Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: arun gera who wrote (188274)	6/1/2022 8:20:08 PM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Recommended By 3bar Respond to of 217750

Arun, your comments are superficially correct, but wrong in that different people have different ideas. With a few billion people and millions in various positions to do things in the Covid and H5N1 etc process and many thousands in military, government, businesses, medical cartels, science and whatnot, I guess you know they don't all act in rational coherence. A physicist will invent fusion reactions, engineers will build atomic bombs, politicians will fund them from taxes, military people will strategize and prepare, and some Dr Strangelove will go rogue and off they go. The outcome would be unintended by all except one individual. Similarly with covid. I'm in favour of R&D, but not in favour of deployment of weaponized viruses. Scientists want to do research. Bill Maher would want a recession to get Trump out. Federal Reserve will move interest rates to support their favoured president [as I thought they did to keep George W in power when interest rates should obviously have been raised long before, or they resisted lowering them to stop George W being elected by keeping the economic boom clinging on after the Y2K bust was well underway]. So with Covid, Pfizer would want a protection package ready to go. The military might think it swishy to take down China. A researcher might want to see their virus in the wild to see how it goes [the arsonist tendency]. I want R&D to prepare for wild viruses that might form [such as humanized H5N1]. Politicians might want kickbacks for fundings. Everyone has different motivations which could be completely opposite to each other in many instances. You are right that not all or even most explanations have to involve Trump, but assuredly vast swathes of them did involve trying to get him so it's hardly a stretch that people with an influence in one sphere might think virus release would be a way to get him while doing other good stuff too. People don't necessarily have single motives to do things. Small expenditures compared with big ones? People act in millions of ways to get small amounts of money which are huge to them. The trail is hardly wide open to public view. I have no idea who the military people who attended the deployment games might be. There's only circumstantial evidence that I'm aware of for various theories on who dunnit, but there are probably documents/data somewhere that shows what, who, when etc, probably under 75 year top secret confidentiality. Lack of evidence is not evidence of absence. Pfizer had a Vaxx almost ready to go, which doesn't mean somebody else didn't want a virus panic and recession to get Trump. Multivariate motives. They got the best of both worlds = $billions in Vaxx profits and got rid of Trump as well. And for added fun, got a chance to boss everyone around. USA didn't get China to test a bioweapon. They were allegedly the subject of it. The Wuhan R&D might have been related or great cover for deployment. You can rest assured that China and USA were not in cahoots with the creation and deployment of Covid in China. But you might be right that it's possible. I don't see why they would be aligned, other than in doing R&D on viruses and whatnot, which I think is a very good idea. Seeking single answers in the vastly complex chimpoid zoo with millions of different people doing millions of different things with many different motives is not normally worthwhile. Similarly in Ukraine - why the war? Putin bad = a stupidly simplistic answer. Military-industrial profits also simplistic. Kickbacks for Hunter and DementiaJoe10% also simplistic albeit true. Obama fun and power also simplistic. Military murderous maniacs also true, necessary but not sufficient. Hating Stalin and USSR evils no doubt fits some such as Zbig and Azovs. Germans goose-stepping again with Herr Gruppenfuhrer Stoltenberg, Klaus Schwab and co, Nazis not enough on their own. Putin refusing to bow down to Russia Russia Russia attacks another variable, not enough in itself. Russians not wanting to have 1812 Overture played again in Moscow yet another motivation. All sorts. Millions of motives. We got the war in Ukraine and maybe MAD, and we got Covid. Multivariate analysis why is required. The pangolin-bat mating in the Wuhan Wettery is looking like a dud theory. I doubt many people at all subscribe to that theory now. Mqurice