They didn't do it. We did.

[PopeBeanieModerator]

Unseen wrote:

I think the fact that there’s little apparent interest in investigating the matter is the best indication that we did do it.

My intention is to withhold conclusions until there’s sufficient evidence. All “evidence” so far is circumstantial. I’m so disappointed with the online trend to draw conclusions without evidence, while constantly viralizing all discussions from every POV, it seems that a little pushback is called for against obviously one-sided or prejudiced arguments that lack verifiable evidence. One doesn’t have to take a side just to point out that evidence is lacking. Similar to the Wuhan covid leak vs zoonotic crossover to explain where the pathogen originated… even scientists favoring a scandalous lab leak theory say that there’s no solid evidence to support any conclusion, and there may never be.

Meanwhile, IMO, a much, much bigger issue is Putin’s lies and lack of transparency. He uses his troops as cannon fodder and pays Wagner to execute war crimes with the most ruthless efficiency possible. His nuclear saber rattling is a reason to NOT appease him, and to disempower him as quickly as possible before he can win with impunity. If Biden is evil for lying about the pipeline, Putin out-evils him a hundred times over and should be taken out of the big picture for good.

A useful reaction from the pandemic would be to do a better job making research practices more transparent. China’s withheld data, which poses the largest challenge, at least wrt covid forensics. And “gain of function” is another virilized mess of non-expert opinionating and conspiracy hyperbolics. Determining pathogenic risks, pre-pandemic prophylaxes, and pandemic countermeasures is increasingly essential. One lab leak, if it really happened that way, should not deter further, transparent and regulated research, or else Mother Nature will continue to make the zoonotic risks rise.

• This reply was modified 1 month ago by  PopeBeanie. Reason: typos and clarity again. i write terrible drafts

[UnseenParticipant]

@PB

It doesn’t seem to you passing strange that all we get is “We didn’t do it” along with a hint that anyone who thinks we did is just stupid, when a flight of subpoenas could settle the matter?

You seem to imply that if we did do it, it’s not such a big deal. Well, it’s a big deal to a Europe that is dealing with scarce fuel and the cascade of side effects in their supply chains.

These are our allies and if we did do it, we stabbed them in the back.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

Bombing the pipeline was an irrational and destructive thing to do, that harmed the interests of the West.  Who does that point to?  R …

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

It could also have been Ukraine, attempting to harm Russian interests.  It doesn’t make any sense that the US or NATO did it.  There was already an energy shortage in Europe.

[_Robert_Participant]

PopeBeanie wrote:

Unseen wrote:

I think the fact that there’s little apparent interest in investigating the matter is the best indication that we did do it.

My intention is to withhold conclusions until there’s sufficient evidence. All “evidence” so far is circumstantial. I’m so disappointed with the online trend to draw conclusions without evidence, while constantly viralizing all discussions from every POV, it seems that a little pushback is called for against obviously one-sided or prejudiced arguments that lack verifiable evidence. One doesn’t have to take a side just to point out that evidence is lacking.

Yes Pope,

As the US/Euro economy is being overtaken by China’s we can expect tons of infighting. Two empires can coexist for a long time but essentially the result is that real wages are going down and young Americans won’t be as wealthy as their parents. Russia is only a nuclear threat as its economy is tiny and its conventional miliary is a paper tiger.

People want to assign blame for all this. Practically every meme or politically charged Youtube video title is an example of a logic fallacy or a host of them. The direct result of collecting your view history and targeting you with what you already want to believe in an endless positive feedback loop. This is why when someone commits an appeal to authority argument instead of producing evidence, the best thing to do is show the authority is suspect. They are called social media “influencers”, FFS. The appeal to fear is another fallacy running wild.

They will just help speed up the transition to a world once again dominated by authoritarianism.

[UnseenParticipant]

Conflicting Reports Thicken Nord Stream Bombing Plot

None of the emerging narratives surrounding the Nord Stream pipeline bombing really contradicts Seymour Hersh’s central allegation that Biden authorized the operation.

…

The question of whether Hersh’s story is accurate — either in whole or in part — is of monumental significance, and there are some issues related to this story that have not received as much attention as they deserve. Among these are questions surrounding the legal and constitutional framework the Biden administration would have used if, as Hersh’s source alleges, Biden directly ordered the bombing of the Nord Stream pipelines. There is also an emerging counternarrative to Hersh’s reporting from U.S. intelligence that warrants scrutiny, both on its merits and for how it might relate to Hersh’s story.

[UnseenParticipant]

The diversions begin. Now, it’s some unidentified pro-Ukraine group that destroyed the pipelines. Which, if true, was kinda dumb. By throwing Germany into a needless economic crisis, it hurts Germany’s ability to support the Ukraine war effort.

[Author]

Posts