Increasingly, we are seeing evidence that this coronavirus was spread as an intentional attack.
As David has already noted, the Chinese Communists have blamed our military for the spread of the Wuhan virus. Now initially, most people, myself included, considered this a huge backside ,-covering move.
Now, however, I wonder if it’s not more serious than that.
You see, the Chinese Communists, traditionally, when they want to blame somebody else for something that they themselves have done, tend to blame the CIA, not the US military. That distinction is important because from an international law point of view, calling the virus an American military action versus calling it a spy action means that the Chinese can claim that it was an act of war. Frankly, that’s the only reason I can see for the distinction…The only reason I can see for the change of tactics.
And frankly I am far from convinced that this isn’t the Communist Party following their own founders advice about “accuse your opposition of what you are guilty of.”
Add to that, this coming from Tom Cotton the other day, on Martha MacCallum’s show:
“We know it didn’t originate in the Wuhan food market based on the study of Chinese scientists … I’m not saying where it started, I don’t know. We don’t know because the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) won’t open up to international experts,” Cotton said. “That’s what we need to do so they can get to the bottom of where the virus originated and hopefully can effect a diagnostic test and vaccine for it.”
…
Cotton also pushed back against critics, specifically Rutgers University chemical biology professor Richard Ebright, who said he found no indication in the genome sequence of the virus to indicate it was engineered.
“Let’s take the professor,” Cotton said. “He was …in fact today cited in the Asia Times saying that it was quite possible that it was a laboratory incident.”
“That’s not saying this is a bioweapon,” Cotton clarified, “but we do know they were investigating and researching coronavirus in that laboratory. It could’ve been an accidental breach, it could’ve been a worker that was infected.”
So, grotesque as the wet market in Wuhan is, the idea that the virus originated there seems questionable at best.
It seems to me far more likely that it came from a couple of miles down the road… at the well established laboratory. I keep hearing, through back channels sources that none other than George Soros has a large financial stake in that lab.
Even if you assume that the release was unintentional and a worker at that site became infected and thus spread it to the population, the question remains what in the world the Chinese were doing developing such viruses in the first place.
The American news media with the help of the Chinese propagandists may consider Tom Cotton to be a fringe figure, but he’s not an idiot. He can read intelligence reports as well as anybody.
There are other indications that this was an intentional act… Mostly the press reaction to it, largely driven by an entity called China Daily, an organization which provides Chinese propaganda masquerading as news which place is like the New York Times The Washington Post the Miami herald and so on pick up and run verbatim.
Another point is the economy. The one fact that the Democrats ,(and the Chinese, but I repeat myself) have been unable to surmount, is the huge and unalloyed success all of the economy under Donald Trump. Personally I can’t think of a better way of dealing with that issue than shutting down the economy entirely on the basis of “the world’s going to end because of the coronavirus.” It seems to me a little too convenient.
There’s one more point to be had here. the most serious of the SARS cases under the Obama Administration ended up numbering in the neighborhood of 50,000 cases, give or take. the Obama Administration brushed it away as being not a major concern. And yet the roughly 5,000 deaths I’ve seen in the most recent reasonable projection here in the United States causes people to believe that the end of the world is nigh? Any death is tragic, certainly, but the variance in reaction between the two cases is I think cause for concern. I mean, forgive me, but something simply doesn’t add up here. There is either far more going on here than we’re being told or far less, and at this point, I would be hard-pressed to tell you which.
All these factors put together however, are more than enough to cause you to sit back and go “Hmmmm”.
