231–240 of 262 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would the FBI be hesitant about faking/sensationalizing this? It's nearly impossible to prove, China's unlikely to make an issue out of it, and even if the lie got exposed what punishment would they face?
>Why would the FBI be hesitant about faking/sensationalizing this? BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT CHINESE. The fact that you don't get it tells stories.
Given today's anti-free-thinker HN climate I'm probably going to get downvoted to oblivion for saying this, but I feel I need to say it. I don't think COVID-19 research should be secretive, I think it should be a global effort, and I'm perfectly happy with the idea of any nation having open access to all COVID-19 research, vaccines, results, and (anonymized) data. There should NOT be a concept of intellectual propert…
Someone should profit for figuring out how to stop COVID because otherwise there is little incentive beyond the government, and they don’t typically work nights and weekends. If China succeeds in stealing the solution, that will harm mankind because it will reduce future incentive to stop these things quickly.
Maybe a slight headstart if they throw extra research money on it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> First off, the west's covert activities are not limited to benign surveillance. An annoying thing about pro-chinea respondents is they chuck out these claims without backup. They do it a lot. it's irritating.
It's not 'pro china' to have surface familiarity with some of the CIA's greatest hits. They tried to kill Castro with an exploding cigar, no joke, like Looney tunes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok about korea, I'll look up the uprising. What about this bit he said "If the US were to spy on a citizen, they wouldn't end up in a concentration camp". Seems a valid point in general.
I mean, I'm not trying to say "china always good, USA always bad", either. I'm just trying to add some perspective. If I were to take that on as some sort of debate challenge, I'd point out the mass incarceration and the fact that we still have a bigger chunk of people in jail despite being so much freer. Of course, that's a bit of a rhetorical gambit. As far as the characterization of china, it depends. Han Chinese…
> that we still have a bigger chunk of people in jail
Provide a citation. I believe this figure is true for the US (you are saying you are in the US I take it?), so cite it. It's a strong and damning figure so bring it to the front.
> Han Chinese don't go to prison just for criticizing the government
Do other ethnicities? Why does ethnicity matter here? Does ethnicity make a difference in chinese law?
> They go to prison if they start getting organized, holding meetings, being an alternative political party
In this respect the US and the UK are better because you don't. Mind, I've no great trust in the government not to 'keep an eye on troublemakers' as they'd put it, in fact there's a long history of infiltrating groups in an immoral and downright illegal way sometimes, but they strongly tend not to end up in prison.
> Xinjiang...
I've not heard of this. Could you provide some pointers please? (genuinely curious)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Han Chinese don't go to prison just for criticizing the government, they just lose opportunities. This is verifiably false. Han vine Chinese book store owners in Hong Kong were kidnapped to mainland China, incarcerated and forced to sign confessions. Their ‘crime’ was selling books critical of the CCP.
I was speaking more generally. WeChat is monitored and things get said there, the gulags aren't full. There was a lot of outrage over that doctor that died after blowing the whistle about C19, for example. HK was more of a hot situation, you had protestors waving UK flags and talking about independence. I'm not justifying anything, but that's exactly the 'credible threat' vs 'talking shit' distinction I was talking a…
>> This is verifiably false.
> I was speaking more generally
That response is meaningless (the classic 'nebulous response' to an inconvenient question) and thus sidesteps addressing his point. Also please elaborate on what 'losing opportunities' means - I hope it doesn't extend to eg. the right to eat food does it?
> In the cases you're referencing, are they still locked up?
It's irrelevant if they are still locked up or released, they got locked up for political reasons. Right?
Given today's anti-free-thinker HN climate I'm probably going to get downvoted to oblivion for saying this, but I feel I need to say it. I don't think COVID-19 research should be secretive, I think it should be a global effort, and I'm perfectly happy with the idea of any nation having open access to all COVID-19 research, vaccines, results, and (anonymized) data. There should NOT be a concept of intellectual propert…
China promised to give its covid-19 vaccine to WHO for free. If the accusation is true, it's basically Robinhood for poor countries.
Given today's anti-free-thinker HN climate I'm probably going to get downvoted to oblivion for saying this, but I feel I need to say it. I don't think COVID-19 research should be secretive, I think it should be a global effort, and I'm perfectly happy with the idea of any nation having open access to all COVID-19 research, vaccines, results, and (anonymized) data. There should NOT be a concept of intellectual propert…
> Given today's anti-free-thinker HN climate You should champion China to be more transparent about the origins of the virus. Even if it did not originate in a lab, shining more light on its origins will help prevent future outbreaks. China also actively prevented Taiwan from joining the WHO. This would have resulted in more free flow of information. Curiously, I was a labelled a racist for making this statement. > P…
TBH no matter how transparent China is you won't trust it until it turns out to be what you believe.
> actively prevented Taiwan from joining the WHO
Every WHO member can formally invite Taiwan and cast a vote, why didn't any five-eyes nation do that?
> does not do anything for free
I agree. It's simply ruthless geopolitics no matter how angelic a country pretends to be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Point to nearly anything that has dramatically changed modern life and you will see the arm of the state involved: GPS, internet, the airplane, etc. The best argument I'm aware of for private enterprise producing really novel products is Bell Research, however they were a regulated monopoly, not a competitive industry and the state authorized 10% additional charges for investment. You can make some arguments about th…
If you think Apple simply "took something off the shelf" and sold us iPhones at huge markups, you clearly know even less about R&D than I assumed. Cherry-picking examples like the Internet doesn't really prove your point: try comparing the amount of taxpayer-funded R&D that went into the early (pre-1994) Internet with the amount of private investment since then. (I have no idea what the actual numbers are but I'd gue…
I mean, it'd make sense if the government research spending aligned with public interest more closely than private investment did, the government is spending the public's money after all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>>firing inspector generals en masse https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_co... >>>intervening in the criminal proceedings of your friends and political allies http://www.allgov.com/news/controversies/obama-fires-inspect... https://cei.org/blog/obama-fires-inspector-general-who-uncov... >>>a comprehensive strategy to weed out anyone who disagrees with you https://www.motherjones.com/politics/201…
Do you have any links that aren't from these wackjob, far-right fever dream websites? It's honestly hard to even read some of these without laughing. > https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_co... All I see is extreme editorializing of the regular push and pull of government ("horrific neglect", "bull[ing]", "stonewalling", etc). How many of them were fired because Obama didn't like what they were…
Far-right websites like the Washington Post? http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2009/06/third_c...
>>>His connection to Obama was... what exactly?
Kevin Johnson was a public political supporter of Obama while mayor of Sacramento.[1] Walpin investigated Johnson for fraud. Obama fired Walpin. Which one of those three facts are you disputing?
>>>since they have basically nothing to do with what you quoted
The cei.org link should have been grouped with the Rasmussen Reports link as they are both related to the firing of IGs.
>>>Not going to spend time watching some fringe conspiracy YouTube channel
That video cites numerous articles from major journalistic outlets (BBC, NY Observer which itself cites the Washington Post) relevant to the discussion of corruption in the Obama administration, and runs through them at the cyclic rate. It's time-efficient content. It's also funny. But you can't debate any of the information provided, or any of the conclusions drawn, if you discount the presenter as "fringe conspiracy nuttiness".
>>>You should seriously consider that you may be in a short, narrow, and extremely loud echo chamber.
In this thread I've cited sources ranging from the right (Michelle Malkin, Heritage foundation), to the center (BBC, CBS News), to the left (Washington Post, Politifact). You haven't posted anything, haven't countered any of the facts, and have only criticized the sources with strawman accusations of "far right conspiracies". I would challenge you to be more aggressive about exposing yourself to information that challenges your positions and assumptions, and avoid the strawmen.
>>>These aren't the kinds of ideas that normal, well-read, well-informed people from all sides of the political spectrum hold.
Which idea are you arguing against, that Dick Cheney and associated companies were massively corrupt? [2] [3]
[1]https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-obama-introduced-c...
[2]https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2010/jun/09/arianna-hu...
[3]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/halliburton-whistleblower-on-ex...
Does anyone really wonder if we (the US) and China are going to be at war in the next 10 years?
I come from an ex-communist country. So this is probably (hopefully) the only moment my talent of spotting this kind of shit is useful. The thing is that whatever bad behavior the USA committed in the past, and then anxiously analyzed and mulled over for decades... the Chinese are doing day by day, routinely, without ANY remorse or second thought. With the Russians it was different. Sorry to say this, but compared to…