Australian concern over US spreading unfounded claims about Wuhan lab

[ATraveller]

For weeks the Australian government had been growing concerned about the Trump administration’s promotion of the theory that experiments on bats at a Wuhan laboratory had unleashed COVID-19. This week that anxiety peaked.

The belief among some Trump officials that research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology or the Wuhan Centre for Disease Control and Prevention was the source of the coronavirus runs counter to the broadly accepted view – that the virus originated from a wet market where live exotic animals were sold. The lab theory has not been disproved but nor has the US intelligence community provided any evidence to support it.

Senior MPs and bureaucrats worried the US campaign was hampering efforts by Prime Minister Scott Morrison to establish an independent review into the origins of the pandemic, while also undermining government attempts to ban the sale of exotic live animals at wet markets around the world.

Mr Morrison has said since April that Australia’s position was consistent.

“We know it started in Wuhan,” he said last week. “The most likely scenario that has been canvassed relates to wildlife wet markets.”

Australian concern over US spreading unfounded claims about Wuhan lab

Australian suspicions have been raised about who is pushing a dossier promoting the theory that the coronavirus was created in a Wuhan laboratory.

www.smh.com.au

 

[Emeraldlady]

I love the US. My FB has been reminding me of moments from 3 years ago when my husband, daughter and I were hoping across the continent west to east. Today 3 years ago we were touring DC. Brilliant place. History. Architecture. Capitol Hill. The Whitehouse. All the Smithsonians. It was the best holiday we’ve ever had.

That said, I’d love to dig deeper into Constitution history to see if there was some kind of safeguard against random self professed “stable geniuses” who somehow got hold of the microphone. Surely there is something in the wonderful constitution to protect against rogue leadership!

 

[Dr_Meinheimer]

It didn’t protect us from any other President, and doesn’t protect us from this one. He is only a unique annoyance and threat to those who disagree with him. I wished the Constitution protected us from his predecessor, but you’d likely disagree.

That’s probably why the constitution doesn’t protect us from leaders who characteristics we don’t like or find to be wrong.

 

[Maximus1]

If people still don’t understand, America is free to select very bad leaders and wollow in bad leadership. If it happens in a pandemic and lives are at stake, it is bound to result in noticable consequences to life, liberty, AND THE PERSUIT OF HAPPINESS.

 

[Dr_Meinheimer]

If we survived 2008-2016, we will be just fine as a country.

 

[Maximus1]

The just fine doctrine.

 

[Dr_Meinheimer]

No, just that the doom and gloom you continually depict does not reflect reality for most people, nor what we have already survived, which in many people’s opinion, was far worse than the current presidency.