"China Deliberately Spread the Coronavirus....

[Spock]

"China Deliberately Spread the Coronavirus: What Are the Strategic Consequences?"

https://www.hoover.org/research/china-d ... nsequences

Well, this Hoover Institution paper ought to send SSS and the Bob's into full "Cover for China" mode. That will be fun to watch. I predict that with a few seconds of Googling they will suddenly be experts on everything in the paper.

2 paragraphs of note in the article. My opinion since early on, was that China's response to the virus was consistent with them knowing it was a lab accident-as in paragraph 1.

>>>"It is especially troubling that Beijing in late January sent “China’s top biowarfare expert,” Major General Chen Wei, to head the P-4 lab there. Chen, many speculate, was dispatched to clean up evidence of a leak or the existence of a weapons program. That’s a clear signal the disease was not, as Chinese authorities insist, the result of a natural mutation.

The case against China rests not only on how the coronavirus came to first infect humans—something scientists will argue about for years—but also what Chinese ruler Xi Jinping did once the pathogen crippled his country. In short, he took steps he knew or had to know would spread the disease beyond his borders."<<<<

[silverscreenselect]

I guess you realized how silly your election fraud and herd immunity theories were finally and fell back on your old standby, the China menace, with a right-wing think tank available to feed you your lines.

I'm curious what you think the Chinese have to gain by deliberately spreading the virus.

[Spock]

I guess you realized how silly your election fraud and herd immunity theories were finally and fell back on your old standby, the China menace, with a right-wing think tank available to feed you your lines.

I'm curious what you think the Chinese have to gain by deliberately spreading the virus.

When have I said anything about Election fraud? The only thing I said about the election here was that I hope you guys were all happy with the hours you spent jizzing on your computer screens about the polls when they could not have been more wrong.

AndI am not just jumping to China. I have been about China for a long time. A very, very long time.

And BTW-I still buy Herd Immunity.

I figure I am good now. I have had it. So I have nothing to worry about.

[Bob Juch]

I guess you realized how silly your election fraud and herd immunity theories were finally and fell back on your old standby, the China menace, with a right-wing think tank available to feed you your lines.

I'm curious what you think the Chinese have to gain by deliberately spreading the virus.

When have I said anything about Election fraud? The only thing I said about the election here was that I hope you guys were all happy with the hours you spent jizzing on your computer screens about the polls when they could not have been more wrong.

AndI am not just jumping to China. I have been about China for a long time. A very, very long time.

And BTW-I still buy Herd Immunity.

I figure I am good now. I have had it. So I have nothing to worry about.

Why do you keep bashing a major source of your income?

[Spock]

I guess you realized how silly your election fraud and herd immunity theories were finally and fell back on your old standby, the China menace, with a right-wing think tank available to feed you your lines.

I'm curious what you think the Chinese have to gain by deliberately spreading the virus.

When have I said anything about Election fraud? The only thing I said about the election here was that I hope you guys were all happy with the hours you spent jizzing on your computer screens about the polls when they could not have been more wrong.

AndI am not just jumping to China. I have been about China for a long time. A very, very long time.

And BTW-I still buy Herd Immunity.

I figure I am good now. I have had it. So I have nothing to worry about.

Why do you keep bashing a major source of your income?

Because some of us can do 2 things at once. I can be happy with higher soybean prices and still recognize China as a geo-strategic threat. I can also recognize which of the 2 is more important in the big picture.

To turn the question around. Why do you guys have such a hard to taking a realistic look at China? Are you comfortable with such a large percentage of critical components for all levels of defense and scientific endeavours being manufactured in China? Are you sure they are not putting in back doors that will be used at critical times?

"Russia, Russia, Russia" is not the answer for those types of questions. And neither are variations of "Spock, the High Plains Scout, just has a Fu Manchu view of China."

[silverscreenselect]

And BTW-I still buy Herd Immunity.

Some 300,000 of your fellow Americans aren't buying it.

[Spock]

I would also add that you guys have a tremendous amount of confidence in the security protocols and procedures of Chinese Bio-labs when you consider that the Wuhan lab that the Wuhan Lab

>>>"The lab once bragged it stored more than 1,500 strains of coronavirus, and it is known to have engaged in the dangerous engineering of chimeric coronaviruses, as documented in a 2015 article in Nature Medicine."<<<

In your view-Was China's response at the time of the outbreak consistent with what they suspected to be a lab accident or was it consistent with what they thought to be a natural outbreak?

And SSS with the cheap shot
>>>"Some 300,000 of your fellow Americans aren't buying it."<<<

Just curious. what are the demographic characteristics of the dead? Median age of death and so forth. You can't rationally discuss a deadly disease unless you know who it is killing.

[silverscreenselect]

Why do you guys have such a hard to taking a realistic look at China?

I don't have a problem with taking a realistic look at China. I do have a problem with hiding behind China when we have far more pressing problems today with Russia. With you, "what about China?" seems to be replacing the "what about Hillary's emails?" mantra from four years ago. The fact that you have relied on China as a defense mechanism for years doesn't make it any more valid.

And I guess I missed your response to my question about what China would have to gain by deliberately spreading the virus?

[Spock]

Why do you guys have such a hard to taking a realistic look at China?

I don't have a problem with taking a realistic look at China. I do have a problem with hiding behind China when we have far more pressing problems today with Russia. With you, "what about China?" seems to be replacing the "what about Hillary's emails?" mantra from four years ago. The fact that you have relied on China as a defense mechanism for years doesn't make it any more valid.

And I guess I missed your response to my question about what China would have to gain by deliberately spreading the virus?

Again RUSSIA, Russia Russia!!!!

Once again, I doubt I ever mentioned Hillary e-mails here. It was not really a thing I wanted to talk about. If you are going to keep going back farther, I don't think I ever talked about "Dukakis being a card-carrying member of the ACLU" here either.

Call me when large parts of our critical supply chains run through Russia and are vulnerable to funny stuff there.

[silverscreenselect]

And SSS with the cheap shot
>>>"Some 300,000 of your fellow Americans aren't buying it."<<<

Just curious. what are the demographic characteristics of the dead? Median age of death and so forth. You can't rationally discuss a deadly disease unless you know who it is killing.

Many of them were old. But they weren't going to die this year. Many of them could have lived for several years. And let's not forget about the people who will spend the rest of their lives walking around with souvenirs of the virus like Krox's daughter.

We are looking at least a 10% increase in total mortality in the United States from a disease that's only been killing people for ten months.

[Bob78164]

In your own words, please state the facts that you claim support the contention that China deliberately spread the disease. Feel free to provide links to support your factual claims.

Because with all of the idiots out there recirculating debunked conspiracy theories, I'm really not interested in chasing down their flaws, any more than I'm interested in finding the error in a 30-page proof that claims to be able to square the circle with compass and straightedge. So if you can't be troubled to express in your own words the analysis you're adopting, I'm not interested in playing your game. --Bob

[silverscreenselect]

Again RUSSIA, Russia Russia!!!!

Well, Russia, Russia, Russia would be the operative word on a day on which leading security experts are expressing alarm about the degree to which they have hacked our infrastructure. No one is denying China could be a threat. But the Russian problem is more pressing now. And our current president isn't very interested in the problem. Fortunately, that's going to change in another month.

[Spock]

In your own words, please state the facts that you claim support the contention that China deliberately spread the disease. Feel free to provide links to support your factual claims.

Because with all of the idiots out there recirculating debunked conspiracy theories, I'm really not interested in chasing down their flaws, any more than I'm interested in finding the error in a 30-page proof that claims to be able to square the circle with compass and straightedge. So if you can't be troubled to express in your own words the analysis you're adopting, I'm not interested in playing your game. --Bob

Good. Go square your circle. Everything about China according to you guys is a conspiracy theory anyway.

Just noting that the Hoover Institution is tied to Stanford University. Probably not a rich source of conspiracy theories.

Laughing about SSS bringing up Hillary's emails. Anything to run interference for China I guess.

[Spock]

Again RUSSIA, Russia Russia!!!!

Well, Russia, Russia, Russia would be the operative word on a day on which leading security experts are expressing alarm about the degree to which they have hacked our infrastructure. No one is denying China could be a threat. But the Russian problem is more pressing now. And our current president isn't very interested in the problem. Fortunately, that's going to change in another month.

Yeah, you are right. China will just be able to do its thing with the help of many in the admin and wall street and Silicon valley. It will bite us in the ass sometime, when it is too late to do anything about it.

[Spock]

BTW-You guys are helping me play a little game.

For fun, I have long wanted to attract the attention of Chinese Intel just to see if it goes anywhere.

I figure they basically have everything on the internet and with their big data algorithms they do funky things with it.

I have laid a lot of easy to find "China" bread crumbs all over the internet for their algorithms to play with.

Anything "China" here helps.

[Bob Juch]

In your own words, please state the facts that you claim support the contention that China deliberately spread the disease. Feel free to provide links to support your factual claims.

Because with all of the idiots out there recirculating debunked conspiracy theories, I'm really not interested in chasing down their flaws, any more than I'm interested in finding the error in a 30-page proof that claims to be able to square the circle with compass and straightedge. So if you can't be troubled to express in your own words the analysis you're adopting, I'm not interested in playing your game. --Bob

Good. Go square your circle. Everything about China according to you guys is a conspiracy theory anyway.

Just noting that the Hoover Institution is tied to Stanford University. Probably not a rich source of conspiracy theories.

Laughing about SSS bringing up Hillary's emails. Anything to run interference for China I guess.

The Hoover Institution isn't just "tied" to Stanford, it's part of it. It does have it's own board o directors. Its director is Condoleezza Rice.

[a1mamacat]

I would also add that you guys have a tremendous amount of confidence in the security protocols and procedures of Chinese Bio-labs when you consider that the Wuhan lab that the Wuhan Lab

>>>"The lab once bragged it stored more than 1,500 strains of coronavirus, and it is known to have engaged in the dangerous engineering of chimeric coronaviruses, as documented in a 2015 article in Nature Medicine."<<<

In your view-Was China's response at the time of the outbreak consistent with what they suspected to be a lab accident or was it consistent with what they thought to be a natural outbreak?

And SSS with the cheap shot
>>>"Some 300,000 of your fellow Americans aren't buying it."<<<

Just curious. what are the demographic characteristics of the dead? Median age of death and so forth. You can't rationally discuss a deadly disease unless you know who it is killing.

Does it really fucking matter????

[Spock]

I would also add that you guys have a tremendous amount of confidence in the security protocols and procedures of Chinese Bio-labs when you consider that the Wuhan lab that the Wuhan Lab

>>>"The lab once bragged it stored more than 1,500 strains of coronavirus, and it is known to have engaged in the dangerous engineering of chimeric coronaviruses, as documented in a 2015 article in Nature Medicine."<<<

In your view-Was China's response at the time of the outbreak consistent with what they suspected to be a lab accident or was it consistent with what they thought to be a natural outbreak?

And SSS with the cheap shot
>>>"Some 300,000 of your fellow Americans aren't buying it."<<<

Just curious. what are the demographic characteristics of the dead? Median age of death and so forth. You can't rationally discuss a deadly disease unless you know who it is killing.

Does it really fucking matter????

Yes, it does. Because if the median age of death is 5 your public policy response should be different than if the median age of death is 83 (as it is for Covid in Minnesota).

[silverscreenselect]

Yes, it does. Because if the median age of death is 5 your public policy response should be different than if the median age of death is 83 (as it is for Covid in Minnesota).

It's too bad you don't have any Soylent Green factories in Minnesota. Business would really be booming right now, and food prices would be very, very affordable.

You also might not want to discuss median ages to someone who lost a spouse or parent in isolation to COVID. I doubt they would want to hear that their loved one was probably going to die in a couple of years anyway, but wasn't it great that we got to keep sports bars open for a few more weeks.

[Spock]

Yes, it does. Because if the median age of death is 5 your public policy response should be different than if the median age of death is 83 (as it is for Covid in Minnesota).

It's too bad you don't have any Soylent Green factories in Minnesota. Business would really be booming right now, and food prices would be very, very affordable.

You also might not want to discuss median ages to someone who lost a spouse or parent in isolation to COVID. I doubt they would want to hear that their loved one was probably going to die in a couple of years anyway, but wasn't it great that we got to keep sports bars open for a few more weeks.

You are putting words in my mouth as is often the case.

I never said there should not be a public policy response for a disease that predominantly kills the elderly. Just that the public policy response for that disease should be different than for a disease with a median death age of 5.

For example, do you concentrate on nursing homes or pre-schools?

It is also kind of funny, that you throw "Median Age" in my face. Isn't that science?. I thought you guys were all about science?

[silverscreenselect]

For example, do you concentrate on nursing homes or pre-schools?

And, as you conveniently and repeatedly ignore, the problem is that the people who are spreading the disease in many cases are not those who eventually get extremely sick and die from it.

[earendel]

I still don't see an answer to the question of what China would gain by deliberately spreading the COVID virus.

[silverscreenselect]

Minnesota State Sen. Jerry Relph Dies After Contracting COVID-19

This man might even have been your senator, Spock. I'm sure that his family would love for you to contact them right now and give them the benefit of your theories on herd immunity, and you might even add a note that he probably didn't have too much longer to live anyway, especially if he had any other co-morbidities.

[silverscreenselect]

To turn the question around. Why do you guys have such a hard to taking a realistic look at China? Are you comfortable with such a large percentage of critical components for all levels of defense and scientific endeavours being manufactured in China? Are you sure they are not putting in back doors that will be used at critical times? "Russia, Russia, Russia" is not the answer for those types of questions.

Well, at least one world-renowned cybersecurity expert has come around to your way of thinking Spock. You should feel honored that he pretty much paraphrases your own words:

The Cyber Hack is far greater in the Fake News Media than in actuality. I have been fully briefed and everything is well under control. Russia, Russia, Russia is the priority chant when anything happens because Lamestream is, for mostly financial reasons, petrified of discussing the possibility that it may be China (it may!). There could also have been a hit on our ridiculous voting machines during the election, which is now obvious that I won big, making it an even more corrupted embarrassment for the USA.

Unfortunately, one of Trump's underlings didn't get the message from Spock and the President:

This [the hacking] was a very significant effort, and I think it's the case that now we can say pretty clearly that it was the Russians that engaged in this activity

[Bob Juch]

I just thought of a word that describes Spock and Trump: Rabble-rouser.