Coronavirus

2,627,275 Views | 20307 Replies | Last: 1 day ago by Werewolf
Packchem91
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to desope24 • 9:39a, 6/2/21
dogplasma said:
" In January, immediately pre-COVID, Trump was already trailing Biden in the polls. His best and maybe only shot at reelection was to downplay the virus..."

Everything in your post is spot on, but I might disagree with this one part. IMO, if Trump had himself jumped into Covid response with full force and become a champion of the cause, I think his re-election chances would have gone up dramatically. Unless you're just saying that it was Trump's own personal belief that he had to dismiss the threat, which was obviously true, since he said as much.
I 100% agree with you DP. In a crisis, people want leadership. They want someone strong, who can tell them what is going on, and what is being done about it. Trump failed there, because he tried to downplay it.

If he'd come out strong, explained what a temporary interruption of the economy (and fun) was needed, but that he was creating these mnfg hubs to get out oxygen supplies and masks, etc....I think the tone -- and his likelihood for convincing some more of the moderates -- to vote for him would have been likely.
What people don't want/need in a crisis is more divisiveness....but we got that.

(and I'll bet some of the folks who'll rip me on this, are the same ones giving Biden / Harris a rightly difficult time for their lack of action on the border crisis).
Reply Quote
1
Civilized
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to desope24 • 9:43a, 6/2/21
dogplasma said:
" In January, immediately pre-COVID, Trump was already trailing Biden in the polls. His best and maybe only shot at reelection was to downplay the virus..."

Everything in your post is spot on, but I might disagree with this one part. IMO, if Trump had himself jumped into Covid response with full force and become a champion of the cause, I think his re-election chances would have gone up dramatically. Unless you're just saying that it was Trump's own personal belief that he had to dismiss the threat, which was obviously true, since he said as much.

Completely agree.

And yes, I'm just saying that Trump erroneously thought his only shot was to champion/prop up the economy and downplay the virus.

I've said multiple times on here in the past that what Trump got completely wrong about COVID was that it was a huge missed opportunity for him to demonstrate leadership through crisis. Think back to 9/11, and how Bush's handling of that event propelled his approval ratings through the roof.

COVID could have been Trump's 9/11, electorally.
Reply Quote
1
Wayland
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:56a, 6/2/21
Quote:
One persistent mistake we make is confusing democracy and liberty. Liberty is the right to govern your own life, your own mind, to make a future as you see fit, with whomever you wish to. Democracy is the will of the majority. Although we live in a place where we have both, the two are not linked. Some autocracies have been astonishingly liberal, and democracies can succumb to tyranny of the majority, and become profoundly illiberal. The idea that we could not discuss the lab-leak hypothesis for over a year represents a failure of scientific liberalism, and possibly the tension between the majority and liberalism. Many scientists on social media may have viewed the lab leak as a hypothesis that would help their political opponent, and pushed to curtail its consideration. Such a gambit was dangerously shortsighted.

Liberalism in science -- the ability to hold and discuss a broad range of views -- is a newborn bird. We hold it in our hands. It matters even more than the right answer. Lab leak is just a salient reminder of how vulnerable that bird is -- and that's the real lesson we need to learn.

I am too lazy to go back and see if this Medpage blog post by Vinay Prasad had been posted here yet, but I finally got around to reading it.

Reply Quote
3
1 edit
Civilized
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Packchem91 • 10:03a, 6/2/21
Packchem91 said:
dogplasma said:
" In January, immediately pre-COVID, Trump was already trailing Biden in the polls. His best and maybe only shot at reelection was to downplay the virus..."

Everything in your post is spot on, but I might disagree with this one part. IMO, if Trump had himself jumped into Covid response with full force and become a champion of the cause, I think his re-election chances would have gone up dramatically. Unless you're just saying that it was Trump's own personal belief that he had to dismiss the threat, which was obviously true, since he said as much.
I 100% agree with you DP. In a crisis, people want leadership. They want someone strong, who can tell them what is going on, and what is being done about it. Trump failed there, because he tried to downplay it.

If he'd come out strong, explained what a temporary interruption of the economy (and fun) was needed, but that he was creating these mnfg hubs to get out oxygen supplies and masks, etc....I think the tone -- and his likelihood for convincing some more of the moderates -- to vote for him would have been likely.
What people don't want/need in a crisis is more divisiveness....but we got that.

(and I'll bet some of the folks who'll rip me on this, are the same ones giving Biden / Harris a rightly difficult time for their lack of action on the border crisis).

100%.

We got divisiveness, along with completely transparent denials of the crisis severity, and attempted shifting of blame for crisis responsibility.

Not a recipe for strong belief in leadership.

He thought calming leadership meant trying to trick Americans into thinking the crisis wasn't severe, rather than having a firm grasp on the seriousness of the virus and the skills to coherently team with government agencies and private industry to defeat it.

The irony was that whether the virus emerged from the lab or the wet market or from eating bat soup, it impacting America was very clearly not Trump's 'fault'. If the virus had emerged from Denmark instead of China, and he spent less time being distracted by the virus origins and more time exhibiting true calming leadership, he'd be in his second term right now. Americans weren't going to hold him responsible for the existence of the virus in our country, just his response to it.

A huge part of Biden's electoral appeal to moderate/independent swing voters was his grasp on the realities of the seriousness of COVID and his willingness to shoot straight with Americans about the crisis.
Reply Quote
2
packgrad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Packchem91 • 10:05a, 6/2/21
Comparing the handling of a novel coronavirus to the border crisis isn't even close to the same. It's basically just trying to appeal to everyone as a centrist. There is nothing similar about the coronavirus and the border and how they should be handled.

It does not matter what Trump did. It would have been framed negatively. He blocked travel to China. Racist/xenophobic. Democrat leaders started appealing to their constituents to go to festivals. He says he didn't want to cause panic, so he was too weak. There is zero effort required to see that it did not matter what he did, it would be framed negatively. Absolutely he could have done some things better, but the goal was not working together to inform the public. The goal was to try to trip up the president and get him out of office.

Civ saying this could have been his 911 is ridiculous. We didn't have a state press back then. They were getting close, but not fully invested in propaganda like they are today. That is revisionist history to pretend 1 the situations are remotely similar and 2 that he would have been written about favorably. Heck we freaking have it on record that major news outlets said that things can be true even if Trump said it. Lol. They are admitting that they manufactured news. If Trump said/did something, they took the opposite position. Hell, just look at coverage of Trump getting ice cream versus Biden getting ice cream.

We still don't have evidence that lockdowns worked. Why would it have been strong for him to do more lockdowns early? Or is the position that Trump being strong on lockdowns would have ended them sooner because the left and their propaganda arm would have been against it? Trump was strong on manufacturing items as they were needed. Do we so easily forget how Trump was going to be responsible for all of the deaths from not having enough ventilators in NY, then they had more than they needed. Same with hospital beds. Same with PPD. Same with vaccines. Strong leadership was never looked for, nor credited. Critiqued leadership is all that was allowed. And unfortunately it seems they had the cdc working as partisans and not scientists.

But I know that doesn't matter, because Trump.

Edit to add. Jumping back to that border crisis comparison, Pence or Trump met with the media everyday to give updates. The current Vice President who was chosen to lead the response to the border crisis hasn't held a PC in 70 days. That would be much bigger news with the previous administration.
Reply Quote
6
1 edit
statefan91
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:04a, 6/2/21
Reply Quote
packgrad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:08a, 6/2/21

Reply Quote
caryking
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Civilized • 12:09p, 6/2/21
Civilized said:
packgrad said:
TheStorm said:
I found the use of the term "revisionist history" especially ironic...


Lol. #notademocrat is going to fight tooth and nail that he was hoodwinked. He's even spouting virus denier nonsense. Just completely eaten up with TDS. The freaking press is even admitting that they misrepresented stories because it came from Trump, but #notademocrat thinks it had nothing to do with the election. Lol.

The press had zero reason to trust Trump carte blanche at that point. There was not good evidence for what he was proclaiming about the Wuhan lab, and he was saying a bunch of obviously erroneous and electorally motivated stuff about the seriousness of COVID.

Trump was an obvious virus denier throughout and especially so early in the crisis when he was trying to control the narrative to maintain consumer confidence and the markets. Not even debatable.

Trump, to Woodward: "To be honest with you, I wanted to always play it down. I still like playing it down. Because I don't want to create a panic."

Trump, to CNBC: "No, not at all. We have it totally under control. It's one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It's going to be just fine."

Trump, on the campaign trail: ""Looks like by April, you know, in theory, when it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away."

Trump presser: "It's going to disappear. One day it's like a miracle it will disappear."

Trump Twitter: "The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA. We are in contact with everyone and all relevant countries. CDC &World Health have been working hard and very smart. Stock Market starting to look very good to me!"

Trump Twitter: ""Gallup just gave us the highest rating ever for the way we are handling the CoronaVirus situation. The April 2009-10 Swine Flu, where nearly 13,000 people died in the U.S., was poorly handled."

Trump presser: ""We're getting rid of this virus. That's what we're doing. That's the best thing we can do. By the way, for the markets, for everything it's very simple, very simple solution. We want to get rid of it. We want to have very as few deaths as possible. This is a horrible thing."

All this BS was obviously false as he was saying it and looks even worse now. This is the guy the media should have been trusting about virus origins, especially coupled with his anti-China stance and a lack of any hard evidence?
At the same time, his senior advisor on the subject is saying the same thing. But, behind the scene (start looking at the email dump yesterday) Fauci and some of his cronies are talking about this virus and trying to push it away from China. Why? Because they are knee deep in the funding...

and read this nugget...

https://thenationalpulse.com/news/covid-looks-engineered-govt-funded-immunologist-told-fauci-in-january-2020/

make sure you read the links in the article... How can a President provide good info to the country when the people supplying information are inept (Fauci, being one)?

At some point, a person may have to research his own info and provide the best guidance they can. Civ makes this look like Trump is all at fault. Perhaps he was doing the best he could given the information he was provided. That is something only the people in the room can attest to..

Dr. Peter Navarro has said repeatedly that he new Fauci was not truthful, in fact, he journaled his thoughts at the time they happened. I have heard him read from them. He did not trust Fauci at all!!!
Reply Quote
2
2 edits
caryking
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Civilized • 12:55p, 6/2/21
Civilized said:
GuerrillaPack said:
Civilized said:
GuerrillaPack said:
Starting to ramp up the pressure to coerce people to take the jabs. How long until governments try to make it mandatory?

Saw today that PR was reopening but limiting indoor seating to only those that have been vaxxed.

It's a business decision, and businesses are subject to the market's opinions about their decision. You have the choice regarding patronizing these businesses, or not.

The government making vaccinations mandatory is a completely different ballgame. The political will just isn't there, nor should it be in my opinion. The government mandating that we put something in our bodies is a bridge too far.


I agree. But if a business refuses services for reasons that Leftists don't like - such as a Christian-owned bakery not wanting to bake a cake for a Sodomite fake wedding- then they raise hell to force businesses to provide service. How would you like it if businesses refused service to vaccinated people, and said they would only serve the unvaccinated?

I wouldn't care. It's that business's prerogative.

Businesses are free to discriminate against smokers, or college grads, or vaxxers, or anti-vaxxers.

Vax status isn't a protected class.
That's where you and I differ... If a business has the right (in which I do) to discriminate, then, it shouldn't make a difference what discrimination they do... screw this whole idea of protected classes. That's what makes cultural wars!!!
Reply Quote
3
Daviewolf83
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:32p, 6/2/21
Staff
Saw a report last night that Moderna is filing paperwork with the FDA for a biologics license for their Covid-19 vaccine. Pfizer filed their paperwork for a biologics license a little over three weeks ago on May 7. According to the FDA, a biologic license "is a request for permission to introduce, or deliver for introduction, a biologic product into interstate commerce." If granted, it would serve as official government approval of the vaccines. It is expected to take several months for regulators to review and approve a biologic license.
Reply Quote Next Staff
Wayland
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:11p, 6/2/21
NC cases continue to drop. Will be interesting to watch the next two days to see if the case decline outpaces the post holiday weekend case shift.

Hospitalizations at 610 with a full 97% reporting. NC COVID ICUs at an all time low of 180. Crossing my fingers that the trend continues and we don't experience much of a Southern summer wave this year.

Although kind of expected, it has been amazing to see the rate of decline of the cases post the April plateau/mini wave. NC cases have decline about 66% in the last month.

Reply Quote
4
Daviewolf83
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Wayland • 3:24p, 6/2/21
Staff
Wayland said:
NC cases continue to drop. Will be interesting to watch the next two days to see if the case decline outpaces the post holiday weekend case shift.

Hospitalizations at 610 with a full 97% reporting. NC COVID ICUs at an all time low of 180. Crossing my fingers that the trend continues and we don't experience much of a Southern summer wave this year.

Although kind of expected, it has been amazing to see the rate of decline of the cases post the April plateau/mini wave. NC cases have decline about 66% in the last month.

I think we are still a few days from seeing the effects of Memorial Day travel and events and it will likely be reflected in the updates early next week, given the reporting lags. I am also hopeful we will not see a Summer bump, but if we do, I expect it to be much lower due to vaccinations. Given the fact this virus has followed some of the virology curves of the past, I will not be surprised if there is a Summer bump that lasts a couple of months.

Of course, I expect the usual suspects to lose their minds if we do see a rise in cases and hospitalizations due to the Summer bump.
Reply Quote Next Staff
1 edit
Packchem91
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to packgrad • 4:50p, 6/2/21
packgrad said:
Comparing the handling of a novel coronavirus to the border crisis isn't even close to the same. It's basically just trying to appeal to everyone as a centrist. There is nothing similar about the coronavirus and the border and how they should be handled.

It does not matter what Trump did. It would have been framed negatively. He blocked travel to China. Racist/xenophobic. Democrat leaders started appealing to their constituents to go to festivals. He says he didn't want to cause panic, so he was too weak. There is zero effort required to see that it did not matter what he did, it would be framed negatively. Absolutely he could have done some things better, but the goal was not working together to inform the public. The goal was to try to trip up the president and get him out of office.

Civ saying this could have been his 911 is ridiculous. We didn't have a state press back then. They were getting close, but not fully invested in propaganda like they are today. That is revisionist history to pretend 1 the situations are remotely similar and 2 that he would have been written about favorably. Heck we freaking have it on record that major news outlets said that things can be true even if Trump said it. Lol. They are admitting that they manufactured news. If Trump said/did something, they took the opposite position. Hell, just look at coverage of Trump getting ice cream versus Biden getting ice cream.

We still don't have evidence that lockdowns worked. Why would it have been strong for him to do more lockdowns early? Or is the position that Trump being strong on lockdowns would have ended them sooner because the left and their propaganda arm would have been against it? Trump was strong on manufacturing items as they were needed. Do we so easily forget how Trump was going to be responsible for all of the deaths from not having enough ventilators in NY, then they had more than they needed. Same with hospital beds. Same with PPD. Same with vaccines. Strong leadership was never looked for, nor credited. Critiqued leadership is all that was allowed. And unfortunately it seems they had the cdc working as partisans and not scientists.

But I know that doesn't matter, because Trump.

Edit to add. Jumping back to that border crisis comparison, Pence or Trump met with the media everyday to give updates. The current Vice President who was chosen to lead the response to the border crisis hasn't held a PC in 70 days. That would be much bigger news with the previous administration.
Right, they were not the same in context. But leadership in crisis is leadership in crisis.

Look, I don't disagree with most of what you say -- I'm a believer the media, as a whole, had a major role in the divisiveness. They don't get a pass here...as I'd posted just yesterday, this lab revision is evidence they allowed emotion to get in the way

But sorry, you'll never convince me that Trump was a good leader thru the worst of the crisis. He suspended flights to China....ok, great. He also ridiculed and mocked those wearing masks (despite almost uniform medical guidance taht it would reduce spread (no one ever said prevent, except those who wanted to attack the message)). As for messaging -- he went on 60 Minutes to convey his message, and basically said he didn't want to tell the people it was serious. WTH? Your job is to keep your people safe. Tell them the truth....that this thing was deadly, and that they should treat it as such. CAlling people weak for wearing masks? That is the opposite of leadership.

But to me, most significantly....people, in times of crisis, want some compassion. He is perhaps the least compassionate person who has ever lead the country at least in the last 4 decades. (I don't know if Obama was really compassionate or not, but holy crap, could he look like he was). Whether it was the fault of the Chinese, Russians, Democrat media moguls, or aliens....at some point we had thousands of Americans dead and families impacted by loss of family members, health, and jobs....and I'm not sure he ever came across as being compassionate for that. And ultimately, that resonates.
If he'd been a compassionate leader, and told Americans to protect themselves and their loved ones, and acted like this thing was real from day one, he'd still be POTUS.

No way to prove that of course, just a gut feel, that those things would have been much more critical than a finely tuned economy.
Reply Quote
5
caryking
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:54p, 6/2/21
Just an FYI: the mask protection is another one that's falling apart.
Reply Quote
2
packgrad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Packchem91 • 5:30p, 6/2/21
Packchem91 said:
packgrad said:
Comparing the handling of a novel coronavirus to the border crisis isn't even close to the same. It's basically just trying to appeal to everyone as a centrist. There is nothing similar about the coronavirus and the border and how they should be handled.

It does not matter what Trump did. It would have been framed negatively. He blocked travel to China. Racist/xenophobic. Democrat leaders started appealing to their constituents to go to festivals. He says he didn't want to cause panic, so he was too weak. There is zero effort required to see that it did not matter what he did, it would be framed negatively. Absolutely he could have done some things better, but the goal was not working together to inform the public. The goal was to try to trip up the president and get him out of office.

Civ saying this could have been his 911 is ridiculous. We didn't have a state press back then. They were getting close, but not fully invested in propaganda like they are today. That is revisionist history to pretend 1 the situations are remotely similar and 2 that he would have been written about favorably. Heck we freaking have it on record that major news outlets said that things can be true even if Trump said it. Lol. They are admitting that they manufactured news. If Trump said/did something, they took the opposite position. Hell, just look at coverage of Trump getting ice cream versus Biden getting ice cream.

We still don't have evidence that lockdowns worked. Why would it have been strong for him to do more lockdowns early? Or is the position that Trump being strong on lockdowns would have ended them sooner because the left and their propaganda arm would have been against it? Trump was strong on manufacturing items as they were needed. Do we so easily forget how Trump was going to be responsible for all of the deaths from not having enough ventilators in NY, then they had more than they needed. Same with hospital beds. Same with PPD. Same with vaccines. Strong leadership was never looked for, nor credited. Critiqued leadership is all that was allowed. And unfortunately it seems they had the cdc working as partisans and not scientists.

But I know that doesn't matter, because Trump.

Edit to add. Jumping back to that border crisis comparison, Pence or Trump met with the media everyday to give updates. The current Vice President who was chosen to lead the response to the border crisis hasn't held a PC in 70 days. That would be much bigger news with the previous administration.
Right, they were not the same in context. But leadership in crisis is leadership in crisis.

Look, I don't disagree with most of what you say -- I'm a believer the media, as a whole, had a major role in the divisiveness. They don't get a pass here...as I'd posted just yesterday, this lab revision is evidence they allowed emotion to get in the way

But sorry, you'll never convince me that Trump was a good leader thru the worst of the crisis. He suspended flights to China....ok, great. He also ridiculed and mocked those wearing masks (despite almost uniform medical guidance taht it would reduce spread (no one ever said prevent, except those who wanted to attack the message)). As for messaging -- he went on 60 Minutes to convey his message, and basically said he didn't want to tell the people it was serious. WTH? Your job is to keep your people safe. Tell them the truth....that this thing was deadly, and that they should treat it as such. CAlling people weak for wearing masks? That is the opposite of leadership.

But to me, most significantly....people, in times of crisis, want some compassion. He is perhaps the least compassionate person who has ever lead the country at least in the last 4 decades. (I don't know if Obama was really compassionate or not, but holy crap, could he look like he was). Whether it was the fault of the Chinese, Russians, Democrat media moguls, or aliens....at some point we had thousands of Americans dead and families impacted by loss of family members, health, and jobs....and I'm not sure he ever came across as being compassionate for that. And ultimately, that resonates.
If he'd been a compassionate leader, and told Americans to protect themselves and their loved ones, and acted like this thing was real from day one, he'd still be POTUS.

No way to prove that of course, just a gut feel, that those things would have been much more critical than a finely tuned economy.



To each their own. I know we share similar feelings on many of this, and disagree on others. That's fine. All that said, it's unfortunate "scientists" and media were more interested in usurping a presidency than showing integrity in their work. That will damage the country more than anything Trump did/didn't do. The media is **** now. Has been for quite a while, but they completely went off the ledge under the previous administration. "Science" is a joke. I said it at the beginning of all of this, the response from the citizenry next time we have an event like this will not be sympathetic to government instruction. The blame for that can be placed almost solely at the feet of "science" and media.
Reply Quote
5
caryking
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to caryking • 5:35p, 6/2/21
pineknollshoresking said:
Just an FYI: the mask protection is another one that's falling apart.




Reply Quote
3
caryking
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Packchem91 • 6:35p, 6/2/21
Packchem91 said:
But sorry, you'll never convince me that Trump was a good leader thru the worst of the crisis.

  • He suspended flights to China....ok, great - actually from China
  • He also ridiculed and mocked those wearing masks (despite almost uniform medical guidance taht it would reduce spread (no one ever said prevent, except those who wanted to attack the message).
  • As for messaging -- he went on 60 Minutes to convey his message, and basically said he didn't want to tell the people it was serious. WTH?
  • Your job is to keep your people safe. Tell them the truth....that this thing was deadly, and that they should treat it as such. CAlling people weak for wearing masks? That is the opposite of leadership.
Ok, let's try and tackle this one...

Think about what the lead medical advisor could have been saying to Trump. Really, just look at my last post showing an email about mask. If I was dealing with a knucklehead like Fauci, I probably would have said... ***? The guy was probably providing advise that's all over the lot.

Never in my lifetime have I seen such a massive misrepresentation of one persons words like has happened to Trump. I think you all owe him a debt of gratitude for dealing with all these hacks!

Messaging: grow up and make your own decisions! That's probably what Trump had to do based on the idiotic advice he was receiving. I'll bet you would flounder (in your own world) when working with hacks like he was.

Truth: he was telling the truth; however, it's only coming now! Why?
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
Packchem91
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to packgrad • 7:18p, 6/2/21
packgrad said:
Packchem91 said:
packgrad said:
Comparing the handling of a novel coronavirus to the border crisis isn't even close to the same. It's basically just trying to appeal to everyone as a centrist. There is nothing similar about the coronavirus and the border and how they should be handled.

It does not matter what Trump did. It would have been framed negatively. He blocked travel to China. Racist/xenophobic. Democrat leaders started appealing to their constituents to go to festivals. He says he didn't want to cause panic, so he was too weak. There is zero effort required to see that it did not matter what he did, it would be framed negatively. Absolutely he could have done some things better, but the goal was not working together to inform the public. The goal was to try to trip up the president and get him out of office.

Civ saying this could have been his 911 is ridiculous. We didn't have a state press back then. They were getting close, but not fully invested in propaganda like they are today. That is revisionist history to pretend 1 the situations are remotely similar and 2 that he would have been written about favorably. Heck we freaking have it on record that major news outlets said that things can be true even if Trump said it. Lol. They are admitting that they manufactured news. If Trump said/did something, they took the opposite position. Hell, just look at coverage of Trump getting ice cream versus Biden getting ice cream.

We still don't have evidence that lockdowns worked. Why would it have been strong for him to do more lockdowns early? Or is the position that Trump being strong on lockdowns would have ended them sooner because the left and their propaganda arm would have been against it? Trump was strong on manufacturing items as they were needed. Do we so easily forget how Trump was going to be responsible for all of the deaths from not having enough ventilators in NY, then they had more than they needed. Same with hospital beds. Same with PPD. Same with vaccines. Strong leadership was never looked for, nor credited. Critiqued leadership is all that was allowed. And unfortunately it seems they had the cdc working as partisans and not scientists.

But I know that doesn't matter, because Trump.

Edit to add. Jumping back to that border crisis comparison, Pence or Trump met with the media everyday to give updates. The current Vice President who was chosen to lead the response to the border crisis hasn't held a PC in 70 days. That would be much bigger news with the previous administration.
Right, they were not the same in context. But leadership in crisis is leadership in crisis.

Look, I don't disagree with most of what you say -- I'm a believer the media, as a whole, had a major role in the divisiveness. They don't get a pass here...as I'd posted just yesterday, this lab revision is evidence they allowed emotion to get in the way

But sorry, you'll never convince me that Trump was a good leader thru the worst of the crisis. He suspended flights to China....ok, great. He also ridiculed and mocked those wearing masks (despite almost uniform medical guidance taht it would reduce spread (no one ever said prevent, except those who wanted to attack the message)). As for messaging -- he went on 60 Minutes to convey his message, and basically said he didn't want to tell the people it was serious. WTH? Your job is to keep your people safe. Tell them the truth....that this thing was deadly, and that they should treat it as such. CAlling people weak for wearing masks? That is the opposite of leadership.

But to me, most significantly....people, in times of crisis, want some compassion. He is perhaps the least compassionate person who has ever lead the country at least in the last 4 decades. (I don't know if Obama was really compassionate or not, but holy crap, could he look like he was). Whether it was the fault of the Chinese, Russians, Democrat media moguls, or aliens....at some point we had thousands of Americans dead and families impacted by loss of family members, health, and jobs....and I'm not sure he ever came across as being compassionate for that. And ultimately, that resonates.
If he'd been a compassionate leader, and told Americans to protect themselves and their loved ones, and acted like this thing was real from day one, he'd still be POTUS.

No way to prove that of course, just a gut feel, that those things would have been much more critical than a finely tuned economy.



To each their own. I know we share similar feelings on many of this, and disagree on others. That's fine. All that said, it's unfortunate "scientists" and media were more interested in usurping a presidency than showing integrity in their work. That will damage the country more than anything Trump did/didn't do. The media is **** now. Has been for quite a while, but they completely went off the ledge under the previous administration. "Science" is a joke. I said it at the beginning of all of this, the response from the citizenry next time we have an event like this will not be sympathetic to government instruction. The blame for that can be placed almost solely at the feet of "science" and media.


I think it was ok that science changes some over time., for this event. I do suspect though that as more emails get published, like Faucci, the general public's distrust of leading science / medical guidance will become even more doubted.
When you get beat over the head for 15 months of "trust the science" and then you see some weird influences on the science.

And yes, unless this event Spurs major corrections on the way the media operates )very unlikely), it will get worse.
Reply Quote
1
packgrad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:44p, 6/2/21
Reply Quote
3
GuerrillaPack
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:49p, 6/2/21
https://instagr.am/p/CPonFxvgnzR
Reply Quote
3
vanuel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:18p, 6/2/21
I saw through Fauci's bullcrap a long time ago. Fauci has been all over the map from day one. The sad thing is that the truth about how all of this went down will never come out because we no longer have a functioning free press, our Congress has been completely dysfunctional forever, corporations have no moral compass whatsoever. I have basically come to the conclusion that the United States is in permanent decline at this point.
Reply Quote
5
Daviewolf83
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:10a, 6/3/21
Staff
Many have wondered why the lab-leak theory to the origin of the coronavirus that causes Covid-19 is now gain traction with the media, politicians, and scientists. It is due to the amazing work of amateur sleuths from around the world. These amateurs did what other researchers, government investigators could not or refused to do. They found obscure and hidden documents that pointed directly to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and the work of Dr. Shi.

You can can read the full account of their work at the link below to a pivotal story just published in Newsweek.

Exclusive: How Amateur Sleuths Broke the Wuhan Lab Story and Embarrassed the Media

From the article, I came away with the following impressions:

1. The mainstream media were too quick to reject the theory and this was due in part to:
a. The fact President Trump advanced the theory and they did not want to give him or his administration any positive press.
b. A reliance on the opinion of Dr. Peter Daszak, who heads the EcoHealth Alliance group. Dr. Daszak, it turns out, purposely worked to mislead journalists and others who would advance the lab-leak theory. He even got 60 Minutes to participate in his attempted cover-up.

2. Based on the pervious information I have read about Dr. Daszak and the additional information contained in this article, the Trump administration was right to end the government's contracts with his organization. If the information in the article is correct, Dr. Daszak should never be allowed to receive any more government money or to conduct viral research in the future.

3. The CCP and the WIV have been engaged in an extensive cover-up of the work of Dr. Shi and the lab for years. Even this past year, they have both worked to hide evidence that would point directly to the WIV as a source of the SARS-Cov-2 virus. The amateur sleuths (and this article) point out the out-right lies and deception of Dr. Shi and the attempts of the CCP to block access to damaging information.

4. We should all be thankful for amateur sleuths who have tremendous abilities to find and mine data across the internet. Without these people, we likely would not have the information we have today that points to the cover-up by the CCP and WIV.

5. The article references the work of Alina Chan on Twitter. I have followed her Tweets for months and I highly recommend you follow her as well, if you are interested in this topic. She has been able to take the work of these determine armatures and explain it in general terms to the masses. The article mentions her work specifically and the importance of it in advancing the story.

6. Based on the actions of the CCP and the WIV to date, there is ZERO chance they will participate in any investigation into the origins of the virus.

7. The investigation into the virus' origins should be lead by the intelligence community and not the scientific community and it should build on the work started by the amateur sleuths. The scientific community and in particular, those who work in this area had a vested interest in downplaying the lab-leak story. It is for this reason, I do not believe they need to have a leadership role in the investigation. .Even today, many in this community are seeking to downplay the lab-leak theory. Why would they do this? Well, there is a chance future research and research dollars will be impacted if the results of the investigation proves the lab-leak theory.
Reply Quote Next Staff
1 edit
TheStorm
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Packchem91 • 6:46a, 6/3/21
Packchem91 said:
packgrad said:
Comparing the handling of a novel coronavirus to the border crisis isn't even close to the same. It's basically just trying to appeal to everyone as a centrist. There is nothing similar about the coronavirus and the border and how they should be handled.

It does not matter what Trump did. It would have been framed negatively. He blocked travel to China. Racist/xenophobic. Democrat leaders started appealing to their constituents to go to festivals. He says he didn't want to cause panic, so he was too weak. There is zero effort required to see that it did not matter what he did, it would be framed negatively. Absolutely he could have done some things better, but the goal was not working together to inform the public. The goal was to try to trip up the president and get him out of office.

Civ saying this could have been his 911 is ridiculous. We didn't have a state press back then. They were getting close, but not fully invested in propaganda like they are today. That is revisionist history to pretend 1 the situations are remotely similar and 2 that he would have been written about favorably. Heck we freaking have it on record that major news outlets said that things can be true even if Trump said it. Lol. They are admitting that they manufactured news. If Trump said/did something, they took the opposite position. Hell, just look at coverage of Trump getting ice cream versus Biden getting ice cream.

We still don't have evidence that lockdowns worked. Why would it have been strong for him to do more lockdowns early? Or is the position that Trump being strong on lockdowns would have ended them sooner because the left and their propaganda arm would have been against it? Trump was strong on manufacturing items as they were needed. Do we so easily forget how Trump was going to be responsible for all of the deaths from not having enough ventilators in NY, then they had more than they needed. Same with hospital beds. Same with PPD. Same with vaccines. Strong leadership was never looked for, nor credited. Critiqued leadership is all that was allowed. And unfortunately it seems they had the cdc working as partisans and not scientists.

But I know that doesn't matter, because Trump.

Edit to add. Jumping back to that border crisis comparison, Pence or Trump met with the media everyday to give updates. The current Vice President who was chosen to lead the response to the border crisis hasn't held a PC in 70 days. That would be much bigger news with the previous administration.
Right, they were not the same in context. But leadership in crisis is leadership in crisis.

Look, I don't disagree with most of what you say -- I'm a believer the media, as a whole, had a major role in the divisiveness. They don't get a pass here...as I'd posted just yesterday, this lab revision is evidence they allowed emotion to get in the way

But sorry, you'll never convince me that Trump was a good leader thru the worst of the crisis. He suspended flights to China....ok, great. He also ridiculed and mocked those wearing masks (despite almost uniform medical guidance taht it would reduce spread (no one ever said prevent, except those who wanted to attack the message)). As for messaging -- he went on 60 Minutes to convey his message, and basically said he didn't want to tell the people it was serious. WTH? Your job is to keep your people safe. Tell them the truth....that this thing was deadly, and that they should treat it as such. CAlling people weak for wearing masks? That is the opposite of leadership.

But to me, most significantly....people, in times of crisis, want some compassion. He is perhaps the least compassionate person who has ever lead the country at least in the last 4 decades. (I don't know if Obama was really compassionate or not, but holy crap, could he look like he was). Whether it was the fault of the Chinese, Russians, Democrat media moguls, or aliens....at some point we had thousands of Americans dead and families impacted by loss of family members, health, and jobs....and I'm not sure he ever came across as being compassionate for that. And ultimately, that resonates.

If he'd been a compassionate leader, and told Americans to protect themselves and their loved ones, and acted like this thing was real from day one, he'd still be POTUS.

No way to prove that of course, just a gut feel, that those things would have been much more critical than a finely tuned economy.
Didn't you and your family travel out west (I presume that you flew) on a major trip (Yellowstone or similar) right in the middle of when these compassionate "powers that be" were advising Americans not to travel (presumably to keep everybody "safe") during the midst of the pandemic about a year ago in June or thereabouts?

I mean we get it. You don't like Trump and you didn't like him before that either and you made that very, very clear in your posts at that time... so please stop trying to prop up Civ's revisionist history "this could have been Trump's 911" post.

It wouldn't have mattered what Trump did and you know it - and so to say otherwise here now is nothing but disingenuous.

The press attacked him and his press secretary beginning DAY 1 non-stop... the first 10 minutes of every single 6:30 PM national news broadcast on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, etc. was nothing but Trump! Trump! Trump! Trump! Trump! (we've got him this time) and Russia! Russia! Russia!
Reply Quote
7
1 edit
TheStorm
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to caryking • 6:52a, 6/3/21
pineknollshoresking said:
pineknollshoresking said:
Just an FYI: the mask protection is another one that's falling apart.




I wonder who exactly might have contacted Fauci and advised him that they needed him to switch his stance on the mask narrative? Don't fool yourselves people, there was an election at stake and election laws that needed to be changed in certain states that could not otherwise be changed...

And in the meantime that "hero" Andrew Cuomo is still the Governor of New York.
Reply Quote
3
desope24
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:11a, 6/3/21
Cloth masks don't stop transmission but they do reduce the "zone of influence" (my term) in situations where you're not confined for long periods of time with other people. I thought that was always the goal. I've never heard anyone say regular masks will prevent transmission.
Reply Quote
2
BBW12OG
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:19a, 6/3/21
You have posters that slurp up the liberal media and hate everything Trump. Especially the ones that chose to travel during the height of the pandemic still regurgitating proven falsehoods.

No need to discuss with idiots like that. None.
Big Bad Wolf. OG...2002

"The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
- Thomas Jefferson
Reply Quote
2
wilmwolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:29a, 6/3/21
There have been plenty of statements and propaganda that at least implied that wearing a mask would protect you from getting Covid. There have been plenty of debates about that in this very thread. I understand the mechanics behind saying that a mask could slow the transmission of Covid, but most of it has been about political theater for quite some time now. Knowing what we know now about the rate of asymptomatic cases being much lower than previously thought, and the risk of those people spreading the virus being low, I think that the wearing of masks by healthy people was fairly pointless, if a relatively harmless act weighed against potentially spreading the virus. I wore and continue to wear my mask as required, but it's very clear that for a segment of this country, wearing masks was virtue signalling, evidenced by how quickly we've gone from people having serious discussions about wearing multiple masks at once, to having mask mandates completely eliminated despite not yet meeting the vaccination goals.
Just a guy on the sunshine squad.
The Gatekeeper.
Homer Dumbarse.
StateFan2001 will probably respond to this because he isn't smart enough to understand how ignore works.
Reply Quote
5
Wayland
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:59a, 6/3/21
Haven't read this whole article yet, but looks like the cover up may be falling apart.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins



Reply Quote
2
BBW12OG
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:01a, 6/3/21
The SOCIALIST PARTY'S propaganda arm is at it in full swing this morning. Their lefty buddies at CNN have already had God Fauci on this morning and he is scheduled to be on there several times in the next few days.

As long as you have the national media outlets covering for him you have to realize that this was and always has been political. Yes, it was a horrible virus. Yes, it was 99% certainly man made with all the information that has come out.

Why does that matter? Instead of uniting the country against a common enemy the lefties and their media minions divided the country and did everything they could do to paint Trump in a bad light. He could have done a better job but the media magnified the divide in the country 100 fold.

Anyone that denies that...well....I'll keep that one to myself.
Big Bad Wolf. OG...2002

"The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
- Thomas Jefferson
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
Packchem91
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TheStorm • 9:24a, 6/3/21
TheStorm said:
Packchem91 said:
packgrad said:
Comparing the handling of a novel coronavirus to the border crisis isn't even close to the same. It's basically just trying to appeal to everyone as a centrist. There is nothing similar about the coronavirus and the border and how they should be handled.

It does not matter what Trump did. It would have been framed negatively. He blocked travel to China. Racist/xenophobic. Democrat leaders started appealing to their constituents to go to festivals. He says he didn't want to cause panic, so he was too weak. There is zero effort required to see that it did not matter what he did, it would be framed negatively. Absolutely he could have done some things better, but the goal was not working together to inform the public. The goal was to try to trip up the president and get him out of office.

Civ saying this could have been his 911 is ridiculous. We didn't have a state press back then. They were getting close, but not fully invested in propaganda like they are today. That is revisionist history to pretend 1 the situations are remotely similar and 2 that he would have been written about favorably. Heck we freaking have it on record that major news outlets said that things can be true even if Trump said it. Lol. They are admitting that they manufactured news. If Trump said/did something, they took the opposite position. Hell, just look at coverage of Trump getting ice cream versus Biden getting ice cream.

We still don't have evidence that lockdowns worked. Why would it have been strong for him to do more lockdowns early? Or is the position that Trump being strong on lockdowns would have ended them sooner because the left and their propaganda arm would have been against it? Trump was strong on manufacturing items as they were needed. Do we so easily forget how Trump was going to be responsible for all of the deaths from not having enough ventilators in NY, then they had more than they needed. Same with hospital beds. Same with PPD. Same with vaccines. Strong leadership was never looked for, nor credited. Critiqued leadership is all that was allowed. And unfortunately it seems they had the cdc working as partisans and not scientists.

But I know that doesn't matter, because Trump.

Edit to add. Jumping back to that border crisis comparison, Pence or Trump met with the media everyday to give updates. The current Vice President who was chosen to lead the response to the border crisis hasn't held a PC in 70 days. That would be much bigger news with the previous administration.
Right, they were not the same in context. But leadership in crisis is leadership in crisis.

Look, I don't disagree with most of what you say -- I'm a believer the media, as a whole, had a major role in the divisiveness. They don't get a pass here...as I'd posted just yesterday, this lab revision is evidence they allowed emotion to get in the way

But sorry, you'll never convince me that Trump was a good leader thru the worst of the crisis. He suspended flights to China....ok, great. He also ridiculed and mocked those wearing masks (despite almost uniform medical guidance taht it would reduce spread (no one ever said prevent, except those who wanted to attack the message)). As for messaging -- he went on 60 Minutes to convey his message, and basically said he didn't want to tell the people it was serious. WTH? Your job is to keep your people safe. Tell them the truth....that this thing was deadly, and that they should treat it as such. CAlling people weak for wearing masks? That is the opposite of leadership.

But to me, most significantly....people, in times of crisis, want some compassion. He is perhaps the least compassionate person who has ever lead the country at least in the last 4 decades. (I don't know if Obama was really compassionate or not, but holy crap, could he look like he was). Whether it was the fault of the Chinese, Russians, Democrat media moguls, or aliens....at some point we had thousands of Americans dead and families impacted by loss of family members, health, and jobs....and I'm not sure he ever came across as being compassionate for that. And ultimately, that resonates.

If he'd been a compassionate leader, and told Americans to protect themselves and their loved ones, and acted like this thing was real from day one, he'd still be POTUS.

No way to prove that of course, just a gut feel, that those things would have been much more critical than a finely tuned economy.
Didn't you and your family travel out west (I presume that you flew) on a major trip (Yellowstone or similar) right in the middle of when these compassionate "powers that be" were advising Americans not to travel (presumably to keep everybody "safe") during the midst of the pandemic about a year ago in June or thereabouts?

I mean we get it. You don't like Trump and you didn't like him before that either and you made that very, very clear in your posts at that time... so please stop trying to prop up Civ's revisionist history "this could have been Trump's 911" post.

It wouldn't have mattered what Trump did and you know it - and so to say otherwise here now is nothing but disingenuous.

The press attacked him and his press secretary beginning DAY 1 non-stop... the first 10 minutes of every single 6:30 PM national news broadcast on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, etc. was nothing but Trump! Trump! Trump! Trump! Trump! (we've got him this time) and Russia! Russia! Russia!
Yellowstone. You should try it....maybe you wouldn't be son angry all the time! IIRC, they'd actually just started allowing flights a month or so before with restrictions, but it was certainly a bit worrisome to hop on a fully loaded plane. But hey, I stayed busy going out to restaurants and shopping and vacations even thru Covid -- I figured i could control my own actions as a natural social distancer to stay safe.

We can agree to disagree on Trump's ability to be re-elected. Media hurt, but he p'd down his own leg way too many times.
Reply Quote
1
Packchem91
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to wilmwolf • 9:28a, 6/3/21
wilmwolf80 said:
There have been plenty of statements and propaganda that at least implied that wearing a mask would protect you from getting Covid. There have been plenty of debates about that in this very thread. I understand the mechanics behind saying that a mask could slow the transmission of Covid, but most of it has been about political theater for quite some time now. Knowing what we know now about the rate of asymptomatic cases being much lower than previously thought, and the risk of those people spreading the virus being low, I think that the wearing of masks by healthy people was fairly pointless, if a relatively harmless act weighed against potentially spreading the virus. I wore and continue to wear my mask as required, but it's very clear that for a segment of this country, wearing masks was virtue signalling, evidenced by how quickly we've gone from people having serious discussions about wearing multiple masks at once, to having mask mandates completely eliminated despite not yet meeting the vaccination goals.
I completely agree with this. The ultimate virtue signaling though was all the people who ran to social media to update their profile pics to show them with a mask. Jeez louise.

I'm not as all-in on the political drivers as some in this thread (they do exist though).....but the CDC's sudden flip -- which caught pretty much everyone off guard, was eye opening.
Reply Quote
1
Daviewolf83
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Wayland • 9:52a, 6/3/21
Staff
Wayland said:
Haven't read this whole article yet, but looks like the cover up may be falling apart.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins



The cover-up was going on as recently as a few weeks ago when The Elf was questioned by Senator Paul. He stated his organization did not fund "gain of function" research at the Wuhan lab which we know from actual documents was a lie.

The link to the article I posted above provides some info on how scientists with vested interests in covering up what the Wuhan lab was doing provides even more proof of a cover-up. Add to this, the information you just posted.

This is why I say the investigation into the source of the SARS-COV-2 virus can not be lead by the scientific community and it certainly can not be lead by the WHO. The WHO had their chance and failed miserably. The amateur investigators mentioned in the article I posted produced much more compelling information than the WHO and their "investigators" produced.

The investigation needs to be lead by US Intelligence, using the data gathered by the amateur investigators (they have a lot more info they are still going through) and information the intelligence investigators may possess. Scientists should be advisors to help the investigators understand the info, but they should not lead any investigation into the virus' origin.
Reply Quote Next Staff
1 edit
cowboypack02
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Daviewolf83 • 10:07a, 6/3/21
Daviewolf83 said:
Wayland said:
Haven't read this whole article yet, but looks like the cover up may be falling apart.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins



The cover-up was going on as recently as a few weeks ago when The Elf was questioned by Senator Paul. He stated his organization did not fund "gain of function" research at the Wuhan lab which we know from actual documents was a lie.

The link to the article I posted above provides some info on how scientists with vested interests in covering up what the Wuhan lab was doing provides even more proof of a cover-up. Add to this, the information you just posted.

This is why I say the investigation into the source of the SARS-COV-2 virus can not be lead by the scientific community and it certainly can not be lead by the WHO. The WHO had their chance and failed miserably. The amateur investigators mentioned in the article I posted produced much more compelling information than the WHO and their "investigators" produced.

The investigation needs to be lead by US Intelligence, using the data gathered by the amateur investigators (they have a lot more info they are still going through) and information the intelligence investigators may possess. Scientists should be advisors to help the investigators understand the info, but they should not lead any investigation.
Seems to me that we should start charging people with lying to Congress.....
Reply Quote
5
Oldsouljer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to desope24 • 10:16a, 6/3/21
dogplasma said:
Cloth masks don't stop transmission but they do reduce the "zone of influence" (my term) in situations where you're not confined for long periods of time with other people. I thought that was always the goal. I've never heard anyone say regular masks will prevent transmission.
Goals change. Have you ever heard the term "mission creep"?
Reply Quote
2
packgrad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Wayland • 10:18a, 6/3/21
Wayland said:
Haven't read this whole article yet, but looks like the cover up may be falling apart.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins





Jeez. Daszak needs to be in a prison somewhere.

This was quite interesting as well.

"The inflammatory idea of SARS-CoV-2-as-bioweapon has gained traction as an alt-right conspiracy theory, but civilian research under Shi's supervision that has yet to be made public raises more realistic concerns. Shi's own comments to a science journal, and grant information available on a Chinese government database, suggest that in the past three years her team has tested two novel but undisclosed bat coronaviruses on humanized mice, to gauge their infectiousness. "
Reply Quote
1
First Page Last Page
Page 287 of 581 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.