War Against Lab Leak Grinds On, Beyond Laughable Now

Fifty-one percent of Americans favori lab leak origins of
SARS-CoV-2 virus, causing Coronavirus disease COVID-19,
Morning Consult

The explanation SARS-CoV-2 virus, (causing Coronavirus disease COVID-19), originated through accidental release from a research laboratory became the majority view of Americans in February 2023, according to polls in Morning Consult.

Democrats lead the nation in believing Covid 19 naturally occurred, instead of spilling over from a virology research laboratory — with only some 42 percent of Democrats favoring lab leak origins, 51 percent of all Americans favoring lab leak origins, and 72 percent of Republicans favoring lab leak origins. Morning Consult

Democrats have been obstinate in their refusal to publicly acknowledge the proposition an engineered lab leak that caused Coronavirus disease COVID-19 as an origins explanation is not only plausible, but now is clear and convincing and climbing.

However, as government leaks continue, it is becoming less politically palatable for Joe Biden and the Democrats to continue the Big Lie that Covid 19 must have not have come from a lab. [For a continuing dose of evidence, reason and facts on SARS-CoV-2 origins, see Alex Washburne @Ayjchan @JamieMetzl, Nicholas Wade, DRASTIC (Decentralized Radical Autonomous Search Team Investigating COVID-19), and especially all the folks at BiosafetyNow who are embarrassing the deluded and dishonest.

Virologists, clumsy at politics, to this day often sound like dead-enders in the origins debate. And not just virologists.

Writes Justin B. Kinney, Quantitative Biologist. Associate Professor, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. Co-founder, Biosafety Now, http://biosafetynow.org, "Not just virologists—public health experts and biosecurity experts too. Really seems like many in this extended science/policy community reflexively circle the wagons at any mention of a 'lab leak.'"

A recent exchange on social media exemplifies some public pronouncements and an unsettling ideology of many virologists, (noone is sure how many).

Marburg virus of 1967

The exchange concerns the infamous Marburg virus of 1967, one of the most famous lab leak tragedies, in which a deadly virus causing hemorrhagic fever leaked from lab workers to families and caregivers, resulting in 31 deaths.

One Krutika Kuppalli, a reputable bio-health expert, using perverse reasoning, voices her personal view that because a virus can infect human beings from animals, zoonoses, this virus capability disconfirms  possibility that researchers in a lab were studying that virus and that the virus subsequently could have leaked from the laboratory through lab workers, such as what happened in Marburg, Germany.

Writes Kuppalli on March 24, "If we can believe that #Marburg and many other infectious diseases (e.g. Ebola, Plague, Mpox etc) is the result of zoonotic transmission why is it so hard for us to believe that it was the same with COVID-19."

In reply to Kuppalli, Justin B. Kinney, Quantitative Biologist. Associate Professor, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. Co-founder, Biosafety Now (http://biosafetynow.org, @BiosafetyNow) in muted, apparent disgust, writes, "Fun fact: Marburg virus is named after Marburg, Germany—where the virus does not naturally occur—because the first documented outbreak was caused by a lab leak at the Behringwerke industrial plant there. @BiosafetyNow."

In reply to Kinney's simple and, what one would guess, is an uncontroversial narrative of a historical fact of a lab leak comes the following exchange:

This is absolutely false and why on earth would you make that up?

— Gigi Gronvall (@ggronvall) March 26, 2023

The following exchanges take place that ought merit Kinney be given a Nobel Peace Price for his patience in dealing with utter stupidity.

What I wrote is true. I thought you’d know this history.

— Justin B. Kinney (@jbkinney) March 26, 2023

I’m astounded by the disdainful reaction of public health and biosecurity experts to my *accurately* calling the 1967 outbreak of Marburg virus a “lab leak”. Their reaction makes me even less inclined to believe what they say about the origins of SARS-CoV-2. https://t.co/cfC1HdJCgu

— Justin B. Kinney (@jbkinney) March 26, 2023

Lesson going forward is: If an anti-lab leak stooge speaks, he or she is lying.

These state-sponsored propagandists are so transparent & vile.

— Dana Parish (@danaparish) March 26, 2023

Marburg was not a lab leak? It was lab workers infected by monkeys. That's a lab leak. In 2019, a US biolab was shut down because necropsies were performed on monkeys and the door to the room wasn't closed, exposing lab techs outside who weren't wearing respiratory protection.

— Laurence (Larry) Boorstein (@LarryBoorstein) March 26, 2023

It’s more than semantics/insults, the scientific community (of which I am a member) is by and large treating the public like they are stupid children that need to be punished for questioning their authority. I feel it’s the scientific community that needs to be held accountable

— Bryce Nickels (@Bryce_Nickels) March 26, 2023

>

It's troubling how many virologists seem more concerned about the potential for new rules and regulations on their own research than the possibility that the research of their respected colleagues might have sparked the COVID-19 pandemic. https://t.co/KhuBSYFAiq

— Justin B. Kinney (@jbkinney) March 25, 2023

Yes, it is troubling that virologists seem more concerned about the potential for new rules and regulations on their own research than the possibility that the research of their respected colleagues might have sparked the COVID-19 pandemic.

Even more troubling are the facts that the Democrat Party is not concerned that bio-research might have sparked the COVID-19 pandemic, and that Biden and the Democrats continue to block open investigations into the COVID-19 pandemic origins.

The attacks and lies will go on for a very long time.

It may seem subtle for people outside the field, but for anyone who's been paying attention throughout COVID, Dr. Gonsalves has been one of Dr. Fauci's attack dogs.

His attack on Dr. Redfield's far superior virological credentials is a transparently bad-faith defense of Fauci. https://t.co/WzdpWidaWk

— Alex Washburne (@WashburneAlex) March 26, 2023

Where, dolt, did Kinney suggest gain-of-function research was involved in the laboratory accidents with Marburg virus?

Why, dolt, do you limit the definition of "laboratory accident" to include only gain-of-function research?

— Richard H. Ebright (@R_H_Ebright) March 26, 2023

“In over 1,000 years of evolutionary time, we see no evidence of a furin cleavage site in any SARS CoV, except for the SARS-CoV that emerged in Wuhan 1.5 years after researchers proposed to insert a furin cleavage site in a SARS CoV in Wuhan.” Mmmm… https://t.co/rz4B1K2JHP

— Frank Visser (@ReusVisser) March 26, 2023

Unsurprisingly, virologists want the public to believe up is down, wet is dry, day is night, and that they care about lab safety. That journalists keep pretending AR and cohorts are experts in anything other than misinformation peddling is a joke. https://t.co/aXLV3Nw5Ar

— Bryce Nickels (@Bryce_Nickels) March 26, 2023

Kuppalli's statement, and similar statements over the last 24 hours by Eckerle, Gronvall, Rasmussen, and Pease are a public declaration of an inability to read, an inability to reason and/or a desire to deceive.

— Richard H. Ebright (@R_H_Ebright) March 26, 2023

I want everyone to observe how confidently "science journalist" @Laurie_Garrett states something as epidemiological fact, pointing to her book

And then read @R_H_Ebright, an actual scientist.

If you just read Garrett, your understanding of science would be wrong. https://t.co/4dqu1GfUzs pic.twitter.com/VCoG9RMVQc

— Alex Washburne (@WashburneAlex) March 27, 2023

Islam Knows War Is Depraved

Update: Greenwald: We wouldn't want to inflame anti-American sentiment:

We're currently occupying two Muslim countries. We're killing civilians regularly (as usual) -- with airplanes and unmanned sky robots. We're imprisoning tens of thousands of Muslims with no trial, for years. Our government continues to insist that it has the power to abduct people -- virtually all Muslim -- ship them to Bagram, put them in cages, and keep them there indefinitely with no charges of any kind. We're denying our torture victims any ability to obtain justice for what was done to them by insisting that the way we tortured them is a "state secret" and that we need to 'look to the future.'

We provide Israel with the arms and money used to do things like devastate Gaza. Independent of whether any or all of these policies are justifiable, the extent to which those actions 'inflame anti-American sentiment' is impossible to overstate.

And now, the very same people who are doing all of that are claiming that they must suppress evidence of our government's abuse of detainees because to allow the evidence to be seen would 'inflame anti-American sentiment.' It's not hard to believe that releasing the photos would do so to some extent -- people generally consider it a bad thing to torture and brutally abuse helpless detainees -- but compared to everything else we're doing, the notion that releasing or concealing these photos would make an appreciable difference in terms of how we're perceived in the Muslim world is laughable on its face.

---
Do not look at the pictures below - they are disgusting and repulsive to any civilized human being. [ I took them down, they make me feel sick. AfterDowningStreet keeps them to remind people that war is not a video game.]

But they make a point: That War, is awful and depraved.

Understand that President Obama's sub-moronic statement - "(T)he most direct consequence of releasing (the Abu Ghraib photos), I believe, would be to further inflame anti-American opinion and to put our troops in greater danger" - is ludicrous in the face of the 1,000,000s killed, wounded and traumatized for life in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Who wrote that for Obama?

Put aside the anti-democratic nature of secrecy and domestic government censorship for a moment, the families of the people we killed would gladly be tortured if they could bring back their children, their brothers, their fathers. Hey, these guys are actual human beings.

To reduce it to political terms President Obama, think of war as a bad PR strategy, a rude thing to do to your fellow human beings in other countries and something that inflames anti-American opinion. War supports the message that we don't like you.

What the hell do you think war does for anti-American opinion?

Democratic Dittoheads

PUMA (Party Unity My Ass) scream the commenters across the blogs of those who dare criticize the leader.

The issue is Obama's decision to bar release of torture photos, and you are a PUMA if you criticize Barack Obama. The Party merits your unwavering support.

Some of the shall we say less-than-sophisticated Democrats get right in line behind the leader, a la the most unthinking of the Republican mob.

Gleen Greenwald notes today:

Apparently, the proper reaction to heinous acts by our political leaders is not to hold them accountable but, instead, to hide evidence of what they did. That's the warped mentality Obama is endorsing today, and has been endorsing since January 20.

Raul Hilberg and Norman Cohn, were they alive today, would look on in disgust at this mob of the unthinking.

I thought the dittoheads were limited to their side.

Obama's Assualt - A Sister Secrecy Moment

Update: Greenwald on Obama's latest effort to conceal evidence of Bush era crimes. Dittoheads beware, Greeenwald links to John Aravosis (Obama's logic was "a bit Bushian") Steve Hynd ("Obama Trades Our Principles For Cheneyism") TPM ("Obama falls back on Bushisms") Dan Froomkin ("Obama Joins the Cover-Up"). And as Greenwald points out, "Obama now has new cheer-leaders: Bill Kristol, Michael Goldfarb and Max Boot," and come MyDD commenters below.

This is a trust-breaking moment, President Obama, and you really blew it.

It's not a mistake. It's an assault against this democracy.

That would be President Obama's decision to to block release of detainee photos of torture out of a concern that the photos would “further inflame anti-American opinion.”

What is this, a Sister Secrecy moment? Are you trying to prove to America that you're really not an open government, transparency-loving, honest, straight-shooting democrat?

Obama's argument is:

We cannot practice democracy at home by ensuring that the American people have access to IMAGES of facts already known, because we're afraid that sympathizers of torture victims will seek revenge.

If Obama is worried about the troops, get them the hell of out of these two wars in Asia already. Release the photos and then condemn them in the strongest possible terms, singling out the Neocon idiots on whose watch these obscenities happened and who ordered torture to begin with, instead of refusing to investigate and prosecute these war criminals.

From the Times:

The A.C.L.U. sharply criticized the president’s decision. In a statement, its executive director, Anthony D. Romero said:

'The Obama administration’s adoption of the stonewalling tactics and opaque policies of the Bush administration flies in the face of the president’s stated desire to restore the rule of law, to revive our moral standing in the world and to lead a transparent government. This decision is particularly disturbing given the Justice Department’s failure to initiate a criminal investigation of torture crimes under the Bush administration.

'It is true that these photos would be disturbing; the day we are no longer disturbed by such repugnant acts would be a sad one. In America, every fact and document gets known – whether now or years from now. And when these photos do see the light of day, the outrage will focus not only on the commission of torture by the Bush administration but on the Obama administration’s complicity in covering them up. Any outrage related to these photos should be due not to their release but to the very crimes depicted in them. Only by looking squarely in the mirror, acknowledging the crimes of the past and achieving accountability can we move forward and ensure that these atrocities are not repeated.'

Already, the Democratic equivalents of dittoheads are lining up behind the leader. Pathetic.

You Can't Handle the Truth

Secrecy is not playing well, nor should it. Check out the Tech Ticker video, especially the last 20 seconds.

Also from Tech Ticker:

A New York Times story, citing officials involved in the government's stress test, which declares 'all 19 banks undergoing the exams will pass them. '

This point ... is a continuation of what many believe is a hoax (or outright crime) being perpetrated on the American people by its government.

How do we know? One thing is certain: Trust is not an option.

Russ Feingold: Government in Secret

Thank you Russ Feingold.

See Russ Feingold: Government in Secret in the LA Times via Common Dreams:

... It’s a given in our democracy that laws should be a matter of public record. But the law in this country includes not just statutes and regulations, which the public can readily access. It also includes binding legal interpretations made by courts and the executive branch. These interpretations are increasingly being withheld from the public and Congress. ...

In a serious presidential campaign, the Bush administration's performance on the issue of secrecy in a democratic society would be debated endlessly by the major candidates. How about you, Sen. McCain: What's your opinion on the Bush administration's commitment to secrecy?

I don't believe we will get this discussion in the campaign from George Stephanopoulos, Charles Gibson and Wolf Blitzer.

Open Our Government

Our government wants to know a lot about us, but almost nothing about them. It should be the other way around.

OpenTheGovernment.org concludes:

The current administration has exercised an unprecedented level not only of restriction of access to information about federal government's policies and decisions, but also of suppression of discussion of those policies, their underpinnings, and their implications. It has also increasingly refused to be held accountable to the public through the oversight responsibilities of Congress. These practices inhibit democracy and our representative government; neither the public nor Congress can make informed decisions in these circumstances. Our open society is undermined and made insecure.

And Ruth Rosen reports on The Secret White House. This regime does not see itself as accountable to the public, and deserves to be treated as such. Face it, we live in a society high-jacked by an authoritarian bunch of repulsive renegades, at least if one believes in a Jeffersonian conception of government.
###