Tucker Carlson or the CDC: Who Do You Trust More for Advice About Masks?

I just finished watching what I would call a very in-depth report with the former Director of the CDC, Dr. Redfield, who after a couple of weeks ago going on tv and saying that he believes the lab leak theory is the more plausible one, took a break from commenting because he was getting death threats. Can you imagine? "If you don't stop talking about an alternate theory, we will kill you"? What the fuck is that all about?


He went on to say that he was disappointed that Dr. Fauci was so wedded, to the bat to intermediate host ( that nobody can identify yet ) to human and so dismissive of the lab leak theory. It just didn't seem like something a scientist would do, discount a plausible theory with such rigor.



What am I hearing the former Director of the CDC, that was there at the beginning, that had the highest security clearance of any scientist at the time working side by side with the Secy. of State trying to figure all this out, is that he doesn't quite understand what motivated Fauci., Dr Dazak, head of ECCO Health that actually gave the money to the Wuhan lab to do gain of function research, to take the path they took, other than to cover their ass because they are in a direct line of American money, going to a lab in China who has apparently lied about literally everything concerning the origins of Covid.


That doesn't sound like an organization that was looking out for the best interests of the public.


The best interest of the public would have been better served by pressing China, not giving them carte blanche to write a report resolving them of any responsibility in all this.


He imagined a conversation between Dazak and Fauci going something like this, "what if it gets out that we gave this lab money to do this research that we have now said we don't think they were doing" and Dazak saying there were no bats in that lab with now video proof from Australian TV that there were indeed bats in that lab. This whole mess could be dropped right at their feet! 600,000 dead Americans and they weren't as forth coming as they should have been.


Yeah, sounds like they had their own interest above that of the public with regard to the information that was available in the beginning had they been honest.


Did they do all that they could do to help stop this once it started, maybe and maybe they should get credit for that but that's only one part of this story. What if it is confirmed, I think it already has been, that Fauci and Dazak were less than truthful because their ass was on the line if any of this got out?


Would that change your opinion? That just maybe the CDC was manipulated by various players like the Medical Journal Lancet seems to have been manipulated to stop this lab theory in it's tracks because this could open up a real "can of worms" for a lot of people?


Why was Fauci so determined to squash the lab leak theory? As a scientist, he should have said from day one that both theories would be investigated and never have picked one over the other to support with all the information now coming forth that it would appear he had a conflict of interest to say the least in all this.


So combine the mistakes of the CDC and the "apparent" ( to me and others ) attempt to down play the lab leak theory and to me, the CDC does not come out of this looking like they had the best interest of the public at heart.
Originally Posted by HedonistForever

You're looking for a conspiracy around every corner, just like I'm looking for the Delta variant around every corner. That's not to say that one or the other of us is not right.

I don't agree with your approach. The interests of America and the World would be best served if we got to the bottom of this, so it doesn't happen again, or if it does we're better prepared. Maybe the Chinese know what happened and the rest of the world doesn't. Maybe the Chinese don't know. Either way we need their cooperation. You threaten to isolate them or sue them for $10 trillion and you're not going to get anywhere.

There are risks in many parts of the world, not just China. They include mining and using bat guano; humans living in proximity to bats; humans living in proximity to other animals like birds, monkeys, pangolins and civets; wet markets;labs with inadequate safety procedures; and labs doing gain of function research. If we understand the risks and their relative importance we'll be better off, assuming we have politicians, public officials, and people in private companies, universities and hospitals who will use good judgement. Which we haven't necessarily had to date, outside of the vaccine companies like Moderna, Biontech, Novartis and Pfizer, which have performed beyond our highest expectations.

Anyone who believes with certainty that the virus was created in the Wuhan laboratory is naive.

You're looking for a conspiracy around every corner, just like I'm looking for the Delta variant around every corner. That's not to say that one or the other of us is not right.


No, I'm merely looking for the most plausible explanation and that has now changed for many including scientist and pundits a like, to the Wuhan Lab, as I'm sure you have noticed.


It is not a "conspiracy theory" and you should no better than to call it that. More "facts" line up for the lab theory than the "Zoonotic" explanation. At some point, a ton of "circumstantial evidence" gets you away from conspiracy theory, to plausible theory.


I don't agree with your approach.



My approach?


The interests of America and the World would be best served if we got to the bottom of this, so it doesn't happen again, or if it does we're better prepared. Maybe the Chinese know what happened and the rest of the world doesn't. Maybe the Chinese don't know. Either way we need their cooperation. You threaten to isolate them or sue them for $10 trillion and you're not going to get anywhere.


Now let's talk about "your approach" Mr. Chamberlain! OK, that was a bit harsh but anybody that thinks being "conciliatory" to the Chinese is the way to getting honest cooperation, is the person being naive. The Chinese have said that they are done with this investigation, period. So what good does it to for the world to tell China, they want another investigation using the same body, the WHO, that did the first? Talk about the definition of insanity.


There are risks in many parts of the world, not just China. They include mining and using bat guano; humans living in proximity to bats; humans living in proximity to other animals like birds, monkeys, pangolins and civets; wet markets;labs with inadequate safety procedures; and labs doing gain of function research. If we understand the risks and their relative importance we'll be better off, assuming we have politicians, public officials, and people in private companies, universities and hospitals who will use good judgement. Which we haven't necessarily had to date, outside of the vaccine companies like Moderna, Biontech, Novartis and Pfizer, which have performed beyond our highest expectations.

Anyone who believes with certainty that the virus was created in the Wuhan laboratory is naive. Originally Posted by Tiny

I don't think you picked the right word there. Believing something "with certainty" that has not been conclusively proven would better be called foolish because one will look foolish if proven wrong. That's part of the reason I call myself an Agnostic. I'm not about to say I believe something with certainty, the existence of God and creation, when there is no proof.


While I certainly believe the lab leak theory is more plausible, I am not now nor have I ever said it is a "certainty", that would be foolish.

Dear Tiny,
I had hoped to produce a segment from last nights Tucker Carlson show, proving "with certainty" ( fat chance ) that Tucker was not an anti-vaxxer but for whatever reason, they didn't post that one segment.


On 3 different occasions in about a 5 minute period, Tucker said "I believe in vaccines", "vaccines are good".


I was going to create a whole new thread with "click bait" that said "Anti-vaxxers threaten to dump Tucker Carlson". And I asked myself, if Carlson based his program on appealing to anti-vaxxers, why in the world would he say 3 times that he believes in vaccines, vaccines are good and lose a good deal of his audience which have implied, no, outright said, is all he cares about?


Since you seem to be into his head more than most, maybe you could venture a guess.


Beyond that lies the question, should journalist ignore the very real fact, that there have been side effects from these vaccines, because that might discourage others from taking them? Don't tell the truth because it might upset the government narrative? Really?



So what is the line that journalist should be taking? Last night he put a woman on the air who says her husband and son both developed blood clots after taking the vaccine. Now we know for a fact that this has occurred as reported by people who are not Tucker Carlson. Should he not have done that because it might discourage somebody from taking the vaccine and "causing" their death"?


This particular incident goes directly to the incidence of young males having side effects from this vaccine and also the mandating of this vaccine for young people who want to travel and participate in events where organizations are saying "you must be vaccinated to attend". The young man didn't feel the need to get vaccinated, as it turned out later, he apparently had already recovered from Covid which he didn't even know he had because he had antibodies, but he felt he had to for the reasons I explained. A couple of days after the first shot, he started having problems and developed blood clots.



So the question being asked is, should a person with Covid antibodies, still be forced to take the vaccine in order to participate in life? And should information that some people are having side effects, be kept from the American people, "for the greater good"?


Haven't been able to verify how many anti-vaxxers Tucker lost last night.

Dear Tiny,
I had hoped to produce a segment from last nights Tucker Carlson show, proving "with certainty" ( fat chance ) that Tucker was not an anti-vaxxer but for whatever reason, they didn't post that one segment.


On 3 different occasions in about a 5 minute period, Tucker said "I believe in vaccines", "vaccines are good".


I was going to create a whole new thread with "click bait" that said "Anti-vaxxers threaten to dump Tucker Carlson". And I asked myself, if Carlson based his program on appealing to anti-vaxxers, why in the world would he say 3 times that he believes in vaccines, vaccines are good and lose a good deal of his audience which have implied, no, outright said, is all he cares about?


Since you seem to be into his head more than most, maybe you could venture a guess.


Beyond that lies the question, should journalist ignore the very real fact, that there have been side effects from these vaccines, because that might discourage others from taking them? Don't tell the truth because it might upset the government narrative? Really?



So what is the line that journalist should be taking? Last night he put a woman on the air who says her husband and son both developed blood clots after taking the vaccine. Now we know for a fact that this has occurred as reported by people who are not Tucker Carlson. Should he not have done that because it might discourage somebody from taking the vaccine and "causing" their death"?


This particular incident goes directly to the incidence of young males having side effects from this vaccine and also the mandating of this vaccine for young people who want to travel and participate in events where organizations are saying "you must be vaccinated to attend". The young man didn't feel the need to get vaccinated, as it turned out later, he apparently had already recovered from Covid which he didn't even know he had because he had antibodies, but he felt he had to for the reasons I explained. A couple of days after the first shot, he started having problems and developed blood clots.



So the question being asked is, should a person with Covid antibodies, still be forced to take the vaccine in order to participate in life? And should information that some people are having side effects, be kept from the American people, "for the greater good"?


Haven't been able to verify how many anti-vaxxers Tucker lost last night. Originally Posted by HedonistForever

His VAERS and myocarditis episodes were highly misleading. He didn't present both sides. If he weighed the risks for the two options, that would would clearly point towards getting the vaccine for most people.

Did the young man you mentioned take the J&J vaccine? As Trump has noted, the benefits of even that vaccine, which has been associated with blood clots and which is less effective than Pfizer and Moderna, far outweigh the risks. And very few people are getting vaccinated with the J&J vaccine now.

Does Tucker propose that everyone get tested for antibodies before they get vaccinated now? Sounds like another way to run up healthcare costs.

I'll call him a journalist when he starts presenting both sides. Until then he's a sanctimonious political commentator, like Rachel Maddow.

I don't think you picked the right word there. Believing something "with certainty" that has not been conclusively proven would better be called foolish because one will look foolish if proven wrong. That's part of the reason I call myself an Agnostic. I'm not about to say I believe something with certainty, the existence of God and creation, when there is no proof.


While I certainly believe the lab leak theory is more plausible, I am not now nor have I ever said it is a "certainty", that would be foolish.
Originally Posted by HedonistForever

I realized you don't believe the lab leak theory was a certainty. There are others who do. A few here go further and say it was a biological weapon intentionally unleashed on the world by the Chinese, and so we should go to war. I'm not sure whether they're serious, but they are naive. I'm not going to call them foolish though although perhaps on this particular point they at least unwise.

I don't think we should go to war with China but I do think we should cut as many ties to China as possible and punish them economically to the extent we can and try to rally some of our cowardly allies to join us before it is too late and China becomes the real super power in the world if they haven't already. I predict they will take Taiwan before the end of the Biden Presidency and there isn't a damn thing militarily that we can do about it and then they will control a large share of the worlds capacity for computer chips.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...semiconductors


The World Is Dangerously Dependent on Taiwan for Semiconductors




Sanctimonious or not, Tucker is covering important stories that the rest of the Democrat controlled MSM are not telling the American people.


Don Lemon was talking with Chris Cuomo saying that only "privileged White people" oppose teaching CRT. If he tuned in to Fox news, he would see Black people at every single school board meeting all over the country calling CRT racist and against it's teaching but then CNN is a promoter of CRT, so no big surprise there.


Kinda like 1blackman1 saying all Black people hate Trump. He knows that's a lie but says it anyways because he can't control his racist tendencies.

I don't think we should go to war with China but I do think we should cut as many ties to China as possible and punish them economically to the extent we can and try to rally some of our cowardly allies to join us before it is too late and China becomes the real super power in the world if they haven't already. I predict they will take Taiwan before the end of the Biden Presidency and there isn't a damn thing militarily that we can do about it and then they will control a large share of the worlds capacity for computer chips. Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Someday China will be the #1 economic power in the world and maybe the #1 military power. There's not a lot we can do about it. There are 1.4 billion of them and they're every bit as intelligent and hard working as Americans. And they've discovered free enterprise, although they still do have a lot of inefficient state owned enterprises. China's government revenues and expenditures as a % of GDP are now lower than most of western Europe's, although not as low as ours.

As to Taiwan, yes, that is a good argument for developing a manufacturing base for leading edge chips in the USA or at least outside of Taiwan and China. Or otherwise be willing to go to war to defend Taiwan, which I suspect the majority of us are not willing to do.

Smucker Carlson can't win...

Nope the LSM will not let him, Hum

CDC for the win

CDC trys very hard to be the winners follow the money

fuck china

CDC gets millions from big pharma( 79.6 from 2014-2018) so yea believe them and the vaccine industry made 41.7 billion as of 2019 so conflict of interest much hum

Tucker?

Tucker sucks