3 ms·

So there’s a new president and the main intelligence agency changes its position radically in alignment with the new government. Why should we be confident in a

So there’s a new president and the main intelligence agency changes its position radically in alignment with the new government. Why should we be confident in any other claim they made in the past?

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> the main intelligence agency changes its position radically When did the CIA come out against lab leak? Everyone's been spitballing low- and moderate-confidence guesses.
wkat4242 2y ago
Yes that's what I thought but it does say it was an analysis project started by Biden. The timing is suspicious, true. But yeah this topic is extremely politicised (not just by the US mind you, but also by China). So it's hard to say what's the truth. I doubt we'll ever find it. The lab leak theory does make sense though IMO. I wouldn't be surprised if it were true. But yeah, I take this at face value. And to be honest I'm just really happy that this is all behind us.
layer8 2y ago
We shouldn’t be confident in this specific assessment because the agency making it isn’t either: > The agency made its new assessment with “low confidence,” which means the intelligence behind it is fragmentary and incomplete.
hansjorg 2y ago
So what you're saying is that we shouldn't put our trust into people who pride themselves on being master manipulators and deceivers?
- rightbyte 2y ago
  The head of a underpants subscription telemarketing firm is probably trusting his underlings more than the head of the CIA.
  - DonHopkins 2y ago
    Magical Mormon underpants? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garment
mhb 2y ago
Or, in a parallel universe, there's an old president who preemptively pardoned the person who might have been involved in GOF research leading to a lab leak.
- bdangubic 2y ago
  [flagged]
- kleton 2y ago
  It is an interesting angle, because now he could potentially be subpoenaed by Congress or anyone else, and it seems unlikely that he would perjure himself over anything after 2014.
  - morepedantic 2y ago
    All he needs to do is commit a federal crime right away.
- ocschwar 2y ago
  That pardon means that person is available for subpoena and cannot decline to answer any question.
  - morepedantic 2y ago
    Unless there's another crime outside the scope of the pardon. For example, crimes within the statute of limitations prior to the pardon, new crimes after the pardon, or state level crimes during the period of the pardon.
morkalork 2y ago
Considering what is known about that agency's activities under Reagan, I think everyone lost confidence about any claims they made before I was even born.
- jfengel 2y ago
  That's just it. It was a very long time ago. Not many CIA employees are still there. That's not reason to trust it. But "a bad thing happened in the 80s and that's all I need to know" isn't a compelling argument either.
  - morkalork 2y ago
    I'm missing the part where there has been institutional reform since then. Otherwise, the mandate and policies that fostered those affairs are still in place, no?
    - jfengel 2y ago
      The agency has been through several reforms since then, most notably the complete reorg after 9/11. Like I said, that's not the same as knowing that they're following the rules now. But it isn't the same organization by any stretch.
- Hikikomori 2y ago
  Essentially goes back to the start, bunch of rich nepo kids playing spy. See Sidney Gottlieb for a fun story.
dandanua 2y ago
Even if the lab leak theory is true, why Trump was so confident about it? Does he have sources that CIA does not? I would be so confident in it only in the case if I myself caused that virus leak...
- zeagle 2y ago
  Well, if there is one thing about Trump that everyone would agree on, it is that he is very self confident in everything he says.
- dboreham 2y ago
  He has the voices in his head.
- aga98mtl 2y ago
  Only one lab in the world doing GoF experiments on this specific furin cleavage site AND a random natural mutation happens within a few KM of this lab on this specific furin cleavage site. What are the odds of this happening? Very close to zero.
- ocschwar 2y ago
  Trump wasn't confident in the theory. He is not confident in anything. He does not care about the truth or falsity of anything he says. He only cares about it serving his interests.
  - SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
    Don’t you people tire of this? Do you really not realize why he just won every contest we have? He was the president at the time - yes - he had better info than you. The people saying it wasn’t a lab leak had motivation to do so - and the head of that group just took a president pardon for their efforts.
    - ocschwar 2y ago
      A narcissist like Trump doesn't have better information than I do. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
shadowgovt 2y ago
And, an equally interesting question: why should we be confident in any claim they are making now?
- WillyWonkaJr 2y ago
  Normally I would disregard their findings. However, the FBI, former head of the CDC, and Congressional panel all came to the same conclusion: Covid was made in a lab.
rsanek 2y ago
Doesn't feel like a radical change in position to me. They said they weren't sure either way previously. In this statement they're explicitly calling it "low-confidence." The FBI & Energy Department have both said that they think it's a lab leak.
gtgvdfc 2y ago
In fact the government has been quietly acknowledging that the lab leak has merit for about two years now.
lolinder 2y ago
Changes its position radically? The FBI came out saying it had moderate confidence in the lab leak theory in 2023, right in the middle of the Biden administration [0]. The DOE came out with their own assessment a few days earlier [1]. The CIA's position was hiterto "we're not yet sure", and now it's "we still aren't sure but we're leaning towards lab leak". That's not a radical shift, it's a very slight shift in the direction that other three-letter agencies have been leaning for years. There were almost certainly some politics involved in the decision to release the report now, but it's not like the CIA were staunch advocates for zoonotic origins up until now, and again: Biden's FBI and DOE were already leaning this way! [0] https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/28/politics/wray-fbi-covid-origins-lab-china/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/28/politics/wray-fbi-covid-origi... [1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/26/politics/covid-lab-leak-wuhan-china-intelligence https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/26/politics/covid-lab-leak-wuhan...
morepedantic 2y ago
I would like to jump on the band wagon and point out that this is an absolutely minuscule shift in position.
- mmustapic 2y ago
  > The C.I.A. has said for years that it did not have enough information to conclude whether the Covid pandemic emerged naturally from a wet market in Wuhan, China, or from an accidental leak at a research lab there. From "we don't know if it was a lab leak or spread from the market" to "we think it maybe is". Sure, they started this investigation with Biden, but just released it a couple of days ago AND they have even low confidence on it. So, why release it if the confidence is low? Why now? The answer is: new government, new conclusions.
  - morepedantic 2y ago
    They went from uncertain to low certainty. It's hard to imagine a smaller shift in position than that, and thus the dog-pile. You're trying to drag me into some other debate entirely.

So there’s a new president and the main intelligence agency changes its position radically in alignment with the new government. Why should we be confident in any other claim they made in the past?

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> the main intelligence agency changes its position radically When did the CIA come out against lab leak? Everyone's been spitballing low- and moderate-confidence guesses.

wkat4242 2y ago

Yes that's what I thought but it does say it was an analysis project started by Biden. The timing is suspicious, true. But yeah this topic is extremely politicised (not just by the US mind you, but also by China). So it's hard to say what's the truth. I doubt we'll ever find it. The lab leak theory does make sense though IMO. I wouldn't be surprised if it were true. But yeah, I take this at face value. And to be honest I'm just really happy that this is all behind us.

layer8 2y ago

We shouldn’t be confident in this specific assessment because the agency making it isn’t either: > The agency made its new assessment with “low confidence,” which means the intelligence behind it is fragmentary and incomplete.

hansjorg 2y ago

So what you're saying is that we shouldn't put our trust into people who pride themselves on being master manipulators and deceivers?

rightbyte 2y ago
The head of a underpants subscription telemarketing firm is probably trusting his underlings more than the head of the CIA.
- DonHopkins 2y ago
  Magical Mormon underpants? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garment

mhb 2y ago

Or, in a parallel universe, there's an old president who preemptively pardoned the person who might have been involved in GOF research leading to a lab leak.

bdangubic 2y ago
[flagged]
kleton 2y ago
It is an interesting angle, because now he could potentially be subpoenaed by Congress or anyone else, and it seems unlikely that he would perjure himself over anything after 2014.
- morepedantic 2y ago
  All he needs to do is commit a federal crime right away.
ocschwar 2y ago
That pardon means that person is available for subpoena and cannot decline to answer any question.
- morepedantic 2y ago
  Unless there's another crime outside the scope of the pardon. For example, crimes within the statute of limitations prior to the pardon, new crimes after the pardon, or state level crimes during the period of the pardon.

morkalork 2y ago

Considering what is known about that agency's activities under Reagan, I think everyone lost confidence about any claims they made before I was even born.

jfengel 2y ago
That's just it. It was a very long time ago. Not many CIA employees are still there. That's not reason to trust it. But "a bad thing happened in the 80s and that's all I need to know" isn't a compelling argument either.
- morkalork 2y ago
  I'm missing the part where there has been institutional reform since then. Otherwise, the mandate and policies that fostered those affairs are still in place, no?
  - jfengel 2y ago
    The agency has been through several reforms since then, most notably the complete reorg after 9/11. Like I said, that's not the same as knowing that they're following the rules now. But it isn't the same organization by any stretch.
Hikikomori 2y ago
Essentially goes back to the start, bunch of rich nepo kids playing spy. See Sidney Gottlieb for a fun story.

dandanua 2y ago

Even if the lab leak theory is true, why Trump was so confident about it? Does he have sources that CIA does not? I would be so confident in it only in the case if I myself caused that virus leak...

zeagle 2y ago
Well, if there is one thing about Trump that everyone would agree on, it is that he is very self confident in everything he says.
dboreham 2y ago
He has the voices in his head.
aga98mtl 2y ago
Only one lab in the world doing GoF experiments on this specific furin cleavage site AND a random natural mutation happens within a few KM of this lab on this specific furin cleavage site. What are the odds of this happening? Very close to zero.
ocschwar 2y ago
Trump wasn't confident in the theory. He is not confident in anything. He does not care about the truth or falsity of anything he says. He only cares about it serving his interests.
- SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
  Don’t you people tire of this? Do you really not realize why he just won every contest we have? He was the president at the time - yes - he had better info than you. The people saying it wasn’t a lab leak had motivation to do so - and the head of that group just took a president pardon for their efforts.
  - ocschwar 2y ago
    A narcissist like Trump doesn't have better information than I do. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

shadowgovt 2y ago

And, an equally interesting question: why should we be confident in any claim they are making now?

WillyWonkaJr 2y ago
Normally I would disregard their findings. However, the FBI, former head of the CDC, and Congressional panel all came to the same conclusion: Covid was made in a lab.

rsanek 2y ago

Doesn't feel like a radical change in position to me. They said they weren't sure either way previously. In this statement they're explicitly calling it "low-confidence." The FBI & Energy Department have both said that they think it's a lab leak.

gtgvdfc 2y ago

In fact the government has been quietly acknowledging that the lab leak has merit for about two years now.

lolinder 2y ago

Changes its position radically? The FBI came out saying it had moderate confidence in the lab leak theory in 2023, right in the middle of the Biden administration [0]. The DOE came out with their own assessment a few days earlier [1]. The CIA's position was hiterto "we're not yet sure", and now it's "we still aren't sure but we're leaning towards lab leak". That's not a radical shift, it's a very slight shift in the direction that other three-letter agencies have been leaning for years. There were almost certainly some politics involved in the decision to release the report now, but it's not like the CIA were staunch advocates for zoonotic origins up until now, and again: Biden's FBI and DOE were already leaning this way! [0] https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/28/politics/wray-fbi-covid-origins-lab-china/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/28/politics/wray-fbi-covid-origi... [1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/26/politics/covid-lab-leak-wuhan-china-intelligence https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/26/politics/covid-lab-leak-wuhan...

morepedantic 2y ago

I would like to jump on the band wagon and point out that this is an absolutely minuscule shift in position.

mmustapic 2y ago
> The C.I.A. has said for years that it did not have enough information to conclude whether the Covid pandemic emerged naturally from a wet market in Wuhan, China, or from an accidental leak at a research lab there. From "we don't know if it was a lab leak or spread from the market" to "we think it maybe is". Sure, they started this investigation with Biden, but just released it a couple of days ago AND they have even low confidence on it. So, why release it if the confidence is low? Why now? The answer is: new government, new conclusions.
- morepedantic 2y ago
  They went from uncertain to low certainty. It's hard to imagine a smaller shift in position than that, and thus the dog-pile. You're trying to drag me into some other debate entirely.