The framing for this comes courtesy of Sage Hana's excellent series decrying The Intercept's multiple journalistic failures, including TI founder Glenn Greenwald's odd refusal to delve into the metastasizing scandal of the COVID-19 “vaccines”. To Greenwald's odd absence from the signature aspects of that story we can add another failure arising from his
using anti vax in my question was not originally intended as derogatory.
but given your reply, i'm not interested in further discussion with someone who denies the evidence--the facts-- all around us--a million plus dead from the virus in the u.s., 80-90 % of those currently in icu's in hospital are the unvaccinated, and the dramatic decline in deaths and serious cases among those vaccinated like myself who got covid, with the 2 shots and a booster, and like many others, experienced no worse than a moderately bad cold.
Regardless of Glen Greenwald comments it is a matter of common sense: you do not get 'scared', terrified, (Nuland discomposure), the Russians can get material from the labs, if they only content 'defensive', health related stuff. To add insult to injury now there is a change to the story: they were Russian labs: yeah, we did not destroy them after more than 30 years, but support them and finance them.
Sorry 'fact checkers'? if you don't make any sense and make all our USA actions perfect, always right, never anything bad: there's no perfection in this world, you're showing your real 'colors'.
Frankly, the observations of Nuland's discomfiture strike me as a tad exaggerated. She was uncomfortable, but the notion that she came unglued and made a careless admission just doesn't match what I saw in the video of her answering Rubio's question.
But you have hit on the larger issue: the network of labs originated with Soviet Russia, and the Biological Threat Reduction Program has sustained and even enlarged them--AND THAT IS THE STATED PURPOSE OF THE ENTIRE PROGRAM.
The labs went from studying dangerous pathogens under Soviet auspices to doing pretty much the same thing under American auspices. And it's not a secret. The Nunn Lugar legislation authorizing this is public record. The funding is public record. The studies of tularemia, yersinia pestis, and other dangerous pathogens are a matter of public record, and not just in Ukraine, but throughout the world (including Russia). Some of the research is classified, but the substance of the overall program is not.
The rationale for this is that it's "peaceful" and "defensive". The same logic is used to rationalize gain of function research in Wuhan.
What's scandalous about the Ukrainian biolabs is not that they're a "secret", but that they are not. The entire BTRP has been acknowledged publicly since inception.
Like Fauci, the DoD and State Department see nothing wrong with this kind of "research".
I'm non-plussed by this. Politifact did not "embarrass" Greenwald - they took information and twisted it for a forgone conclusion, as did Snopes. Meanwhile, the US government is furiously trying to do damage control over what Nuland said, going so far as to claim Russia will stage a false flag with bioweapons. Can we focus on that please, instead of going after Glenn Greenwald for not being "thorough" enough in one article with a fast-breaking story?
what is a "vaccine" ?
According to the CDC today, a vaccine provides protection against disease.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm
According to the CDC prior to September 1, 2021, a vaccine provides immunity and prevents disease.
https://web.archive.org/web/20210826113846/https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm
The reason the CDC changed the definition was because the mRNA shots are NOT vaccines under the old definition.
Of course, it's debatable if they even qualify as vaccines under the new definition either.
using quote marks around the word vaccine makes it seem you are anti-vax--are you ?
I'm anti propaganda, anti junk science, anti stupidity, and anti troll.
it was really just a simple straight forward question--
so is the fact that the covid vaxes have greatly reduced and protected against the risks of covid propaganda, junk science and simply a stupid claim ?
1 - It's not a fact, but a lie. That has already been amply documented.
2 - My position regarding the Big Pharma inoculations is amply stated in the body of my work. I invite you to read it.
3 - Arguing a lie is a fact is the epitome of junk science. Yes, it's a stupid claim.
If you want to have a RESPECTFUL discussion of the data, we can do that. But it will be civil and it will be grounded in data. That is non negotiable.
Hateful and derogatory labels such as "anti-vax" are not respectful, not necessary, and not acceptable.
That too is non negotiable.
using anti vax in my question was not originally intended as derogatory.
but given your reply, i'm not interested in further discussion with someone who denies the evidence--the facts-- all around us--a million plus dead from the virus in the u.s., 80-90 % of those currently in icu's in hospital are the unvaccinated, and the dramatic decline in deaths and serious cases among those vaccinated like myself who got covid, with the 2 shots and a booster, and like many others, experienced no worse than a moderately bad cold.
no need to reply.
Regardless of Glen Greenwald comments it is a matter of common sense: you do not get 'scared', terrified, (Nuland discomposure), the Russians can get material from the labs, if they only content 'defensive', health related stuff. To add insult to injury now there is a change to the story: they were Russian labs: yeah, we did not destroy them after more than 30 years, but support them and finance them.
Sorry 'fact checkers'? if you don't make any sense and make all our USA actions perfect, always right, never anything bad: there's no perfection in this world, you're showing your real 'colors'.
Frankly, the observations of Nuland's discomfiture strike me as a tad exaggerated. She was uncomfortable, but the notion that she came unglued and made a careless admission just doesn't match what I saw in the video of her answering Rubio's question.
But you have hit on the larger issue: the network of labs originated with Soviet Russia, and the Biological Threat Reduction Program has sustained and even enlarged them--AND THAT IS THE STATED PURPOSE OF THE ENTIRE PROGRAM.
The labs went from studying dangerous pathogens under Soviet auspices to doing pretty much the same thing under American auspices. And it's not a secret. The Nunn Lugar legislation authorizing this is public record. The funding is public record. The studies of tularemia, yersinia pestis, and other dangerous pathogens are a matter of public record, and not just in Ukraine, but throughout the world (including Russia). Some of the research is classified, but the substance of the overall program is not.
The rationale for this is that it's "peaceful" and "defensive". The same logic is used to rationalize gain of function research in Wuhan.
What's scandalous about the Ukrainian biolabs is not that they're a "secret", but that they are not. The entire BTRP has been acknowledged publicly since inception.
Like Fauci, the DoD and State Department see nothing wrong with this kind of "research".
I'm non-plussed by this. Politifact did not "embarrass" Greenwald - they took information and twisted it for a forgone conclusion, as did Snopes. Meanwhile, the US government is furiously trying to do damage control over what Nuland said, going so far as to claim Russia will stage a false flag with bioweapons. Can we focus on that please, instead of going after Glenn Greenwald for not being "thorough" enough in one article with a fast-breaking story?