By the way, just saying…
“COVID19”–you couldn’t come up with a better name for a lethal, economy-tanking pandemic. Like SMERSH or SPECTRE. Hollywood screenwriters get paid big bucks to come up with evil names like that.
As our talks went around the ‘intelligence’ of someone who declared this on television, I wonder, with your original statement, how you may be classified inside the intelligent part of the humans;
More intelligent than a “stable genius”.
1 Like
You have a hard time getting golf partners?
2 Likes
Ceasefire.
I only fire when fired upon.
I thought it was pretty clear what you were trying to do which is why I called you out on it.
He didn’t have any trouble understanding what I was getting at with my question. I know this because he directly responded to that point in his response.
I’m sure he appreciates you standing up for him but he’s a big boy and can fend for himself.
Can you please cite you source for this as I would like to read more about how doctors and scientists in the US are being censored by the US Govt. and or other various levels.
Sure thing. Here’s one from the Fed Govt that they’ve since reversed according to the link:
Or this one, straight up not allowing Fauci to answer a question directed to Fauci:
Further down I was thinking of the Florida surgeon general being escorted out of the Q&A, a spokesperson has since said he had a meeting. I’ll take their word for it.
I see you didn’t enquirer about the rest of my sentence you quoted, about spreading misinformation and falsehood. Is that because you agree the Administration is doing it and that it’s a problem?
1 Like
Excluding one network is not censorship. Any one of the doctors affected by that order was free to go on that network anyway if they so chose. Would they be removed from the team if they had done that? Sure/maybe/probably you can have your opinion on that hypothetical all you want. Either way, it’s not censorship.
Same with Fauci…he can get onto any network he wants any time he wants due to his name recognition and the fact he is a subject matter expert. That’s not censorship.
Not familiar with the Florida surgeon general’s situation but has he been “disappeared” like doctors in China? No, he hasn’t, therefore to try to draw an equivalency like:
Is bullshit.
As far as
no, I do not advocate false statements by anyone in the Govt. The problem is a lot of the “misleading statements” are VERY subject to bias. Just an example offhand, one might say “we want to be open by Easter” is a big LIEEEEE, but others would consider that the leader giving optimistic statements to a country in crisis…that’s why I
because there’s a lot of room for endless argument about that. Not so much about censorship (IMO).
That is a form of censorship. The head of the Pandemic Response Team, VP, who schedules media bookings of the experts on that team, said he would not allow those experts to be booked on CNN because of the way they covered the briefings. Whether you like it or not millions of people get their news from CNN. It is patently ridiculous to say that they were free to go even if they might lose their jobs over it. That means they were not free to go, they were being censored. The leading pandemic experts were being prevented from speaking with one of the largest news organizations in the country by the VP of the United States.
I had assumed you would not advocate false statements by the government; I don’t know anyone who would say that they do. But your example is not one I’d use to represent the blurred bias line between lies, mis-info, and misleading. Saying he wanted the country open by Easter wasn’t any of those. It was counter to all of his science/medical advisors advice, but it was not a lie, it was a hope, not realistic, and served no good to say it in public.
What is unambiguous are statements attempting to deflect any responsibility whatsoever, following the literal statement of “I don’t take responsibility at all.” about the lag in test kit availability. “we inherited bad tests.” “We inherited a broken test—the whole thing was broken” “They were obsolete.” Really, inherited from whom? From a previous administration? There was no COVID19 previously. It’s ok to say there was no test for something that didn’t previously exist, so why lie?
“Anybody that wants a test can get a test.” Is this a rip off the ACA Keep Your Doctor playbook? That was first week of March. Know when my county started to get the bulk of their test kits (and certainly not enough for anybody)? This week. And regardless, it is up to healthcare providers to decide who gets tested, so no, anybody who wants a test can absolutely not get a test. Not now, and definitely not back on March 6th.
“Now they’re doing tests on airlines-very strong tests-for getting on, getting off. They’re doing tests on trains-getting on and off” Truth: no they are not.
When referring to NY “I don’t believe you need 40,000 or 30,000 ventilators.” Three days later when asked about that statement, his reply: “I didn’t say that. I didn’t say that. I didn’t say that. Come on. Be nice.” Truth: He said that.
Now some things don’t fall into the lie category, like Kellyanne Conway’s comment about what the 19 means. I don’t know how to categorize that. Just ignorant? This is the senior advisor to the president. But her favorite actual lie seems to be saying the president did not say something he just said. Like with cutting entitlements, or bombing Iranian cultural sites. When journalists with balls play the video of Trump saying what she just denied he said, she still inexplicably sticks to her story.
It’s par for the course for this Administrations Press Secretaries, going back to Spicer “Hitler didn’t use chemical weapons,” or Grisham lying about the date Trump arrived in a certain country, or the newest, McEnany, not a lie, just false hope with a hint of partisan douchbagery “We will not see diseases like the coronavirus come here. And isn’t it refreshing when contrasting it with the awful presidency of President Obama,” that was in Feb, not long before Trump himself was saying it was totally under control.
So I stand by my previous post, which I believe you agreed with, that when you can’t speak truthfully and accurately about something as important as a national emergency, don’t speak. (Sorry that was so long, for anyone who actually read it)
5 Likes
Just to be picky, Covid-19 is the name of the illness, not the virus.
CoronaVirusDisease-[20]19 I think.
1 Like
The original topic is: “Who’s to blame for Covid-19?” Calling it Novel Corona Virus, Covid-19; Sars-Co2, CoronaVirusDisease-2019, Wuhan Virus, and/or China Virus doesn’t really matter. It’s well agreed that the virus origins are Wuhan, China. Did it come from a “wet market” or a level 4 virus research lab in Wuhan? Who knows? I would suggest that China’s reluctance to allow outside scientists, provide the virus sequencing, provide information on the origin/1st case/lab results, allow international travel from Wuhan while restricting domestic travel from Wuhan, reporting that the virus is NOT transmitted person to person (thus having potential to become a pandemic), and telling this to the WHO is responsible for the Lion’s share of the blame. I would also question “what is it that they are hiding?” The WHO’s primary responsibility is to research & investigate outbreaks to prevent spread and pandemics throughout the world. They didn’t bother to VERIFY the information that they were receiving from China taking it on face value and they should also shoulder some responsibility for the spread. Doesn’t the world rely and trust on the WHO to do this very important job??? Each & every country in the world afflicted have made and will continue to make mistakes in dealing with this. Obviously they would have made no mistakes IF the virus was contained in China. BUT none of them (other than CHINA) certainly can be blamed for the release and prevention of the initial spread of this “virus”. In my lifetime there has been Hong Kong Flu, Asian Flu, and now Wuhan Virus. Perhaps it’s time to evaluate the role that “wet markets” play (and will continue to play) in the threat to world wide pandemics and do something about that on the world stage.
The Communications Over Various Feeds Electronically for Engagement Act (COVFEFE Act) is a bill introduced into the United States House of Representatives in 2017 (on June 12), during the 115th United States Congress.
International organizations can have challenges walking a diplomatic line, there is no ‘power’ in these organizations anymore than the IMO can take away mariner licenses.
Since that is the lay of the land, it is not uncommon for governments or other organizations to add extra protections than provided by international organizations.
Sounds like the US did, they added safeguards and barriers and personnel to keep the domestic disease control agency honest. Having such safeguard would not only have likely benefitted the US, but also the whole world. Shame they were reduced/removed.
And sure, that doesn’t excuse the problems that may have led to the outbreaks, but when examining an incident, it’s also important to recognize when the barriers to unacceptable consequences were removed. The EL FARO sank by the failure of one man, but, the extent and severity of the consequences went beyond that individual, and included failures of safeguards that should have minimized extent. Would you give ABS or CG or TOTE a pass for their parts despite the primary responsibility?
1 Like
Nah. He had no idea what he was saying, especially when it comes to legislation. If it ain’t an executive order he’s signing in his obsessive want to undo all of Obama’s accomplishments, he doesn’t have a clue. I believe he was trying to type press “coverage”, but didn’t finish or spell check.
1 Like
The WHO isn’t a police organization. It doesn’t bust down doors and serve warrants. It relies entirely on the good faith efforts of the countries that want to cooperate with it. If China did lie to the WHO, are you blaming the WHO for being lied to?
But the administration of POTUS45 had plenty of officials who knew an epidemic was beginning, as early as Dec 31.
From the WAPO:
15 officials from his administration were embedded with the WHO in Geneva, working full time, hand-in-glove with the organization on the virus from the very first day China disclosed the outbreak to the world, Dec. 31. At least six other U.S. officials at WHO headquarters dedicated most of their time to the virus, and two others worked remotely with the WHO on covid-19 full time. In the weeks that followed, they and other U.S. government scientists engaged in all major deliberations and decisions at the WHO on the novel coronavirus, had access to all information, and contributed significantly to the world body’s conclusions and recommendations.
Everything that the WHO knew, the Trump administration knew — in real time.
END
So the question is, Why did the administration take so long to take action?
But it’s an irrelevant question, because POTUS45 knew it was a pandemic before it was even called a pandemic. Proof? His own words. POTUS45 quote, from March 17, "I felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic.”
I think so too. The automatic spell check is pretty aggressive and takes over if you’re not alert. It also happened to me on quite a few occasions.
I agree wholeheartedly with you about international organizations, but there are signatories (China is one) to the WHO. While I’ll admit I don’t know anything about it’s charter, I would like to think that allowing the WHO into a country to investigate would be part of it. Allowing other countries (such as the US) to investigate on site I would think is discretionary and entirely up to the country of origin. I know that the WHO has not policing powers, but at the very least they should conduct an independent, on site investigation and not take a country’s “word” of the situation. That’s how a pandemic can be started (and it did). The WHO should have done their due diligence for themselves (and the world that they represent) and blew the whistle that the virus could be spread human to human and not tow the Chinese political line.
I do agree that there are barriers when dealing with profit vs regulatory oversight. I don’t believe in the case of the El Faro that ABS/USCG/Tote should get a pass for their role, but ultimately in this incident the bulk of the responsibility can be placed on one man’s mistake. Whether he felt pressure of the schedule (unlikely, I believe), deviation causing more fuel consumption (slightly, maybe), hopes of getting a permanent billet on a new ship and not having a blemish on his record (a little more likely), and lastly my opinion of the most likely cause - complacency & over reliance on old weather data & software while not seeking the latest weather forecasts (from as many sources as were available)to base this very important decision.
As is removal of such personnel—so, there was additional oversight in place and it was removed, voluntarily. That removal was not without repercussions. You should consider the removal as a fault.
Excuse me, excuse me. The barriers are in place to protect. The nature doesn’t matter. The government pays for CDC to be in China, and a pandemic office in the White House and removed it. Turns out if you pull the state troopers off the highway, people will speed—is this really a factor that needed to be tested? Was it ever in doubt?
What do you expect happens in response? That America put in place exactly what was in place? Or just pay someone something ? Wouldn’t you prefer prevention to compensation?
1 Like
In case I’m not making myself clear, the equivalent in the EL Faro case is the idea that there were National Weather Service personnel onboard to assist the Master and/or warn the company or Coast Guard, who were removed to be replaced, by no one.