No.
You were suggesting that the coronavirus pandemic was a benefit to China and speculating that the whole episode was planned. Its too soon to see how the pandemic affects China and the rest of the world but there’s certainly no evidence of deliberate intent to infect the global population with a deadly virus.
The evidence actually suggests that viral pandemics are increasingly common due to unintentional general human impacts on the animal world - Ebola, SARS, MERS, Swine flu, Avian flu, Zika. And others.
Going back to Dennis3450 and the WHO, not an organisation Ive ever really taken any notice of or paid much attention to. I would have expected them to play a prominent part in fighting Covid, but it seems nations are doing their own thing. Maybe, and this is only a guess, they are more proactive in 3rd-world countries helping to organise.
Aha - there lies the difference - Pres Trump never hid in the dark in his life - whether I agree with a person’s political viewpoint is irrelevant - but I’ll respect a person who stands up to be counted - win or lose
Huge numbers of victims of these mega billionaires in charge of the Social media – must be preparing to seek legal advice on how to reclaim their losses incurred due to biased banning and shadow banning - Best wishes to all of them !
.
For our American cousins here is a pic from Sky News a couple of days ago of the Rottweiller - well actually a pretty normal guy. He is a SPAD (special advisor to Boris Johnson) and the PM relies quite heavily on his advice.
Spad’s are usually unelected as is the case here:
The controversy is that he is supposed to have broken lock-down rules and because he is high profile many are calling for his head including members of the governing party.
I broke the rules myself - I hugged my grandchild - but nobody noticed except the child’s mum who gave me the all clear. Now if everyone in the UK who has broken the rules in the past weeks were to resign their jobs…
You’re entitled to your OPINION of course - but it is at variance with that of many others - He is widely regarded as the “Brains” behind the Brexit vote, Boris becoming PM AND the annihilation of the Labour vote in 2019 - And the “Leaving strategy” currently being pursued ! - As “Pretty Normal” goes and to explain WHY the Swamp is desperately trying to get rid of him - take a listen to what someone American who was with hiim at Oxford Uni has to say about the “Pretty Normal” Guy !
AS I said 3 days ago - "He can come and sit at the “Falstaff Table” in the Boars Head - any time he’s in town !
[You need to follow the link to the other thread - to get access to the “reference” which is only 3 minutes long = but highly informative ]
Aye, there are a few who dislike him in the corridors - goes with the territory i suppose.
Now the thing is back awhile i made mention of a plan he had to sort all the stuff about Brexit and Northern Ireland - remember no-one on the planet could see how the circle could be squared as the many analysts put it - how could you get the UK out and keep NI in.
I called it the: This plan is called the Peterma ‘cummings’ plan
Again I point out with no evidence what so ever 90% of American news media has spent the last three yeas not speculating, not suggesting but flat out accusing Russia of interfering with the 2016 election. Now if those 90% of the media would use the same standard they judged Russia and apply that to China what would the conclusion be. Seems pretty clear
The Russian govemment directed extensive activity, beginning in at least 2014 and carrying into at least 2017, against U.S. election infrastructure’ at the state and local level. The Committee has seen no evidence that any votes were changed or that any voting machines were manipulated.
While the Committee does not know with confidence what Moscow’s intentions were, Russia may have been probing vulnerabilities in voting systems to exploit later. Alternatively, Moscow may have sought to undermine confidence in the 2016 U.S. elections simply through the discovery of their activity
Depends on an interpretation of ‘interference’ - the US is founded and grounded on democracy - if i were Putin i would at least direct some resources in an attempt to undermine that foundation (he failed because the Founding Fathers had the wisdom of foresight).
Since that time Putin has created his own version of democracy in Russia - but that’s for the Russian people to to comprehend and not ours to interfere.
The conclusion should be based on evidence, not what the media wish to “report”.
The fact that they previously wished to suggest something without evidence does not mean that whatever they now report that does have evidence is therefore false. Its nothing to do with the media. Its to do with the evidence.
I thought I’d take my time on this one @peterma - to try to give an answer which might satisfy your natural scepticism.
There is a saying ; "In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is King…!"
So let us envisage such a land where a population of the blind is ruled over by a small hierarchy of one eyed “People” who told them what to do and kept them safe by looking out for lions and snakes etc. The blind people worked the fields under one eyed foremen and the society - the blind were kept alive but subservient and were grateful for the input of teh one eyed people - who naturally held a higher position and superior privileges and enjoyed the dependency of the blind people.
Some of teh one eyed people became “educators” who recited the “lessons” to the blind peoples children and to their own - in a way they became priests and priestesses and told a story that once upon a time all people had two eyes (Which was basically true) and they also said that some of the “two eyes” then became tyrannical and stole the eyes of most people at birth (Which was not true) - the fact was that a genetic mutation occurred which led to a badly connected optic nerve system and the “two eyes " found that this could be treated medicaly by a relatively simple operation to restore sight, when the affected people became adult - but due to the medication, the genetic mutation became more and more pravalent - and the afflicted were kept in protected environments until they were of age, by a version of the Welfare state. until the “Apocalypse” - which may ave been as simple as two eyed women finding “more satisfying” things to do than having children - came” and there were no longer sufficient “two eyes” to operate such a benevolent system. The “two eyes” with much regret decided to look after ther own interests first and simply left the old, the Blind and their occasional “One eyed” children to fend for themselves which was how this society came about. The old tried to look after the blind for as long as they could - and though they died off pretty soon, their valiant efforts did manage to get this “New society” to a state where they were independent enough to survive before they died off.
Now it was known that occasionally two blind people could have a one eyed child because the blind could be “Split” for a left eye sighted - or a right eye sighted and if two "Left eye splits mated - 25 % of their children would be left eye sighted - but there was no way of knowing which split each adult might carry (IF ANY) and infant mortality was of necessity high
So what do we know about people with one eye ?
They can see well enough but have a restricted field of vision, see only in 2 dimensions and find it almost impossible to judge distance because of the lack of the third dimension.
So apart from the stories they had invented to explain their existence and their common plight, “One eyes” would naturally feel their privileged position highly threatened by any potential “two eyes” and any “two eyeds” born to blind couples would be quiety terminated by the “One eyes”.
The number of “two eyes” born to one eyed couples would be higher but relying as it would on both being “Split” for the other eye - would still be micro small.
So it is then that the parents of a child afflicted with “two eyes” would chide their children if they soke of having two eyes or showing this afflictin in public - since tehy would almost certainly be instantly put to death by the other “One eyes” - or teh blind acting as instruments of the “One eyes” and acting as they had been educated.
Thus then is the context of your question and what would happen if such a “two eyes” sought to be elected into a leadership position by the blind and teh “One eyes” ?
Many of those we speak of here have had such experiences and since we started with him I cite Bret Weinstein - who could easily have been killed by Black Supremacist students at Evergreen College - for simply asserting his right and that of His students to equality.
One is led to ponder on how many of those students are now “protesting Police murders” in Minnesota ?
Nay mate - they should not be “seeking election” - WE should be begging them on bended knee to help us in our hour of crisis !
[Edit PS - apologies for the typos - must get an external keyboard - the laptop is getting very sticky on teh keys ! ]
