seems to me, as a weapon covid is a fizzer...
Well, other than the bit about 6.9 million people (so far) being killed by the Gates/China/Fauci et al virus... ?
My point was exactly that, though... that "as military weapons" things bio tend to be crap... because of very hard to target, and once released... very hard to control... making it as likely to kill you as it is the other guy. That hasn't stopped things like... distribution of blankets with smallpox... or contaminating the other guys wells... or using the trebuchet to launch rotting corpses into the other guys castle. Discrete events in which geography or variations in immunity were reliable barriers to blowback... carve out exceptions ?
Mostly... where you see them being used... it will be as a function of some serious whack job gone rouge... or some serious Vlad the Impaler style derangement and desperation. Still leaves it more likely that "experiments" being done on others are a higher probability now than other use... a reason the Africans in Ebola were rightly distrustful, having been subject to such previously. The U.S. has known history... subjecting the population to CIA testing of "benign" agents in subways in U.S. cities to investigate how they spread... probably more to it than that... and not very likely they're the only ones... the Brits and others with knowns... the FSU, etc., as cold war era excess.
I still see less reason for concern coming from established institutions that should know better... and more reason for concern in relation to "new" institutions being created outside the prior controls... in parallel with new developments in the science. New generations with new tools tend to think old rules don't or shouldn't apply to them... only the more if the errors in the ego and $ issues are re-enforced by other factors.
The NGO linkages to all of the above thus give more reason for pause... more in degree they identify as "the enemies" worthy of being attacked by such things... pretty much everyone... as "we just have too many people" isn't the sort of concern that might have you care too much about precision in targeting...
That's not me being dismissive about the ability to do harm to others... still just noting it as a bad idea... ?
Why would anyone ? Perhaps, using it while seeking to gain the "deniability" factor, for one... even attacking yourself with it as a false flag while seeking to impose particular impacts on others by controlling the spread is thus not out of the question... if still a horrible idea. China clearly did engage in some of that... after it was known, in China, that the impact was likely to be significant... China clearly made the decision to "share"... to avoid being uniquely impacted. That's why I've noted the origin issues being impossible to pin down precisely without China's good will in the effort... isn't overly relevant in relation to motives... as the subsequent choices are more than relevant enough.
The rest, you note properly... that effects are amplified by reaction-functions of politicians in various domains...
so, as the NGO angle is one that ties into political agenda...
Means that IF you wanted to use the virus as a weapon... you might be expected to adopt reaction-functions that AMPLIFY the impacts... or direct them in unique ways... or otherwise, simply exploit the fact as "never let a crisis go to waste"...
If systems have been corrupted to the degree they've allowed it to occur at all, and have enabled it through dysfunction (as clearly has occurred)... it might also be used as a diversion... to facilitate some other and more targeted attack. So, concern(s) that the vaccine(s) is (are) the real vector(s) of attack(s)... and not intended as a protection against an attack... are not irrational...
But, then... you'd probably have to come up with a "vaccine" that didn't confer immunity... or some other crazy thing like that ?
What behaviors would you expect to see if "reaction-functions" were being adopted that way ?
Do you see that happening ? Is what you see... truly nefarious... nefarious in some part only... or only a proof of near total incompetence on the part of "experts" who have been corrupted by bad actors with $ ?
The virus... thus could be a political weapon that is being used to mount an attack on trust in government...
or to facilitate an attack on government using the disarray fostered to enable that...
Noting the CDC seems it is now writing legislation as executive fiat... ?
"Who's going to stop them" ?
And, for that, perhaps its working in spades... while the errors in judgment combined with the politicization are doing yeoman's work in fostering a rapidly accelerating growth in division...
If global stability requires competent governance... and a healthy global immune system...
Don't expect much in the way of global stability going forward ?
Who would benefit from disrupting stability ? Who has been actively working at disrupting stability ? |
