Coronavirus Hoax

And they have run large scale naval exercises meant to intimidate each other. Trade relations and being an ally are not the same. The whole Evil Axis, as labeled by the West, they have supported. The Cold War referred to in the articles I linked earlier. Russia and the US had treaties and trade during the much of the Cold War. They were not allies. The fact that China one of the few nations considered a real threat to the US given its nuclear arsenal, China’s allies true allies, political style and the tensions that have been present for awhile, again.

defense.gov/Explore/News/Ar … struction/
washingtontimes.com/news/20 … -priority/
google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q … y10kXm7P8Y
theatlantic.com/politics/ar … ar/595747/
politico.com/newsletters/mo … ina-432036

plus articles I linked earlier about the way the countries view each other and where they stand in relation to countries where one can use the term ‘allies’ and ‘enemies’. A few more in that direction…

thehill.com/opinion/internation … n-and-evil
edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asia … ml?related
wsj.com/articles/SB10001424 … 4111945808
reuters.com/article/us-chin … SKCN1SN1Q2
blog.oup.com/2020/03/why-irans- … s-it-risk/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2% … (1999-2013

notice the way it is simply presumed that Russian and China are the primary threats to choose between and how this is reminiscent of the cold war…

spectator.co.uk/article/the … s-the-bear

And China is, of course, North Korea’s biggest ally. Not without tensions, but still. And it is followed by Russia in this. The US is not an ally of NK, not remotely. The Chinese and the Americans run in different circles. Of course countries will trade with almost anyone. There’s rarely anything moral involved in this. Money rules. as I said earlier even in a supposedly clear just war like WW2 a number of corporations, US and allied multinational kept on trading with Hitler’s Germany…
harmoniaphilosophica.com/2011/0 … azj6wq-22/
libcom.org/library/allied-multi … orld-war-2
that’s during a war…
We are vastly more globalized now and I am not claiming it is a war, though there are certainly cyberwar skirmishes, aggressive espionage, industrial theft on massive systematic scales.

Chinese government hackers…
forbes.com/sites/thomasbrew … 95be5761d6
computerworld.com/article/3 … gency.html

anyone urging canada or norway to increase their defense spending because of the military threat the other is?..
reuters.com/article/us-usa- … SKBN1422TT

or try to imagine anyone talking about Norway vs. Canada the way they are here about Japan and China, for example (and what island with millions of people has either Western democracy said it will take by force, if necessary)…
csis.org/analysis/resolved- … ion-taiwan

anyone talking this way in Norway about Canada in relation to human rights in general…
time.com/5764561/china-human-rights-report/
hrw.org/world-report/2020/c … man-rights

FBI or China theft of technology is biggest law enforcement threat to US, FBI says
theguardian.com/world/2020/ … est-threat
fbi.gov/news/stories/wray-a … nce-020620

Chinese espionage in the United States
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_e … ted_States

CHINA INVOLVED IN 90 PERCENT OF ESPIONAGE AND INDUSTRIAL SECRETS THEFT, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REVEALS
newsweek.com/china-involved … ft-1255908

Pentagon…
defensenews.com/pentagon/20 … ndle-both/
www2.gwu.edu/~sigur/assets/docs … rticle.pdf

NSA…
nytimes.com/2014/03/23/worl … peril.html

Homeland Security’s view of China…America Should View China as a Hostile, Revolutionary Power
homelandsecuritynewswire.com … nary-power

The killing of US spies there…
thedailybeast.com/cheats/20 … nce-breach

and this kind of thinking goes back into Obama also, note the Chinese reaction…
washingtonpost.com/world/na … story.html

All of this somehow parallels Canada Norway relations??? Your flat statement that they are allies makes the slightest bit of sense? No. There is, in a wide variety areas, hostile behavior, carried out by nations with different very different political ideas, each with political philosophies that have as a goal the elimination of other types of political systems and with the US who have gone to war again and again on the justification of removing the wrong or ‘wrong’ type of government,. I haven’t even gone into what the Chinese view as aggressive US behavior and tactics and practices and how they view the US and how they see the US as a hostile threat in general.

I’m sorry, but there is nothing like this kind of rhetoric, in the articles and authorities I linked above, about Norway and Canada. There is no portion of the military of those two countries working out possible war scenarios. There is no concern about WOMD in these countries. There is no regular criticism of each other’s general foreign policies. Canada and Norway have the same allies and potential enemies. The comparison with cAnada norway is just facile. I don’t have to search hard for these types of articles and opinion pieces, or government positions, they are easily found in major media and governmental agencies.

And further, in contrast, canada and norway have similar values, laws, mixed socialist/capitalist systems, freedom of the press, human rights beliefs and more. China and the US are quite different on all these issues. I could see something like a hockey fight breaking out between Canada and Norway, but I guarantee no one in the equivalents to the Pentagon in those two Western democracies are running simulations to make sure they are not wiped out by the other. What bothers me the most is that his has been a running assumption for a long time in mainstream media (and alternative media for that matter). It’s not even controversial. I can accept that anything not run with regularity in mainstream media is going to require significant back up, but I am repeatedly being put in the position of needing to justify something to someone who follows the mainstream media and uses that as his source of information, but for some reason is treating my sense of China/US relations as a conspiracy theory. It’s not. It’s the primary story in media in general.

I think it is very questionable that we would cooperate with them on easily weaponized research - part of the concerns of both the state dept. official and scientists - when we are concerned about their cyber warfare, nuclear stockpiles and actions in the region. I think it is very odd we were extending and expanding the research after State department officials said they were not meeing safety standards and also were concerned about the nature of the research. And it can easily be weaponized. Perhaps we did do research in labs in Russia during the cold war that could potentially lead to ways to improve nuclear weapons, and this was done in a lab State department officials said was not run well, but I’m a bit skeptical.

And, yes, the guy who approved the monies sent to the lab, predicted that within a very few years the Trump admin would be dealing with a major surprise infectious disease crisis.

I don’t think it was the exact bat species that was the source of the earlier disease, horseshoe or whatever it was this time. The complaining state dept officials were concerned about management and staff weaknesses in one memo and in another that there was a chance the lab would be the source of a SARS like pandemic.
washingtonpost.com/opinions … naviruses/
but they got more funding. China is also refusing to allow inspections of the lab now.

Here are some new links…(notice in the first that what seem to be unsafe practices WERE on their website. This is the lab supported by the US and yet complained about by officials at the STate dept and then reupped for funding for more years and more advanced, more dangerous research…)https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/coronavirus-photos-unprotected-wuhan-scientists-21965658
forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/ … -traction/
businessinsider.com/boris-j … ?r=US&IR=T
nypost.com/2020/05/02/intellige … ronavirus/
dailycaller.com/2020/05/02/inte … aboratory/
nationalreview.com/news/who … -pandemic/
and of course Trump says he has evidence that it was the lab, but I take that with a large grain of salt. It seems to me however that 1) what was dismissed for no good reason as a conspiracy theory earlier, is now being taken more seriously daily by various governments intelligence agencies and jounalists.

Notice also that the head researcher wondered herself if the lab might have leaked the disease, then later recanted this wondering, which kept her up at night.

It was dismissed on a number of poor scientific grounds - they knew the virus is not engineered - but this is a fundamental misunderstanding of how viruses can increase effect in labs, without cut and paste procedures - and it ignores the fact that the lab had many infected animals and tissues - that could also be the source of a leak of a ‘natural’ form of the virus.

The number of people living with chronic and long-term illnesses has risen more than exponentially, well here anyway, with diabetes, cancer, hypertension, heart disease, obesity, autism, OCD, chronic fatigue, chronic pain, asthma, autoimmune diseases, etc etc etc.

It wasn’t so when I was a kid and teen, so overall health has been steadily declining, but we’re being kept alive, so that the conglomerates can make money off our weak and dieing carcasses via the medium of mass-consumerism.

I wouldn’t call what the pharmaceutical industry are churning out these days medicine… my medicine is plants and herbs and homeopathy. Remember when Monsanto wanted the rights to all the plant seeds in the world… now it’s becoming clearer as to why?

The issue has become synthetic, everyone wants to buy in
No one really wants to abate a simulation of well being. Very few nowedays opts for assisted suicide . it may become known as a passing fancy.

Big pharm realizing this, is on charm offensive to sell it. Why not?

It really is invaluable to live off the half hearted cures of the suffering.

Just for the sake of argument, on this thread, let’s assume that the covid-19 pandemic is not a hoax.

In other words, that the global crisis is really happening!

Here, perhaps, is the part that most stumps even the “experts”: nytimes.com/2020/05/03/worl … e=Homepage

[b]'The coronavirus has killed so many people in Iran that the country has resorted to mass burials, but in neighboring Iraq, the body count is fewer than 100.

The Dominican Republic has reported nearly 7,600 cases of the virus. Just across the border, Haiti has recorded about 85.

In Indonesia, thousands are believed to have died of the coronavirus. In nearby Malaysia, a strict lockdown has kept fatalities to about 100.

The coronavirus has touched almost every country on earth, but its impact has seemed capricious. Global metropolises like New York, Paris and London have been devastated, while teeming cities like Bangkok, Baghdad, New Delhi and Lagos have, so far, largely been spared.'[/b]

Then it explores the various faxctors that might be involved:

“the power of youth”
“cultural distance”
“heat and light”
“early and strict lockdowns”
“luck”

But in each context there are many exceptions. No one explanation seems to suffice.

[b]'…most experts agree that there may be no single reason for some countries to be hit and others missed. The answer is likely to be some combination of the above factors, as well as one other mentioned by researchers: sheer luck.

'Countries with the same culture and climate could have vastly different outcomes if one infected person attends a crowded social occasion, turning it into what researchers call a super-spreader event.

'That happened when a passenger infected 634 people on the Diamond Princess cruise ship off the coast of Japan, when an infected guest attended a large funeral in Albany, Ga., and when a 61-year-old woman went to church in Daegu, South Korea, spreading the disease to hundreds of congregants and then to thousands of other Koreans.

'Because an infected person may not experience symptoms for a week or more, if at all, the disease spreads under the radar, exponentially and seemingly at random. Had the woman in Daegu stayed home that Sunday in February, the outbreak in South Korea might have been less than half of what it is.

‘Some countries that should have been inundated are not, leaving researchers scratching their heads.’[/b]

So, isn’t that what those on either side of the political spectrum are really dealing with: the great unknowns. Can those once infected become infected again? Will there be “waves”? Will it mutate?

Not that any of this won’t stop the rabid objectivists among us from just shrugging it off. They already factored that [and every other possible variables there are] into consideration. And if you don’t share their point of view, you’re still an idiotic liberal.

And then this part:

nytimes.com/2020/05/03/us/c … e=Homepage

Fitting right in with my own speculation that some of the reactions to the coronavirus here are attached to one or another rabid, dogmatic political agenda in which something like this is merely construed to be part and parcel of one or another rendition of the “deep state”.

So, these folks will use the pandemic merely in order to spread their own reactionary political beliefs about the Jews and the colored people and the foreigners and the homosexuals and the feminists and the globalists and all the people who do not think exactly like they do.

Meaning, in other words, that, in seeing the world around them only as a reflection of what they already believe, it is a complete waste of time trying to actually engage them in intelligent conversation. They spit on that sort of thing. You are either one of us or the enemy.

And, for sure, the last thing they wish to explore is my own take on the objectivist mind. Here for example: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296

Wow, even the Trump administration itself is now in on the hoax:

[b]'Headline: The Trump administration projects about 3,000 daily deaths by early June.

As President Trump presses for states to reopen their economies, his administration is privately projecting a steady rise in the number of cases and deaths from the coronavirus over the next several weeks, reaching about 3,000 daily deaths on June 1, according to an internal document obtained by The New York Times, nearly double from the current level of about 1,750.

The projections, based on government modeling pulled together in chart form by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, forecast about 200,000 new cases each day by the end of the month, up from about 25,000 cases now.

The numbers underscore a sobering reality: While the United States has been hunkered down for the past seven weeks, not much has changed. And the reopening to the economy will make matters worse.'[/b]

The five eyes report considers there is a lot of evidence that the virus was leaked from the Wuhan lab…
https://youtu.be/IxNyWqzT9s4

Yes, yes, yes, as more doctors label any and every death as due to covid 19, the number of deaths will keep rising until they stop lying about the cause of death, ya know, until when the deep state pulls the plug on this hoax and moves back to the end of the world hoax due to climate change or initiates another needless war.

The hoaxers get bolder!

washingtonpost.com/health/r … story.html

[b]'A research paper from scientists at Los Alamos National Laboratory, not yet peer-reviewed, reports that one strain of the novel coronavirus has emerged in Europe and become dominant around the planet, leading the researchers to believe the virus has mutated to become more contagious.

'The mutation affects the structure of a protein, called the spike protein, that is critical to the virus’s ability to infect human cells. The researchers believe this structural change enhances infectivity.

‘“The mutation Spike D614G is of urgent concern; it began spreading in Europe in early February, and when introduced to new regions it rapidly becomes the dominant form,” the authors write. They describe the mutation “increasing in frequency at an alarming rate, indicating a fitness advantage relative to the original Wuhan strain that enables more rapid spread.”’[/b]

For the love of Christ, shut down everything! Before it’s too late!!

Surgeon General Adams Dump’s Gates’ Predictive Model and is now working with ‘real data’.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoKymZ0LDEk[/youtube]
.

Hoax or not – but, come on, who is kidding who – the stakes here are truly enormous: nytimes.com/2020/05/09/busi … e=Homepage

[b]'WASHINGTON — As the nation confronts unemployment levels not seen since the Great Depression, Congress and the Trump administration face a pivotal choice: Continue spending trillions trying to shore up businesses and workers, or bet that state reopenings will jump-start the United States economy.

At least 20 million Americans are unemployed and a large share of the nation’s small businesses are shut and facing possible insolvency. Policy errors in the coming weeks could turn the 18 million temporary layoffs recorded in April into permanent job losses that could plunge the United States into a deep and protracted recession unrivaled in recent history.'[/b]

And while 1] some conservatives here aim to convince us the whole thing really is just a liberal plot to create a global government under the thumb of Big Brother and/or the United Nations, while 2] some liberals here aim to convince us this is all just a stepping stone to the Fourth Reich, out in the real world the actual existential tug of war is all too real.

For millions and millions of us. Go too far in the direction of sustaining the lockdown and countless lives will be destroyed economically. Go to far in opening the economy up and the pandemic can explode to even greater heights. And this is all before what is deemed by many to be an inevitable, even bigger wave in the Fall and Winter.

So, in my view, if the objectivists from either end of the political spectrum prevail, it will truly be a calamity of epic proportions. Especially here in America where the overwhelming prepondeance of infections and deaths continue to prevail.

Consider:

washingtonpost.com/opinions … story.html

[b]'Are we inherently gullible? Research says no: Most adults have well-functioning machinery for detecting baloney, but there’s a common bug in the machine. Faced with a novel idea or new circumstances, we gravitate to information that fits our already existing beliefs. As Sherlock Holmes put the problem: “Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.” This bug has always been exploited by people seeking money, power — or both. But with the rise of social media, the world’s propagandists, con artists and grifters find their search for suckers easier than ever.

'Witness the grubby exercise known as “#Plandemic.” The risible video is the work of an opportunistic Internet filmmaker whose projects include a clip about his 5-year-old son’s discovery of “the truth” about the wealthy sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In his latest film, he advances the conspiracy theory that Anthony S. Fauci of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, billionaire Bill Gates and various other malefactors are spreading a manmade novel coronavirus because they enjoy making people sick and hope to profit on an eventual vaccine. Or some similar nonsense along those lines. And there’s more: Beaches were closed to keep Americans away from the “microbes” in seawater that protect against covid-19.

'A coronavirus conspiracy is mild B.S. compared with the great conspiracy theory of 2016, the weapons-grade hooey known as #Pizzagate. In that viral sensation, important political figures supposedly ran a child-abuse ring out of the basement of a pizzeria that, by the way, doesn’t have a basement.

People believe in a “#Plandemic” because it fits into existing convictions. A lot of people already believe — not without reason — that pharmaceutical companies cash in on suffering. Many people have heard that government labs do research on biological weapons. All true. Government has hemorrhaged credibility in recent years — even with regard to veteran public servants such as Fauci. All of these mind-sets are potential vectors for the viral #plandemic.'[/b]

Bottom line [his and for the most part mine]:

‘Some want your money. Some want your mind. Citizenship in the Internet era demands a heightened commitment to mental hygiene and skepticism. We have to learn that the information that fits neatly into our preconceptions is precisely the information we must be wary of. And even in these wild times, we must heed the late Carl Sagan, who preached that “extraordinary claims” — like grand conspiracies and healing microbes — “require extraordinary proof.”’

He just leaves out the part about objectivism and dasein.

It is objectivist to consider it a calamity. That’s a word with a built in negative evaluation. You are saying that if either of these groups manages to win the debates and swing things too far, bad things will happen. That’s an objectivist evaluation of the consequences. Doesn’t mean it’s bad for you to be making an objectivist evaluation, but it’s an implicit objectivist appeal. You’re a part of the club.

On the contrary, I never exclude my own point of view here from my own point of view. Me calling anything a calamity [in the is/ought world] is no less a function of “I” as an existential fabrication/contraption.

After all, that’s where the part about “I” – my own – being “fractured and fragmented” is derived. Meanwhile, your own still incomprehensible rendition of pragmatism [from my point of view] is just not something “I” am able to grasp.

Just as you clearly do not grasp my own perspective yet. Instead, you only insist that you do. And then proceed [in about as close to an objectivist frame of mind as I have come to understand it] to preach the gospel to the choir.

Note to Phyllo:

I’m coming closer and closer to making you Moe here. Alas, KT becomes less challenging with each post.

I’m not as pretentious as Moe.

Not to worry. It’s just something I made up.

It’s not that farfetched:

latimes.com/archives/la-xpm … story.html

And I’m not particularly insulted by it.

Well, that settles it then. Without even having read it, you are now Moe.

Either you’re not familiar with the characteristics of the stooges or you don’t recognize the characteristics in “your three stooges”.

Did you watch their movies or TV shows?

Duh, I have commented on your disclaimers and position hundreds of times and also explained the problems with your cake and eat it too version.

Here we have a person who believes that people with objectivist positions make the world a worse place according to your values, which you do not consider objective.

So, how does he work with his values, in order to make things where people are more likely to use compromise and negotiation.

He blames people for causing the problems in the world, labels them as a group (here objectivists) and then sometimes adds in his disclaimer that he might be wrong. Above he did not, but readers are presumed to know his position. I do, others won’t.

What does this non-objectivist do, often, after? He then implies that he is better than them because he doesn’t claim to know whereas they do. So, first he labels them, blames the problems on them, then claims a superior ground because he does not actually claim to know. Or rather, he writes exactly the same types of sentences and then often adds in that post a disclaimer.

This miraculously leads to more compromise and negotiation. But wait…give a shot at demonstrating that.

But even more important…you don’t need to write down your values and then add disclaimers.

You could simply challenge objectivists to demonstate theirs. That would be role modeling and would not be the double insult approach you take. Give a shot at demonstrating that your choice to insult, then say, gosh for all I know my insult is wrong, is a better approach than just challenging them on their objectivism. Good luck with that.

And, as I wrote, I believe years ago, no rational person would fall for this crap on the interpersonal level.

You fucked up the kids with your sick capitalist values.
Hej, fuck you, that’s not what’s happening.
Well, as I often say, I can’t be sure. However it’s fucked up that you think the values you give them simply are right.
You seem sure of that.

Given the simple option of NOT presenting your damning judgments of people that you think you can’t know anyway are the case, you decide to dump and disclaim. It makes no sense at all.

But cake and eat it too makes a lot of emotional sense. You like that don’t you.

Now am I sure that’s what you are doing: being passive aggressive? No, I’m not sure.

But you go ahead and demonstrate how your method actually leads to your values being taken up or even being considered.