this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
40 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
23 readers
2 users here now
This magazine is dedicated to discussions on the latest developments, trends, and innovations in the world of technology. Whether you are a tech enthusiast, a developer, or simply curious about the latest gadgets and software, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on topics such as artificial intelligence, robotics, cloud computing, cybersecurity, and more. From the impact of technology on society to the ethical considerations of new technologies, this category covers a wide range of topics related to technology. Join the conversation and let's explore the ever-evolving world of technology together!
founded 2 years ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64891745
Is that your source for "Forced to resign"?
That article is based on a panel where evidence was presented, you can simply just watch the panel yourself, although it's pretty long.
Can you at least let us know the time stamp of where they force him to resign?
You found the panel and are unwilling to watch it? Don't be lazy lol.
I don’t trust you that the video contains the content you claim it does. apparently you have this information, but are refusing to share it with people, so how lazy are you?
He details around the 1:10 minute mark about how he was sidelined (which I incorrectly interpreted to mean he had been forced to resign) for suggesting that both lab leak and natural origin theories should be investigated. Apparently he was simply left out of the discussion entirely after sharing his position, and resigned later, but I haven't actually been able to find any details or the exact reasoning behind his exit from the CDC.
That being said, him being sidelined is, in my opinion, still extremely concerning. It's pretty clear to me that him disagreeing with Fauci lead to him being pushed out, but there doesn't seem to be any info anywhere on the subject.
You do realize that’s why most people are arguing with you, right? Because you made a false claim that you couldn’t back up while repeatedly claiming you've proven it to be true by posting a link to an article that doesn’t say what you claim it says (which is the very definition of “unscientific”)?
Agreed. I misinterpreted it, but my main points still stand.
What exactly was your main point then, if not that he was forced to resign? Everything else you posted seems to be in service of defending that claim.
My main point was that the Whitehouse shouldn't be allowed to censor people (via the FBI) by calling certain information "misinformation" (especially when they had little to no evidence to support their own narrative) by forcing social media platforms to carry out said cencorship (or really in any way in all honesty).
The current administration came up with a narrative, and stifled any and all debate, including that of the then CDC director who they subsequently sidelined simply for saying we should investigate both possibilities on the origins of the virus.
And you’re still wrong! There is no evidence that the government forced social media companies to do anything, and the article you provided doesn’t even make the claim that anyone was forced to do anything.
I didn't say that article claimed that. This information is already known, and it's why there is a case in the first place. The Twitter files came out and corroborated that it had been going on for quite a while.
So you don’t have any source for your claim that social media companies were literally forced to take actions directed by the government?
Let me get that for you, but yes I do.
He's the source directly from Matt Taibbi:
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1606701405443874816
From government news site:
https://judiciary.house.gov/media/in-the-news/house-gop-wants-fbis-twitter-censorship-reimbursement-records