Fauci's "Noble Lies"

[Cuddles]

I understand that to quote you posted is attributed to Fauci. As far as I know it is correct. But where is the lie in it? Fauci never said, so far as I am aware, "don't wear a mask." If had said that it would be a contradiction of what he wrote Burwell.

It was our JACKASS administration's thing. The administration clearly wanted to edit the experts including the CDC and Fauci. Trump said "it will go away" and in their minds perception is reality, and they were making it go away, just like trump tried to make a hurricane go to Alabama using a felt tip marker because he had said it was going to Alabama.

Trump read little, he did not listen other than to himself and to television voices that parroted his nonsense. Why listen to anyone once you're convinced you are smarter than anyone, that "[you] alone can fix it." We were being led by a mad man. Thankfully that was soon obvious, except to Trump's poorly educated followers.

Even Republican politicians knew he was a dangerous, vindictive, narcissistic, lunatic demagogue, but they backed him up anyway because they were afraid of what he might do to ruin their political careers if they crossed him. Many of them are still making the same mistake and looking like blithering fools. The few Republicans who spoke the truth about Trump were ostracized. A lesson for those would be traitors to Trump's plan to overthrow the government and install himself as dictator.

No one ever said don't wear masks. Trump tried to create the perception that Covid was not dangerous by refusing to wear a mask, and almost died from Covid. He set the tone for his sheep including his family, who became infected. It became a Republican thing to refuse to wear a mask? Could anything be more idiotic?

Read the actual quote of Fauci's entire email to Burwell to understand Fauci's position on face masks early in the pandemic. It seems his position evolved, but it was that some types of face masks were of little benefit in protecting a masked uninfected person from an unmasked infected person, never that masks were of no benefit. And from the outset Fauci's position was that some types of face masks were better than others, and always that masks worn by an infected person were of some benefit. This is a nuanced position. This is what he believed at the time. He was not lying! To lie, you have to know that something different from what you are saying is the actual truth. We have no indication that that would apply to Fauci.

eh...it's a crabwalk. We knew what most of Asia was doing, we knew most people early on were after n95s. His early statements were misleading at best, bordering on negligent:

Not a fan of rising, but they got the clip where the previous quote came from:

 

[ipatent]

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR2200/RR2237/RAND_RR2237.pdf

https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/925340

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...behind-zero-hedge-wall-street-s-renegade-blog

All the Rand report said is that ZH "frequently echoes the Kremlin line." It didn't give any examples. See p. 13. Not a great source to prove what you want to prove. The Sputnik website was mentioned. This is a Russian tabloid that has stories that can be quite interesting, many of which aren't reported here.

The Eurekalert report averred:

Wilbur (a visiting scholar in the UTSA Department of Communication) analyzed over 600 articles and found a strong, positive correlation between Sputnik, Russia’s state-owned media, and popular alternative media sites that are thought to provide favorable coverage in the U.S. of Russia and its allies.
​

All these sites have a strategy of reporting things that can't be found in the MSM, and most of them have nothing to do with national security. It's no surprise that they have similar referral networks or rely on each other for information.

It seems like all of this is based on the work of a visiting professor at UT San Antonio.

 

[piezoe]

All the Rand report said is that ZH "frequently echoes the Kremlin line." It didn't give any examples. See p. 13. Not a great source to prove what you want to prove. The Sputnik website was mentioned. This is a Russian tabloid that has stories that can be quite interesting, many of which aren't reported here.

The Eurekalert report averred:

Wilbur (a visiting scholar in the UTSA Department of Communication) analyzed over 600 articles and found a strong, positive correlation between Sputnik, Russia’s state-owned media, and popular alternative media sites that are thought to provide favorable coverage in the U.S. of Russia and its allies.
​

All these sites have a strategy of reporting things that can't be found in the MSM, and most of them have nothing to do with national security. It's no surprise that they have similar referral networks or rely on each other for information.

It seems like all of this is based on the work of a visiting professor at UT San Antonio.

All a person has to do is read ZH to know that you are being fed propaganda.

 

[ipatent]

All a person has to do is read ZH to know that you are being fed propaganda.

I doubt whether you took a good sampling of their posts before you wrote that. A lot of them are next day's stories in conservative MSM like Fox or the Washington Examiner. They scoop the MSM quite a bit.

 

[piezoe]

eh...it's a crabwalk. We knew what most of Asia was doing, we knew most people early on were after n95s. His early statements were misleading at best, bordering on negligent:

I can't entirely disagree with this. It is possible some of the misleading was a result of the press not quoting him in entirety, possibly with a particular agenda in mind. As you know, I am not one to put any trust in the Trump administration, and I see Fauci as a victim of an evil administration that was using him until he said "enough," or as the Italians would say, "basta!" Fauci is an Italian name, right?

 

[Cuddles]

I can't entirely disagree with this. It is possible some of the misleading was a result of the press not quoting him in entirety, possibly with a particular agenda in mind. As you know, I am not one to put any trust in the Trump administration, and I see Fauci as a victim of an evil administration that was using him until he said "enough," or as the Italians would say, "basta!" Fauci is an Italian name, right?

I'm not accusing you of it, but the press has been putting non-Trumpies on a unwarranted pedestal. Actions should stand on their own, not merely be a comparison of the muck pit surrounding them. The Fauci's character assassination was taken too far by the admin but he had stumbles that aren't above scrutiny.

 

[exGOPer]

​

All these sites have a strategy of reporting things that can't be found in the MSM

But these are not reports, these are either opinion pieces or blatant conspiracy theories, ofcourse MSM can't report such things without getting sued or mocked for bullshit. I mean, there is absolute nonsense being posted by morons on facebook, those are things not to be found in MSM, should we start believing that based on your logic of going unreported?

 

[piezoe]

I doubt whether you took a good sampling of their posts before you wrote that. A lot of them are next day's stories in conservative MSM like Fox or the Washington Examiner. They scoop the MSM quite a bit.

I have read enough to determine I don't want to waste my time with them. They quite often intermingle facts with conclusions that reflect a particular political slant. But that's not the worst. The worst is the outright mis-statement of fact and conspiracy promotion. Their standards fall into the mold left by William Randolph Hearst, the creator of "yellow" journalism, and carried forward by Rupert Murdoch using the same tactics to sell trash as news. Hearst succeeded in starting a war, Will Murdoch try the same?

 

[ipatent]

I'm not accusing you of it, but the press has been putting non-Trumpies on a unwarranted pedestal. Actions should stand on their own, not merely be a comparison of the muck pit surrounding them. The Fauci's character assassination was taken too far by the admin but he had stumbles that aren't above scrutiny.

He has a tough job. My only point in the OP was what he said at any particular moment had as much to do with crowd control as the truth.

He also probably knew boosters would be required long before they were officially recommended.

 

[ipatent]

But these are not reports, these are either opinion pieces or blatant conspiracy theories, ofcourse MSM can't report such things without getting sued or mocked for bullshit.

You're just wrong. Go read the stories. How about the Lincoln Project story that's there now, exGOPer? That's been picked up by real newspapers.