Experts in Experimentation

@ArishMell Maybe one of the best ways to draw attention is through exaggeration.

Clearly Mengele was pure evil. Fauci, on the other hand, obviously never wielded a surgical instrument to destroy a human. (Though his record with the treatment of beagle dogs in experiments is beyond sickening.)

But his record with this experimental gene therapy puts him well up on the list of tyrants with blood-free hands. He funded work gain of function work, colluding with China (despite Obama having forbidden such work). One way or another, this led to the release of a pathogen which could lead to death in the elderly, vulnerable particularly if they already had poor health. Fauci and collaborators then changed all the rules of the game, cobbled together these dangerous injectables which actually interfere with people's DNA, and - again with collaborators - FORCED these products on the world.

We have started to see the results.

So by being involved in the creation of a hyped-up worldwide threat and then creating the even more dangerous "cure", Fauci has left himself open to accusations of crimes at a much higher level (in some senses) than those of Mengele.

But if you want to find out whether Fauci is guilty or innocent, why not read the definitive work, "The Real Antony Fauci". Despite what the "fact-checker" guardians of The Narrative may say, this is a work of real scholarship. Practically every sentence has a footnote leading to a verifiable external reference. The evidence given cannot be countered. And it is damning.

And please don't fall into the media-fomented habit of calling anyone who disagrees with the propaganda a Qanon, or a Nazi, or a racist, or a bio-terrorist, or a granny-killer, or a "----"-denier (choose your cause).

That kind of slander is not worthy of you

@WalterF You are certainly right about the power of exaggeration - the newspapers have always used that. I do not though call you a "Nazi" - you are obviously anti-Nazi - nor Qanon follower, but some of what you suggest is not much more plausible than the latter. Anyway you'd not made that image but had quoted it from God-Knows-Where. (Or where He'd would rather not know.)

The stark truth of Covid is that really no-one knows its origin; whatever the FBI and curiously, the US Dept. of Energy believe probably for US domestic political reasons. The FBI bloke mentioned Covid killing "millions of Americans" suggesting he knows and cares little about it also killing far more millions around the world.

The Chinese government has not helped matters by hindering investigations there, not realising that would only encourage all sorts of accusations of will or negligence against them. Yet the pandemic hit them very hard in various ways so it would be in their interests to help identify and publish the disease's real source; just as they published the virus' genetics.


It might not even be a "Chinese" disease; just as so-called "Spanish Flu" was never Iberian.


China first identified the illness but not source - and after her initial panic and confusion, released its identity world-wide. The 'Flu was associated with Spain only by Spain's neutrality in WW1 meaning an un-censored Press that could report its effects openly within Spain.

That is perhaps one of the most frightening aspects of such a disease. Thanks to massive, widespread international travel it could arise almost anywhere and become widespread before it becomes noticed as somehow different from many other illnesses of overlapping symptoms.

What do do then? We do not try to blame nations or individuals. That achieves nothing, especially as it likely to be wrong anyway. We can only and must work together to identify the disease and any protections and treatments against it we can.

It is an awful gamble, when Nature throws its latest cull method at us, to rush into our defences; but what else can we do? I have noticed none of the most ardent ant-vaccination and anti-quarantine campaigners offer constructive alternatives.

If though we dither through insisting on vaccines or medicines needing go through years of testing, through not imposing deeply unpleasant but necessary controls, through seeing epidemics and pandemics as if they are political dogmas.... the death-toll, the long-term as well as short illnesses, the political, social and economic consequences for everyone; will be far, far worse.

What will we do when the next appears? Learn from this and try to fight it; or let it rip through fear of the defences being worse than the disease?

@ArishMell It is strange, and surely highly irregular, that the previous long-in-preparation, thorough, tested Pandemic Preparedness plan / arrangement in the UK was summarily ditched in favour of the lockdown, we-must-stop-all-human-interaction approach, in order to "eliminate" a virus - obviously an impossible, unscientific position.

The human cost has been inestimable.

Why the irrational change? and why did so many governments operate in lockstep on this? In passing, it is to be noted that governments removed many basic freedoms from the individual. Few protested, as they had been successfully persuaded that all measures taken were to protect them from mortal danger. Few took the Orwellian view. Few saw the coming danger, that all opinions contrary to the official narrative would be SUPPRESSED.

I find it most gratifying that Hancock's devious behaviour is now being mercilessly exposed in the press. I hope it's a wake-up call to those who have complied with every diktat coming from the mouths of the Gang of Three wheeled out day after day at 5 pm, with the Union Jack behind them and the graveyard-voiced BBC commentators demanding ever harsher crackdowns.

This is a Great Britain I am ashamed to be associated with.

@WalterF Right, what would you have done?

Practically every government in the world, democracy and tyranny alike, was faced with a new, very infectious disease, affecting people in all sorts of ways including very unexpected ones, easily fatal - how else could they have responded?

I didn't like the lock-downs and associated restrictions any more than you do, but they have gone.

Yes, perhaps it could have been handled better, by any nation, and it is still putting people in hospital - but better in what ways?

I don't know - but do you? All I hope is that those who should know - biologists, doctors, politicians, administrators - do know and can handle the next pandemic better.

Even if still having to use quarantines among their precautions: the word being Italian and coined for the "Forty-Day" Isolation introduced by the Italians trying to stem the Black Death centuries ago.

++++

As for Matt Hancock, whatever he did or did not do, perhaps the best lessons there are that the wretched hypocrite of a journalist involved cannot be trusted to hold material safely and not to release it without authority to suit her own ideas; and that politicians should use proper means of internal communications, not "social media".

@ArishMell The Pandemic Preparedness plan was studied to be an effective response to a dangerous pandemic.

Covid-19 was classed as a dangerous pandemic (after convenient modification of the definition of a pandemic by the WHO).

Ergo, the existing plan was fully adequate. Prepared by experts.

So why on earth radicalise it, by imprisoning the nation? (lockdown being a term used in the prison context)

Suggested answer: the well-known politician's maxim - "never let a good crisis go to waste". In other words, milk it to the full. Use it to achieve your aims.

Hancock - entirely to blame for this release of information. It wonderfully displays his guilt.