High-ranking Chinese defector provides proof COVID was orchestrated by China
- Thread starter artichoke
- Start date
Behold, the latest true fact conservatives were censored and silenced by the left's notoriously discredited and dishonest Orwellian "fact-checkers" and social media gestapo for correctly stating. Contrary to all the vitriol against President Trump for correctly stating that the China Virus came from the Wuhan lab, even left-wing outlets have now been forced to issue their umpteenth humiliating "sorry we lied about you for six months straight" retraction.
But it gets even better. Now former Chinese officials are even apparently confirming with evidence that it not only came from there, but that the whole non-crisis was a manufactured fraud from the beginning, aimed at decimating the West while leaving China in a strong position...which is exactly what ended up happening, with the help of their bought-and-paid-for Democrat stooges and pawns.
"The defector provided an extensive, technically detailed debrief to US officials, that the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) was able to corroborate very technical details of the information provided, and that in DIA’s assessment, the information provided by the defector is legitimate...He provided data proving that SARS-CoV-2 was manmade and leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, in addition to evidence confirming that the People’s Liberation Army managed the Wuhan program (and others), as Chinese virologist Yan Li-Meng told the FBI last year."
Do Democrats ever NOT turn out to be wrong and lying...and betraying this country to aid foreign enemies?
Learn what words mean. He provided at most a claim of "information", not "proof". And your gullibility in accepting as dependable anything from Red State doesn't do you credit either.
1) Translation: Your source includes something other than the Democrat side of the story, so I choose to pretend it all away.
2) This is an invalid "attack the source" fallacy.
3) Show us. Demonstrate that it was only "information" and not "proof."
4) The standard for reporting something as a "fact" is two sources (or just spew Democrat talking points citing nothing but 'anonymous' sources and get humiliated as hoax after hoax gets exposed, if you want to report like our news media). This makes two high-level Chinese defectors who have told the same story, both of whom provided proof. And these two sources aren't "anonymous" (made-up) like the kind Democrats constantly use to lie through their teeth about everything.
Try again, dishonest demagogue.
1) Translation: Your source includes something other than the Democrat side of the story, so I choose to pretend it all away.
2) This is an invalid "attack the source" fallacy.
3) Show us. Demonstrate that it was only "information" and not "proof."
View attachment 20169
4) The standard for reporting something as a "fact" is two sources (or just spew Democrat talking points citing nothing but 'anonymous' sources and get humiliated as hoax after hoax gets exposed, if you want to report like our news media). This makes two high-level Chinese defectors who have told the same story, both of whom provided proof. And these two sources aren't "anonymous" (made-up) like the kind Democrats constantly use to lie through their teeth about everything.
Try again, dishonest demagogue.
Phew. You're even dumber than you appeared. There was ONE source that provided the "data" to which you refer. That the one source said he relied on other sources doesn't make the other sources Red State's sources. Hope that's not overly complicated. "Attacking the source" is not a fallacy. It's an obvious criticism if there is reason to question the source's credibility. But the post you answered did not attack the source. It attacked your misstatement about what the source provided and it questioned the reliability of the entity that published the report based on the source. I have no idea if the source is credible or not, and neither do you.
There was Dong Jingwei and Li-Meng Yan. 1+1 = 2.
This is meaningless smoke and mirrors. Hence the DIA and USAMRIID confirming the claims.
Um...yes, it absolutely is. If you say the capitol of California is Sacramento and show me a Wikipedia article confirming it, me responding by changing the subject to smearing your source in no way invalidates your claim.
That's what a fallacy IS, dumb-ass. Invalid logic for getting to the truth.
Try again.
And your reason is that this source doesn't parrot Democrat lies like your sources, which is a bullshit reason for your invalid, off-topic logic, otherwise known as a fallacy.
And I quote: "Your gullibility in accepting as dependable anything from Red State doesn't do you credit."
That is changing the subject to smearing the source. Anything else you'd like to embarrass yourself trying to lie about or are you good for now?
AProudLefty
The remora of JPP
Oh look! Turd Eater is back to troll!
AProudLefty
The remora of JPP
ExpressLane
Verified User
Have a little self respect. Stop calling yourself a Turd Eater. Troll seems appropriate though.
AProudLefty
The remora of JPP
moon
Satire for Sanity
But a mindless whiner WOULD follow me around to every thread hurling every OTHER snide, whiny complaint you've lashed out with.
You decided to troll me, pal- not vice versa. You were evident as an arrogant, cut-and-paste prick from the outset.
Here's your opportunity to fuck off. Take it.
Right, the documentation he handed over...that was confirmed by USAMRRID and DIA, THAT'S what constitutes the proof. Learn to comprehend what you read.
Laughing at your stupidity is not trolling you, sensitive little crybaby. Take your Midol.
moon
Satire for Sanity
Laughing at your stupidity is not trolling you, sensitive little crybaby. Take your Midol.
Inarticulate twat.
Which source needs to tell you it is okay to think this painfully obvious common sense thought (that changing the subject to smearing sources rather than refuting the claim) before you can be okay with acknowledging that it is flawed logic?
Some of us just think for ourselves and don't require things to be officially recognized to comprehend what they are.
You should try it.
Sure there is, I've already demonstrated that it is flawed logic and does not refute claims. That makes it a fallacy. That's what fallacies are, dumb-ass. Flawed logic. Even if your super-official arbitrary master list doesn't explicitly authorize you to think that thought. That's also why lists of fallacies vary so much from source to source. You're expected to think for yourself.
The claims were confirmed by USAMRIID and DIA. And this source has been right far more than your sources, which all humiliated themselves repeatedly by pushing:
-the "Trump cleared out a protest to give a speech" hoax
-the Russia collusion hoax
-the "Trump told people to drink Lysol" hoax
-the Covington Catholic hoax
-the Charlottesville "very fine people" hoax
-the Roy Moore pedophile hoax
-the Kavanaugh rape gang hoax
-the "repealing Net Neutrality will destroy the Internet" hoax
-the Hydroxchloroquine hoax
-the Jussie Smollett hoax
-the "Investigating Biden's corruption is worse than Biden BEING corrupt" hoax
-the Ukraine transcript hoax
-the Duke Lacrosse team hoax
-the Trayvon Martin hoax
-the "uninsured crisis" hoax
-the multitude of college hate crime hoaxes
-the "deceptively edited video" Planned Parenthood hoax
-the "children in cages" hoax
-the Michael Cohen perjury/contacting the Russians hoaxes
-the SPLC "hate group" hoax
-the "Trump mocking people with disabilities" hoax
-the "you can keep your doctor" hoax
-the "immigrants are rapists, criminals, animals" hoax
-the Kavanaugh "white power symbol" hoax
-the "Trump asked Putin to hack the DNC" hoax
-the polar bear dying from climate change hoax
-the "Trump made it easier for the mentally ill to purchase guns" hoax
-the Scaramucci Russian bankers hoax
-the "Muslim ban" hoax
-the global warming "consensus" hoax
-the "Obama's scandal-free presidency" hoax
-the Trump Jr. WikiLeaks hoax
-the Iran nuclear appeasement hoax
-the "polls show Trump will lose" hoax
-the "Obamacare will never fund abortions or illegal immigrants" hoax
-the "Hillary exonerated" hoax
-the "white privilege" hoax
-the voter suppression hoax
-the "hands up don't shoot" hoax
-the "Trump called soldiers losers" hoax
-the "peaceful protesters" hoax
-the "Trump used a Nazi eagle" hoax
-the "Trump ignored Russia putting bounties on U.S. soldiers" hoax
-the coronavirus hoax
-the "Trump used a Nazi red triangle" hoax
-the "Trump admitted to sexual assault" hoax
-the "penises cause climate change" hoax
-the "Trump denying passports to Latinos" hoax
-the "Mission Accomplished" hoax
But...Democrats constantly get discredited and caught lying by trusting such obviously biased, self-serving sources. You are the last people who should attempt to lecture anyone else on this...especially when USAMRIID and DIA are on the record confirming the claims and evidence of both defectors.
Next.