4 ms·

If you repeat a lie often enough, even the at first reluctant will start to believe it. That's how the propaganda machine typically works. The more these claim

If you repeat a lie often enough, even the at first reluctant will start to believe it. That's how the propaganda machine typically works. The more these claims based on minimal new evidence are repeated, the more it seems the virus may have potentially been released by nefarious actors as an attack on the population. It's not implausable for an entity with knowledge and access to a virus being studied, to release a copy of it in the environment surrounding the lab while maintaining a high degree of deniability. If it is so, then the question that remains is, much like in the case of Nordstream, which nation state has the most incentive to carry it out?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
baja_blast 4y ago
While I won't discount the possibility that the outbreak could be a nefarious plot to plant a virus.I feel the US's response to the pandemic and the massive mistakes made make it less likely. The most likely would be just an accident where a researcher unknowingly got infected while conducting research in a BSL2 lab where they were testing wild SARS like viruses and inserting FCS to gauge the viruses potential threat level
- taw567890 4y ago
  >I feel the US's response to the pandemic and the massive mistakes make it less likely. It may be unlikely but there have been many instances where the US population becomes a victim of its own government's covert actions. The quality of response doesn't neccessarily prove anything.
bigfudge 4y ago
I'm wary of engaging, but this just makes no sense to me. Perhaps you can explain and actually make explicit some of the implied connections. Previously the 'big lie' was that it was not from a lab. Now that it's assessed to be likely from a lab the new lie is the contention that it was done deliberately? Whose propaganda machine is at work here anyway? The Chinese govt or the US one? Or are they in cahoots now?
- taw567890 4y ago
  >Previously the 'big lie' was that it was not from a lab. Wasn't the previous news claim specifically that somebody in Wuhan ate a bat or pangolin? Until it was made public that the US was involved in funding the research.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

baja_blast 4y ago

While I won't discount the possibility that the outbreak could be a nefarious plot to plant a virus.I feel the US's response to the pandemic and the massive mistakes made make it less likely. The most likely would be just an accident where a researcher unknowingly got infected while conducting research in a BSL2 lab where they were testing wild SARS like viruses and inserting FCS to gauge the viruses potential threat level

taw567890 4y ago
>I feel the US's response to the pandemic and the massive mistakes make it less likely. It may be unlikely but there have been many instances where the US population becomes a victim of its own government's covert actions. The quality of response doesn't neccessarily prove anything.

bigfudge 4y ago

I'm wary of engaging, but this just makes no sense to me. Perhaps you can explain and actually make explicit some of the implied connections. Previously the 'big lie' was that it was not from a lab. Now that it's assessed to be likely from a lab the new lie is the contention that it was done deliberately? Whose propaganda machine is at work here anyway? The Chinese govt or the US one? Or are they in cahoots now?

taw567890 4y ago
>Previously the 'big lie' was that it was not from a lab. Wasn't the previous news claim specifically that somebody in Wuhan ate a bat or pangolin? Until it was made public that the US was involved in funding the research.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]