the midst of a scandal over one of the world's biggest financial frauds, and was later sentenced to 12 years in prison in 2020.

Freeh is 'working for' someone who ends up with criminal convictions: that DOESN'T make Freeh guilty, just as your selected source declares -- whether you approve or not.
So clearly, you don't CARE about relevance: "not involved" exonerates Freeh from what you're trying to frame him for. He can give $100,000 to whomever he wants; that might approach doing something 'unethical', but that's far different from 'illegal'. (And *I* didn't have any OBLIGATIONS to include -- or neglect to include -- any evidentiary snippets....YOU were the one trying to build a case, and didn't offer ALL the evidence clearly.)

tfan wrote:
Howee wrote:
tfan wrote:
This story is likely(?) banned on Facebook and Twitter as only the New York Post is running it in the USA.

Your supposition, or is there any real evidence to that effect? Cuz....sometimes social media doesn't choose to give oxygen to things that are unsubstantiated, like they don't post "The Election Was Stolen" as a real idea.


I said "it is likely". You can't come back with "is that your supposition?" In the words of your guy Joey B. : Come on, man!! I know you were trying to hit the ball towards the idea that they didn't block it because it was damaging to Biden, but because it was unsubstantiated. But that isn't much of a difference.

It's an ENORMOUS difference. Look, it's obvious you're uber-eager to pull a "Nyah, Nyah! YOUR Guy's evil, TOO" -- enjoy yourself, along with all the "Big Lie" folks, etc.

And re: the Origins of Covid....WHAT'S THE POINT, ANYMORE?? Even IF China might be found culpable, do you really think they'll make amends, and pay everybody back for their time and trouble? They'll never concede it, there'll be no compensation, AND it can never bring back all the lost lives our government might have saved by reacting differently. It's really just academic at this point.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20862



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/21 4:39 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee. You really can’t think of any reason, maybe even a life and death to millions of people critical reason, why the world needs to really REALLY learn the absolute truth of how exactly point by point this coronavirus pandemic happened?

You have to be shitting us.



_________________
Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17
FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 2485



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/21 6:48 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

There's no more evidence to support the lab leak theory than the bat cave theory at this point. There are many political players who have ulterior motives to push one agenda or the other. I think it's quite plausible that the truth will never be known with anything approaching certainty.

A lot more is going to be known and remembered about the aftermath, which includes the US's complete f-up in managing the pandemic at home and lack of support for other countries. Lives lost in the US were largely due to our own incompetence by our leaders and stupidity and selfishness by our general public. While we're debating this lab issue, China is shipping huge amounts of vaccines to Latin America and Asia while we've done squat (they even chartered the Patriots' jet to do it, but that's another story). Our credibility in this pandemic is not improving.

The long game here is to strengthen WHO's ability to investigate and manage emerging diseases and to support the development of vaccines and treatments for future outbreaks. Lab leaks have happened before and will probably happen again. EID from animals have happened before and will undoubtedly happen again. We need to quit wasting our time on political wrangling and be proactive and productive or the next outbreak won't be any better handled than this one.


tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 8487



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/21 7:02 pm    ::: Re: Lock them up! Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:

Freeh is 'working for' someone who ends up with criminal convictions: that DOESN'T make Freeh guilty, just as your selected source declares -- whether you approve or not.
So clearly, you don't CARE about relevance: "not involved" exonerates Freeh from what you're trying to frame him for. He can give $100,000 to whomever he wants; that might approach doing something 'unethical', but that's far different from 'illegal'. (And *I* didn't have any OBLIGATIONS to include -- or neglect to include -- any evidentiary snippets....YOU were the one trying to build a case, and didn't offer ALL the evidence clearly.)


Be careful about creating strawmen and then triumphantly arguing against them. When I said "ethics" I meant "ethics". I didn't mean "has been convicted of criminal behavior". I "built my case" about unethical behavior and then you decided to proclaim that I had left out evidence with regard to your strawman.

Howee wrote:
tfan wrote:
Howee wrote:
tfan wrote:
This story is likely(?) banned on Facebook and Twitter as only the New York Post is running it in the USA.

Your supposition, or is there any real evidence to that effect? Cuz....sometimes social media doesn't choose to give oxygen to things that are unsubstantiated, like they don't post "The Election Was Stolen" as a real idea.


I said "it is likely". You can't come back with "is that your supposition?" In the words of your guy Joey B. : Come on, man!! I know you were trying to hit the ball towards the idea that they didn't block it because it was damaging to Biden, but because it was unsubstantiated. But that isn't much of a difference.


It's an ENORMOUS difference. Look, it's obvious you're uber-eager to pull a "Nyah, Nyah! YOUR Guy's evil, TOO" -- enjoy yourself, along with all the "Big Lie" folks, etc.


"isn't much of a difference" was a poor choice of words. The point I subsequently made was clearly: the Democratic media and Democratic social media giants only care about "unsubstantiated" if it is in regard to Democrats. Nothing got blocked - at least neither you nor I can think of anything - from Democratic social media or the Democratic media regarding Trump or a prominent Republican because it was unsubstantiated. So "we blocked because it was unsubstantiated (and they never covered even after Tony Bobulinski substantiated it)" is as ultimately weak as "we blocked because a Democrat was involved" since they have a double standard in both cases.

Regarding people fighting the Big Lie, have you conceded that Russiagate was a hoax?

I do think Biden is sleazy politician. Don't know where he ranks on the scale, but right now he is at the #1 podium so is going to take the hits. And you only need one quote to show how he's not the nice grandpa he was portrayed as during the election: "It's like Jim Crow on steroids!!" People also don't appear to notice that Biden single-handedly killed the #MeToo movement.


Howee wrote:
And re: the Origins of Covid....WHAT'S THE POINT, ANYMORE?? Even IF China might be found culpable, do you really think they'll make amends, and pay everybody back for their time and trouble? They'll never concede it, there'll be no compensation, AND it can never bring back all the lost lives our government might have saved by reacting differently. It's really just academic at this point.


No point in finding out how a global pandemic started? I guess we don't need to worry about another global pandemic occurring.

China is already guilty of failing to inform the world when they should have (their first identified case was December 1st, 2019 and they disciplined or reprimanded doctors for talking about a new dangerous virus online at the end of December), and sticking with a "only transmissible animal-to-human" even though the first, and many of the early cases had no connection to the wild animal market. They should be sanctioned and punished for that behavior and if they were Iran or Venezuela we would happily do that. But we gave them as many manufacturing jobs as we could and they are also now a wealthy nation with global power. So it won't happen.




Last edited by tfan on 05/22/21 11:07 pm; edited 9 times in total
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 13623
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/21 7:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
Howee. You really can’t think of any reason, maybe even a life and death to millions of people critical reason, why the world needs to really REALLY learn the absolute truth of how exactly point by point this coronavirus pandemic happened?

You have to be shitting us.


No, I cannot, and No, I AM not. Razz

Please tell me what Positive Goodness will come of knowing precisely where/how it started.

FrozenLVFan wrote:
There's no more evidence to support the lab leak theory than the bat cave theory at this point ..... We need to quit wasting our time on political wrangling and be proactive and productive or the next outbreak won't be any better handled than this one.


This.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 62965
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/21 7:08 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
Please tell me what Positive Goodness will come of knowing precisely where/how it started.


That's generally the first step in preventing it from happening again



_________________
The power of the police to fulfill their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behavior, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 13623
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/21 7:14 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
Please tell me what Positive Goodness will come of knowing precisely where/how it started.


That's generally the first step in preventing it from happening again


You mean, "....from happening THIS WAY again?" Cuz it doesn't seem like there was any forensic evidence from 1918's outbreak that helped this time....was there? Certifying that it originated in China (wet market or lab) will not necessarily prevent it from happening again in 10 months or 10 years in Laos or Peru or Burundi.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 8487



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/21 7:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
Please tell me what Positive Goodness will come of knowing precisely where/how it started.


That's generally the first step in preventing it from happening again


You mean, "....from happening THIS WAY again?" Cuz it doesn't seem like there was any forensic evidence from 1918's outbreak that helped this time....was there? Certifying that it originated in China (wet market or lab) will not necessarily prevent it from happening again in 10 months or 10 years in Laos or Peru or Burundi.


THIS WAY has generic components that don't require identical situations: [virus brought into lab and infected worker, virus made more dangerous to humans in lab and infected worker, or virus brought into market via wild animal]. If Laos, Peru or Burundi island have labs performing "gain of function" work on viruses to make them more effective in infecting humans, it would be nice to know if that is how this one started so the United Nations/WHO could address labs purposely making viruses more harmful to humans. And ditto even if they just are going out and getting viruses off of bats and other animals and bringing them back to their Laotian, Peruvian and Burundian labs to study. It would be helpful for the world to know if China released SARS-Cov-2 by getting if off a bat hundreds of miles away and then infecting a lab worker in a city of 14 million. The United Nations/WHO would have a good case to outlaw "gain of function" research, or make "virology labs" be way outside population centers. And they would have a good case to make "virology labs" subject to international control and inspection.

And if they have wild animal markets in Laos, Peru or Burundi, it would also be helpful for the world to know that a global pandemic started from live/dead wild animals being sold at a city market. The United Nations could at that point have a good case to ban wild animal markets.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 62965
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/21 7:53 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
And if they have wild animal markets in Laos, Peru or Burundi, it would also be helpful for the world to know that a global pandemic started from live/dead wild animals being sold at a city market. The United Nations could at that point have a good case to ban wild animal markets.


They don't necessarily need to be banned. Some safety regulations may be all that's needed. The US has dozens, perhaps hundreds, of wet markets.



_________________
The power of the police to fulfill their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behavior, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect
FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 2485



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/21 8:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
Howee wrote:
pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
Please tell me what Positive Goodness will come of knowing precisely where/how it started.


That's generally the first step in preventing it from happening again


You mean, "....from happening THIS WAY again?" Cuz it doesn't seem like there was any forensic evidence from 1918's outbreak that helped this time....was there? Certifying that it originated in China (wet market or lab) will not necessarily prevent it from happening again in 10 months or 10 years in Laos or Peru or Burundi.


THIS WAY has generic components that don't require identical situations: [virus brought into lab and infected worker, virus made more dangerous to humans in lab and infected worker, or virus brought into market via wild animal]. If Laos, Peru or Burundi island have labs performing "gain of function" work on viruses to make them more effective in infecting humans, it would be nice to know if that is how this one started so the United Nations/WHO could address labs purposely making viruses more harmful to humans. And ditto even if they just are going out and getting viruses off of bats and other animals and bringing them back to their Laotian, Peruvian and Burundian labs to study. It would be helpful for the world to know if China released SARS-Cov-2 by getting if off a bat hundreds of miles away and then infecting a lab worker in a city of 14 million. The United Nations/WHO would have a good case to outlaw "gain of function" research, or make "virology labs" be way outside population centers. And they would have a good case to make "virology labs" subject to international control and inspection.

And if they have wild animal markets in Laos, Peru or Burundi, it would also be helpful for the world to know that a global pandemic started from live/dead wild animals being sold at a city market. The United Nations could at that point have a good case to ban wild animal markets.


This is exactly the point. Any and all of those routes are possible sources for an EID. Pinpointing the one in this case and ignoring the others is absolutely pointless as well as dangerous. We need to be prepared for ALL of them.

The WHO now has nearly zero power to investigate, outlaw, or otherwise effect any changes unless they are invited in by a sovereign nation. The UN can't "ban" wild animal markets (removing food sources from the hungry is truly a first world solution). Trying to get the countries with either susceptible native animal populations or level-4 labs on board to agree to strengthen the WHO is not going to be made any easier by accusing China now and wasting time and resources. The blame game is not helpful. I don't recall we were all this self-righteous when 2 German labs leaked Marburg nearly simultaneously, and the UK probably has the worst safety record on the planet. Our own CDC has accidentally shipped out live anthrax and bird flu, and the NIH failed to secure smallpox samples it wasn't even supposed to have.

Glass houses.


jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20862



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/21 3:25 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Absolutely ludicrous conversation.

In the fairly recent past, meaning something most of us might remember, politically slanted news that was so obvious as to be at times laughable was something associated with Fox News. My point was that that's no longer the case and I used the treatment of the lab leak hypothesis by the non-Fox News mainstream news media as an example of how we now have no reliable news resources that aren't curated according to current politically acceptable narratives.

I wasn't trying to start another debate surrounding the lab leak itself. Just like in the last thread, I was only offering my opinion on the sorry state of the American news media.

And, and But. I'm sorry I used the lab leak as an example. Again. Because I would have rather not read what I've read here and find myself compelled to respond to it. It's hard for me to do this because I have so little respect for what I've read that it is a challenge for me to respond here without just losing it.

When an airplane goes down, even a private plane with one person on board, the NTS will investigate. When it's a commercial aircraft with five or 150 people on board, the NTS will do a painstaking months-long investigation to determine what caused that plane to crash. Was it a problem with the plane, a mechanical failure? Was it weather conditions? Or was it pilot error? We have to know so we can adjust our practices so that it doesn’t happen again.

Same with a boating accident or a building or bridge that collapses. The large brush fires that scorch California.

This pandemic has been the most significant historic event in most of our lives.

Eight million reported deaths as of yesterday world wide and most people thinking about this suggest that that figure is likely much much higher.

So we have a death toll in the last year and a half that hasn't been equaled by any world event in over 75 years. We want to know things about how 10-20 million people perished from this earth in a year and a half. We wanted to know how WWII started. Why a plane crashed. First and foremost because it is a GIVEN that human beings demand answers to those kinds of questions. But the more practical reason is because it is hoped that by knowing how a terrible thing happened we might avoid it happening again.

Is medical research somehow exempt from such examinations into something that might have been human error that resulted in tens of millions of fatalities?

How about this? Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it? Ever heard that one?

So, probably approaching 15-20 million dead worldwide so far, what IF this holocaust of death and misery and economic destruction was manufactured intentionally in a medical research lab? What if a handful of human beings, scientists intending only to do good, conceived of, funded, built and set in motion the kind of gain of function research that created a super bug that doesn't exist in nature? And, as we know has happened over and over again in such medical research labs, the pathogen escaped the lab?

So THAT would not be a critical piece of historical information? How did modern science kill 20 million people exactly? Not important? Nothing to be gained here by knowing?

This isn't about a blame game. US, the mighty USA, fixing blame on China. Like there's just two countries in this world. This is about fixing causation for a human catastrophe unlike anything we've ever seen in our lives. And ongoing. Do you think Brazilians don't want to know how this happened? That people in India don't want to know how this happened? These countries will be demanding answers for decades if they don't get any.

Technically, either of the prevailing scenarios, wet market, or lab leak, are caused by human action. So KNOWING which HUMAN ACTION caused the wiping out of tens of millions of human lives, either one, or the other, would be something ANY lucid, honest, clear thinking person, would instinctively recognize as being critically important.

If scientists who were trying to prepare for a pandemic by creating viruses that have been adapted to do things that in nature they are not capable of doing, i.e. gain of function research, and then they let one of their experimental viruses escape the lab and cause the COVID-19 pandemic, killing tens of millions of people in the process, then KNOWING that this is what happened would allow bodies to come together to either de-emphasize GOF research in the future or make it outright illegal according to international law. CERTAINLY we could get the United States out of the business of supercharging natural viruses in this way, and pressure anyone still doing this kind of research to stop, etc. All of these things.

If the lab leak scenario is indeed what happened then the experiment was the actual CAUSE of tens of millions of deaths. That would mean that this type of experimentation has been PROVEN to be too dangerous for the human race to proceed with in the near future. In fact, if this is what happened, common sense and one look at the death toll might convince anyone with a lick of sense that maybe never taking up this type of research again would be a more appropriate path forward for the human race.

So, Howee. You ask what positive goodness could come from determining how this happened? I would suggest international pressure to stop GOF research on viruses would be positive goodness.

And if it was a wet market then certainly science can investigate what exactly happened in that transmission and infections and how best to prevent it all from happening again. Science has been doing that now for centuries. From Pasteur onward. Of course in order to do that we must first KNOW exactly what happened.

Anything about how hard or expensive that is or whether a sovereign nation can stop the WHO from coming into their country to investigate is really stunning to read. Yeah, China's not cooperating and they're not going to. That's a given. It doesn't mean that the actual source of this coronavirus will not BE investigated. It will remain THE medical mystery of our age until science is able to trace this virus back to its source. I have no doubt that that this will happen. I can see that the political razor wire surrounding this topic has come down somewhat and the conversations are becoming more open.

Academics are going to become less afraid of having their careers destroyed by actually looking into the possibility of a lab leak and I think that even without setting feet on the ground in China they will be able to eliminate either the lab leak or the wet market based on actually being able to finally have these discussions among themselves. Right now and for the past year those kinds of conversations have only been happening behind closed doors and clearly that's starting to open up and I predict there's going to be consensus answer one way or the other within a year or two at the most.



_________________
Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20862



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/21 11:05 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Again, in criticism of the mainstream media and specifically the New York Times I will again, against my better judgement but in the interest of killing two birds with one stone, use the lab leak possibility.

Fauci ‘not convinced’ COVID developed naturally, backs investigation

Dr. Anthony Fauci, a top adviser to President Biden on the coronavirus pandemic, said he’s “not convinced” the deadly virus developed naturally and has called for further investigations into where it emerged.

Fauci was asked during a Poynter event, “United Facts of America: A Festival of Fact-Checking,” earlier this month about whether he was confident that COVID-19 developed naturally.

“No actually. I am not convinced about that. I think we should continue to investigate what went on in China until we continue to find out to the best of our ability what happened,” Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, said, according to Fox News.

“Certainly, the people who investigated it say it likely was the emergence from an animal reservoir that then infected individuals, but it could have been something else, and we need to find that out. So, you know, that’s the reason why I said I’m perfectly in favor of any investigation that looks into the origin of the virus,” he added.

So here’s the problem with our media. This story is taken from the shameless New York Post. A search on Fauci in the New York Times does not produce these quotes or anything on his assertions that he’s not convinced that the virus came about naturally.

Fauci thinks it’s important to find out the truth. But our mainstream media won’t follow him there. Won’t report his thoughts to the public. If you don’t peruse a shit rag like the Post you wouldn’t know any of this.



_________________
Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6887
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/21 12:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
Is medical research somehow exempt from such examinations into something that might have been human error that resulted in tens of millions of fatalities?


Sadly:

Yes, if the examinations might give credence to something that Donald Trump ever said, suggested, hinted, or guessed -- or even if mainstream/social media falsely imagine he ever did.

Yes, if the examinations might contradict mainstream/social media political narratives -- because politics, not history or science or any form of epistemological truth, is the primary agenda for getting readers, viewers, clicks, likes, and ratings in today's divisive cultural climate.

Yes, if the "expert" people most likely to do the examinations are self-interested or conflicted -- because their incomes, their federal grant money, their academic or bureaucratic or business careers, their self-identities or egos, or their reputations would be jeopardized by unearthing the facts.
FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 2485



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/21 3:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
Is medical research somehow exempt from such examinations into something that might have been human error that resulted in tens of millions of fatalities?


Sadly:

Yes, if the examinations might give credence to something that Donald Trump ever said, suggested, hinted, or guessed -- or even if mainstream/social media falsely imagine he ever did.

Yes, if the examinations might contradict mainstream/social media political narratives -- because politics, not history or science or any form of epistemological truth, is the primary agenda for getting readers, viewers, clicks, likes, and ratings in today's divisive cultural climate.

Yes, if the "expert" people most likely to do the examinations are self-interested or conflicted -- because their incomes, their federal grant money, their academic or bureaucratic or business careers, their self-identities or egos, or their reputations would be jeopardized by unearthing the facts.


Oversight and media reporting are entirely dependent on the country involved.


GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6887
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/21 4:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

FrozenLVFan wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
Is medical research somehow exempt from such examinations into something that might have been human error that resulted in tens of millions of fatalities?


Sadly:

Yes, if the examinations might give credence to something that Donald Trump ever said, suggested, hinted, or guessed -- or even if mainstream/social media falsely imagine he ever did.

Yes, if the examinations might contradict mainstream/social media political narratives -- because politics, not history or science or any form of epistemological truth, is the primary agenda for getting readers, viewers, clicks, likes, and ratings in today's divisive cultural climate.

Yes, if the "expert" people most likely to do the examinations are self-interested or conflicted -- because their incomes, their federal grant money, their academic or bureaucratic or business careers, their self-identities or egos, or their reputations would be jeopardized by unearthing the facts.


Oversight and media reporting are entirely dependent on the country involved.


To some degree, yes. I'm commenting on the U.S. However, I'm also of the opinion that my second and third points apply, more or less, to just about any country or international organization, most especially China and the WHO.
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20862



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/21 5:41 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Breaking news on CNN right now. I’ll make a video.



_________________
Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20862



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/21 3:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/AXiqIK8WRNc" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>



_________________
Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6887
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/21 4:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

There are two issues related to Covid-19 virus origin.

The first is whether the origin was a "natural" one, jumping from bats to humans in a wet meat market in Wuhan, China, or whether it was a man-made virus that leaked from a laboratory.

The second issue is why the man-made origin hypothesis has been so aggressively suppressed and censored, especially by U.S. mainstream and social media. I have given my opinions above as to why this suppression is being done -- not because of scientific or historic facts, but simply because of raw politics.

But let's go back to the origin issue and the natural vs. man-made/leak hypotheses. At the outset, common sense seems clear. You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes or Saga Norén to have a strong initial suspicion as to which hypothesis makes by far the most Occam's Razor sense.

How likely is it that of all the wet animal markets in China, in all of Asia, in all the world, that the very first human infections just start by chance in Wuhan, China, a thousand miles away from the natural habit of the suspected bat hosts?

. . . versus . . .

The likelihood that SARS-CoV-2 escaped from China's only biosafety level-4 laboratory right next to the first victims in Wuhan, and where that very bat virus is known not only to have been experimented with for years, under China's "batwoman", Shi Zhengli, but also experimented with specifically to make it more highly infectious to humans ("gain of function" experimentation).

The man-made/escape hypothesis is a no-brainer as a circumstantial evidence first assumption, and should be the logical presumption until proved otherwise by scientific or historical facts.

Of course, China will not disclose the facts in its possession, which are likely conclusive of the issue.

But several independent scientists, including at least one Chinese expatriate (Li-Meng Yan), have come out in favor of the man-made/escape hypothesis, as has virologist and former head of the CDC, Robert Redfield, and the former Covid testing czar, Doctor/Admiral Brett Giroir. Of course, these opinions have been widely suppressed, censored or ridiculed for many months, especially those expressed by legitimate scientists who were part of the Trump administration, by politicized media as well as by academics and government bureaucrats who are self-interested, financially entangled or who have other conflicts of interest.

I think the virulent pandemic of politically motivated truth and opinion suppression in the U.S., regarding Covid and a cornucopia of other important subjects, is a more deadly long-term disease than Covid-19 for the survival of our liberal culture and country.
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin