The NYT makes a stunning admission about the Democratic Party

[beej]

(4) I don't get how people today listen to "influencers" and "podcasters" unless to be informed in a manner that pleases them. As in the post above, truth comes out while misinformation fades away, hopefully rapidly.
(5) If somebody gives an accurate description of what Musk and DOGE is doing a Trumper will likely describe that as "fear mongering." But if the truth is "fear mongering" what can be said?

4) I listen to a lot of podcasters of various views. A lot of the podcasters I listen to are debates about faith. But some of my favorite podcasters are people I disagree with. Alex O'conner, Bart Ehrman, James Tabor. All athiests that have podcasts discussing either the existence of God, the bible or other things. Sometimes they will bring up a good point supporting their view that I hadn't considered. It causes me to study my own beliefs further. I honestly don't understand why people wouldn't listen to something they disagree with.

5)fair enough. But at the same time if there is knowledge that this will help them win the cause, it would be only natural for them then, to embellish the truth to help them win their cause.

[neurosis]

evidence that he is not suppressing information.  Let that sink in.

Oh, it has.    As long as the information is coming from him and isn't negative about him.

[neurosis]

The NYT is now reporting that it was known by several countries that the COVID leak came from the lab. that was suppressed at the time.

Is this true? Because as far as I know, it still hasn't been definitively proven to be true. Has something new come out?

[ghuns]

...For the most part, the main reason Republican "news" was suppressed on those platforms is because it wasn't true.

You mean like, Covid came from a lab in China or the Hunter Biden laptop is real?

I remember back when neither was 'true' and many people were suppressed for saying they were.

[Smit]

4) I listen to a lot of podcasters of various views. A lot of the podcasters I listen to are debates about faith. But some of my favorite podcasters are people I disagree with. Alex O'conner, Bart Ehrman, James Tabor. All athiests that have podcasts discussing either the existence of God, the bible or other things. Sometimes they will bring up a good point supporting their view that I hadn't considered. It causes me to study my own beliefs further. I honestly don't understand why people wouldn't listen to something they disagree with.

5)fair enough. But at the same time if there is knowledge that this will help them win the cause, it would be only natural for them then, to embellish the truth to help them win their cause.

5) Which can be in a form such as loaded words to flat out misinformation. Pretty much everybody used "loaded words" to some extent.

4) If you feel it's mentally stimulating I can understand that. But I think it's unlikely watching any amount of those types of podcasts will influence you to change your mind. Whereas the average guy watching an antivaxxer talk about links between vaccination and autism might just be swayed by what he hears. Which is good if you're an antivaxxer (especially if you're selliing stuff) but bad for everybody else.

[Smit]

You mean like, Covid came from a lab in China or the Hunter Biden laptop is real?

I remember back when neither was 'true' and many people were suppressed for saying they were.

I've read recently thoughts that Covid came from laboratories were indeed suppressed early on.

The circumstances surrounding Hunter Biden's laptop were, at best, suspicious at the time. The original author who found the story wouldn't publish it under his name so the New York post found somebody who would put their name on it. An October "surprise" published in a media source of dubious credibility.

In time the laptop was indeed verified to have belonged to Hunter Biden and that came out.

But the story was published so to say it was suppressed isn't really factual.

[Incogneeto]

Is this true? Because as far as I know, it still hasn't been definitively proven to be true. Has something new come out?

Yes , Common Sense.

[gcode]

In time the laptop was indeed verified to have belonged to Hunter Biden and that came out.

But the story was published so to say it was suppressed isn't really factual.

It was absolutely and totally suppressed until after the 2016 election

[Smit]

It was absolutely and totally suppressed until after the 2016 election

It was published in October and being talked about everywhere.

What is your definition of suppressed?

Is this true? Because as far as I know, it still hasn't been definitively proven to be true. Has something new come out?

There was a story indicating the theory of Covid coming from a lab was suppressed. Not that Covid did indeed come from a lab.

[beej]

Is this true? Because as far as I know, it still hasn't been definitively proven to be true. Has something new come out?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/16/opinion/covid-pandemic-lab-leak.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz7vypq31z7o

Germany's foreign intelligence service believed there was a 80-90% chance that coronavirus accidentally leaked from a Chinese lab, German media say.

Two German newspapers say they have uncovered details of an assessment carried out by spy agency BND in 2020 but never published.

The intelligence service had indications that the Wuhan Institute of Virology had been carrying out experiments where viruses are modified to become more transmissible to humans for research, they say.

from the World Socialist Website 
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2025/03/22/amgj-m22.html

In their commemoration of the five-year anniversary of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the New York Times has chosen to revive the thoroughly debunked Wuhan Lab conspiracy theory, which claims that Chinese scientists unleashed the SARS-CoV-2 virus upon the world, killing tens of millions of people.

In two opinion pieces published by the Times—one co-authored by virologists W. Ian Lipkin and Ralph Baric, the other by sociologist Zeynep Tufekci—the paper denigrates and casts doubt upon the latest groundbreaking coronavirus research by Dr. Shi Zhengli, the world-leading expert on bat coronaviruses who works at the Wuhan lab, revealing far more about their own geopolitical agenda than scientific inquiry.

[Incogneeto]

What is your definition of suppressed?

Zuckerberg coming out and saying "The Admin told me to."

[neurosis]

There was a story indicating the theory of Covid coming from a lab was suppressed. Not that Covid did indeed come from a lab.

I was wondering, because to quote Beej "The NYT is now reporting that it was known by several countries that the COVID leak came from the lab." I haven't seen any report that doesn't use phrasing like "most likely", "possibly", "conceivably".

I'm not saying that it did, or didn't. I'm just saying that I haven't seen anyone say that it's been definitely proven. Kinda like Gaetz sleeping with the 17 year old. 

[beej]

I was wondering, because to quote Beej "The NYT is now reporting that it was known by several countries that the COVID leak came from the lab." I haven't seen any report that doesn't use phrasing like "most likely", "possibly", "conceivably".

I'm not saying that it did, or didn't. I'm just saying that I haven't seen anyone say that it's been definitely proven. Kinda like Gaetz sleeping with the 17 year old. 

80-90% certainty is pretty darn good.  But that's not the point. The point is that the information should not have been suppressed. Because some government agency didn't like the information. And there should be bipartisan support for this because I don't want democrats controlling information and I know that other's don't want republicans controlling information.

[Bucky Cornstarch]

Facts lean left.

[beej]

Facts lean left.

especially if you ain't right.