Smooth light
4 years ago
Can win change subject, death and souls..... Brewha special hahaha!!!
View All Posts by User
Brewha
4 years ago

Typical bullshiit... project your thoughts and pay not one whit of attention to what I said, but twist it around to fit your feeble mind.

MACS wrote:


Perhaps you can elucidate your view more clearly….
View All Posts by User
DrMaddVibe
4 years ago
NIH Admits Funding Gain-Of-Function COVID Experiments; Gives EcoHealth Five Days To Report Data



A top NIH official admitted in a Wednesday letter that the US-funded so-called "gain-of-function" research in Wuhan, China - and that the US nonprofit which conducted it, EcoHealth Alliance - led by the controversial Peter Daszak, "failed to report" that they had created a chimeric bat coronavirus which could infect humans.

In a letter addressed to Rep. James Comer (R-KY), NIH Principal Deputy Director Lawrence A. Tabak cites a "limited experiment" to determine whether "spike proteins from naturally occurring bat coronaviruses circulating in China were capable of binding to the human ACE2 receptor in a mouse model." According to the letter, humanized mice infected with the modified bat virus "became sicker" than those exposed to an unmodified version of the same bat coronavirus.
Recommended Videos

Daszak failed to report this finding, and has been given five days to submit "any and all unpublished data from the experiments and work conducted" under the NIH grant.

Rutgers University Board of Governors Chemistry Professor Richard H. Ebright sums it up. :

While Tabak's letter goes to great lengths to insist that EcoHealth's work couldn't have produced SARS-CoV-2, it absolutely vindicates Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who Fauci repeatedly called a liar in July for accusing him of funding GoF research in Wuhan, China.

As we noted in September, proof that the US funded of GoF research was blown wide open thanks to materials (here and here) released through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by The Intercept against the National Institutes of Health, revealing that EcoHealth was paid to make chimeric SARS-based Covid that they confirmed could infect human cells.

While evidence of this research has been pointed to in published studies, the FOIA release provides a key piece to the puzzle which sheds new light on what was going on.

"This is a roadmap to the high-risk research that could have led to the current pandemic," said Gary Ruskin, executive director of U.S. Right To Know, a group that has been investigating the origins of Covid-19 (via The Intercept).

We also learned in September that 18 months before the Pandemic, Daszak applied for a grant to release enhanced airborne coronaviruses into the wild in an effort to inoculate them against diseases that could have otherwise jumped to humans, according to The Telegraph, citing leaked grant proposals from 2018.

New documents show that just 18 months before the first Covid-19 cases appeared, researchers had submitted plans to release skin-penetrating nanoparticles containing “novel chimeric spike proteins” of bat coronaviruses into cave bats in Yunnan, China.

They also planned to create chimeric viruses, genetically enhanced to infect humans more easily, and requested $14million from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) to fund the work.

Daszak hoped to use genetic engineering to cobble "human-specific cleavage sites" onto bat Covid 'which would make it easier for the virus to enter human cells' - and included plans to commingle high-risk natural coronaviruses strains with more infectious, yet less deadly versions. His 'bat team' of researchers included Dr. Shi Zhengli from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as well as US researchers from the University of North Carolina and the US Geological Survey National Wildlife Health Center.

Darpa refused the contract - saying "It is clear that the proposed project led by Peter Daszak could have put local communities at risk," while warning that Daszak hadn't fully considered the dangers involved in enhancing the virus via gain-of-function research, or by releasing a vaccine into the air.

Angus Dalgleish, Professor of Oncology at St Georges, University of London, who struggled to get work published showing that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) had been carrying out “gain of function” work for years before the pandemic, said the research may have gone ahead even without the funding.

“This is clearly a gain of function, engineering the cleavage site and polishing the new viruses to enhance human cell infectibility in more than one cell line,” he said. -Telegraph

In short, after a massive drop of receipts proved that Fauci, and his boss Francis Collins, lied, the NIH itself has finally acknowledged funding Gain-of-Function research.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/nih-admits-funding-gain-function-covid-experiments-gives-ecohealth-five-days-report 

FAUCI LIED AND MILLIONS DIED!
View All Posts by User
rfenst
4 years ago
LMAO!
View All Posts by User
DrMaddVibe
4 years ago

LMAO!

rfenst wrote:




Paying for a biological weapon with US taxpayer funding and released out into the open while lying to a House committee isn't funny.
View All Posts by User
DrMaddVibe
4 years ago
BREAKING: NIH Docs Confirm Fauci Lied to Rand Paul About US Funding of Gain-of-Function Research at Wuhan


In a letter sent today, October 20, Representative James Comer (R- KY), The National Institutes of Health (NIH) confirmed that Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergens and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), lied to Senator Rand Paul during a hearing on May 11th, 2021.

During that hearing Fauci stated in no uncertain terms, that the NIH nor the NIAID ever funded gain of function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Fauci has stuck to that story even as mounting evidence convincingly contradicted those statements. Here at RedState, we have led the story regarding gain-of-function research and were among the first media outlets to accurately report that Fauci lied during that interaction. The NIH letter specifically discusses genomic studies of bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

“It is important to state at the onset that the published genomic data demonstrate that the bat coronaviruses studied under the NIH grant to EcoHealth Alliance, Inc. and subward to the Wuhan Institute of Virology are not and could not have become SARS-CoV-2. Both the progress report and the analysis attached here again confirms that conclusion, as the sequences of the viruses are genetically very distant.”

Yet later in the letter it states that the progress report with that very data was not submitted by EcoHealth Alliance, headed by the dubious Dr. Peter Daszak, until August 2021. One could assume that the EcoHealth Alliance would never knowingly implicate themselves in what has amounted to global genocide. For the NIH to simply be taking the word of EcoHealth Alliance, which is headed by a man who has knowingly lied to the world about his role in the research that may have led to the creation of this virus, is downright alarming.

To add further fuel to the fire, the NIH letter also confirmed that EcoHealth Alliance was also in violations of the terms of their grant.

“The research plan was reviewed by the NIH in advance of funding, and determined that it did not fit the definition of research involving enhanced pathogens of pandemic potential (ePPP) because these bat coronaviruses had not been shown to infect humans. As such, the research was not subject to departmentmental review under the HHS P3CO Framework. However, out of an abundance of caution and as an additional layer of oversight, language was included in the terms and conditions of the grant award to EcoHealth that outlined criteria for a secondary review, such as a requirement that the grantee report immediately a one log increase in growth. These measures would prompt a secondary review to determine whether the research aims should be reevaluated or new biosafety measures should be enacted.

EcoHealth failed to report this finding right away, as was required by the terms of the grant. EcoHealth is being notified that they have five days from today to submit to NIH any and all unpublished data from the experiments and work conducted under this award. Additional compliance efforts continue.”

Again, if Daszak, who helped to submit the Chinese tailored World Health Organization report on the origins of COVID-19, and authored the infamous Lancet letter, almost universally scientifically decided to be a fraudulent assessment, is in charge of EcoHealth Alliance, why would the NIH expect that Daszak or his organization would tell the truth or submit accurate reports if it could implicate them in the murder of 5 million people?

The NIH letter then provides a genetic analysis of SARS-CoV-2, to known viruses as questioned by Representative Comer. As our reporting here at RedState has previously hypothesized, RaTG13 is the most likely candidate as the backbone for SARS-CoV-2, after facing the genetic manipulation of gain-of-function research. The NIH letter to Comer openly states what we already know: That RaTG13 (a virus found naturally in a cave in the Yunnan Province in 2013), shares 96% of its genomic code with SARS-CoV-2.

“While it might appear that the similarity of RaTG13 and BANAL-52 bat coronaviruses to SARS-CoV-2 is close because it overlaps by 96-97%, experts agree that even these viruses are too far divergent to have been that progenitor of SARS-CoV-2.”

And as written, that’s just not correct. Certainly, that close of a relationship is not close enough for those viruses to be the natural progenitor of SARS-CoV-2, it does make them genetically similar enough to be the progenitor for a synthetic or lab-created SARS-CoV-2, a conclusion suspiciously missing from this letter.

In closing, the letter states that the “bat coronaviruses studied under the EcoHealth Alliance grant could not have been the source of SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 pandemic.” The problem with that conclusion is that it relies exclusively on data and reports provided by the very people who would be implicated in the greatest crime in the history of humanity.

Excuse me while I question their veracity.

https://redstate.com/scotthounsell/2021/10/20/breaking-nih-confirms-fauci-lied-ecohealth-alliance-violated-terms-of-virus-research-grant-n460349 

follow THAT data!
View All Posts by User
MACS
4 years ago
Lied to congress, under oath... and the sheeple take his word on what they should do with their bodies.

Sure... go get ya-self a "vaccine" that doesn't work. Look up the word vaccine. It is synonymous with immunization... which, before covid anyway... meant you would develop immunity to a disease so you couldn't catch it nor transmit it to others.

But if you don't get this "vaccine", which does not work like a vaccine, you are somehow endangering those who already got it... who can still get and transmit the covid virus.

:-k
View All Posts by User
DrMaddVibe
4 years ago

Lied to congress, under oath... and the sheeple take his word on what they should do with their bodies.

Sure... go get ya-self a "vaccine" that doesn't work. Look up the word vaccine. It is synonymous with immunization... which, before covid anyway... meant you would develop immunity to a disease so you couldn't catch it nor transmit it to others.

But if you don't get this "vaccine", which does not work like a vaccine, you are somehow endangering those who already got it... who can still get and transmit the covid virus.

:-k

MACS wrote:




How many booster shots for polio have you got? These aren't vaccinations...they're a stop gap hope that's not giving anyone any long term benefit. There's a reason why mRNA research didn't evolve back in the late 80's early 90's. It didn't work!

Pfizer and BioNTech announce their vaccine is USELESS 11 months after dosing - Alex Berenson



Well, that’s not how they phrased it.

But it is the only reasonable way to read their press release claiming that the booster is 95% effective.

Remember. The booster is given to people who have RECEIVED the vaccine. (That’s why it’s a booster, right?)

And when they tested a booster against a placebo in those people, they found a 95% reduction in disease in people who received the booster (for a total of 11 weeks after they received the booster, excluding the first week, because science - by which I mean because including that week would not help their results).

95%!

Where have you heard that figure before? Oh yeah, it is EXACTLY the same relative risk reduction they claimed in the pivotal trial last year, when they tested the INITIAL dose against placebo.

The only reasonable read is that the booster is providing (temporary) protection similar to the first two-dose series (temporarily) did AGAINST PLACEBO. But these are VACCINATED people.

So where’s the protection from the initial two doses?

There is ONE difference, though. The ABSOLUTE risk appeared at least two to three times higher in the vaccinated people in this trial than in UNVACCINATED people in the initial trial - 110 infections in 5,000 people in 10 weeks, compared to 162 infections in 20,000 people in about the same period.

Because vaccines work.

If you are vaccinated, get ready to take boosters forever.

By the way, the press release includes NO specific safety data.

Yay Pfizer!

PS: Pfizer is going to make 5 BILLION.

Now, they're threatening to give 1/3 dosages to children. Why? It's time to stop this insanity and it's time for people to be held accountable for lives lost, careers in tatters, health in shambles and for what? A little tyrannical liar to parade on The View every day and tell people to wear a mask?


The injections will continue until mortality improves.
View All Posts by User
DrMaddVibe
4 years ago
This is Xiden's kinda double dip!


Dr. Anthony Fauci Received Big Pay Increase To Prevent Pandemics



In a January article published at Forbes, our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com found that Dr. Anthony Fauci was the highest paid federal employee, earning $417,608 (2019).

Dr. Fauci is still the top-paid federal employee earning $434,312 in 2020. Fauci is the Director of the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and current Chief Medical Advisor to the President.

Fauci out-earned the U.S. president ($400,000); four-star generals in the military ($282,000); and roughly 4.3 million other federal employees.

Now, new documents released via our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests from the NIH tell us a lot more. Dr. Fauci received a big pay hike for his biodefense research activities. In other words, Fauci was paid to prevent future pandemics.

The documents released to our non-profit organization OpenTheBooks.com reveal that Dr. Fauci was approved for a “permanent pay adjustment” in excess of his regular salary in December 2004, during the George W. Bush Administration.

From 2004 through 2007, Fauci received a 68-percent pay increase from $200,000- to $335,000-a year. This award was permanent and carried forward through 2020.

Fauci’s permanent pay raise was to “appropriately compensate him for the level of responsibility… especially as it relates to his work on biodefense research activities.”

However, critics say that Fauci was funding research that was actually creating pandemic pathogens in labs that, if leaked or if fell into the wrong hands, might create the very human pandemic they were trying to prevent.

Released here, for the first time, is a portion of NIH’s response to our OpenTheBooks FOIA request. These documents highlight Fauci’s central role in pandemic preparedness funding and biodefense strategies in the years leading up to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Included in the NIH production is a letter, date stamped December 15, 2004, from Dr. Raynard S. Kingston, the then-Deputy Director— which was approved and signed by Dr. Elias Zerhouni, the NIH Director under George W. Bush. The letter reads:

“This is to request that the current retention allowance [(b)(6) redaction] for Dr. Anthony S. Fauci be converted to a permanent pay adjustment in the amount [(b)(6) redaction] over his base pay of [(b)(6) redaction] in order to appropriately compensate him for the level of responsibility in his current position of Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH), especially as it relates to his work on biodefense research activities.”

Redactions labelled (b)(6) under federal FOIA, fall under a large range of categories protecting the employee’s personal information. These redacted items are likely dollar figures, including his salary at the time, which apparently NIH still deems redaction worthy – even 17 years after the fact.

We have already posted his salary back to 2010, but our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com discovered Fauci’s salary records as far back as FY2004. It’s settled transparency law that Fauci’s compensation falls under open records law.

So, why is NIH redacting financial information from 2004 that is 17-years old? Perhaps the answer is in the numbers…
Dr. Anthony Fauci year-over-year salary growth, 2004-2020 OpenTheBooks.com

Dr. Fauci’s “biodefense-related research”

Dr. Kingston’s 2004 letter regarding Dr. Fauci explains some background for his proposed raise:

“More recently, Dr. Fauci has been a key figure in the White House and Department’s response to bioterrorism. His contributions to this effort have been outstanding and include the development of the departmental strategy to augment smallpox vaccine supplies and the development of a plan to develop new anthrax vaccine. He serves as an expert consultant to the White House, the Secretary of DHHS, congressional staff, and a number of HHS groups on the development of biodefense-related research, and public health priorities. He is leading the development of a series of research initiatives, has coordinated fast-track initiatives for academia and industry participation in biodefense-related research, and is responsible for the development of future intermediate and long-range research plans and policies for a sustained and committed biomedical research response to bioterrorism threats. During FY2004, under Dr. Fauci’s leadership, NIAID significantly expanded, intensified, and accelerated its research programs in biodefense.”
Dr. Fauci permanent pay adjustment justification OpenTheBooks.com

The timeline leading up to Dr. Fauci’s “permanent pay adjustment” is key to understanding Dr. Kingston’s recommendation letter and its approval by Dr. Zerhouni.

After 9/11 and the ensuing anthrax attacks in the fall of 2001, Dr. Fauci’s NIAID published, in February 2002, a 15-page document for the agency he oversaw at NIH. It was titled “NIAID Strategic Plan for Biodefense Research” and would kick start the NIAID efforts over the next 19 years to try and keep the country safe from bioterrorism.
Two years later, on December 15, 2004, Dr. Fauci’s increased workload was recognized by a permanent pay adjustment. To this day, Fauci’s portfolio still includes overseeing NIAID’s biodefense research, a portfolio that recently has grown by billions of dollars.

Biodefense Funding and NIAID’s Pandemic Pathogen Research

Over the years, NIH funding has gone towards numerous grants categorized as pandemic-prevention research, including grants for research on bat coronaviruses, both in the U.S. and abroad. Justification for the funding centered around trying to prevent the next pandemic and preventing a possible spillover of viruses from nature to humans.

Some of the biodefense research Dr. Fauci’s NIAID funding came under fire from fellow scientists as too risky. Critics said that Fauci was funding research in labs that was actually creating pandemic pathogens that, if leaked or if fell into the wrong hands, might create the very human pandemic they were trying to prevent.

In 2014, President Barack Obama’s Administration enacted a federal funding pause for what was termed “gain-of-function” research. It turns out, through waivers and pause exemptions, Dr. Fauci’s institute was funding many of the very scientists doing the potentially risky pandemic research, including the University of North Carolina coronavirus researcher Ralph Baric, who collaborated with Shi Zhengli, the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s so-called “bat lady,” and New York-based EcoHealth Alliance’s Peter Daszak.
In December 2017, weeks after President Donald Trump’s first Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary resigned over a private plane charter scandal, and while the agency was still without a confirmed Secretary (Alex Azar was not confirmed and sworn in until January 2018), NIH and Dr. Fauci’s NIAID quietly restarted funding, with guidance, for what was then termed “enhanced potential pandemic pathogens.” News of the funding restart surprised many in the scientific community.
In 2019, Dr. Fauci’s NIAID secretly approved funding for some of the controversial gain-of-function scientists whose very research caused the scientific community’s concern and led to the funding pause under the Obama Administration in 2014.
Last month, a rejected 2018 Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) grant proposal was leaked and published online by a collaborate group of scientists and researchers known as DRASTIC, a leak detailed in The Intercept. The DARPA proposal included an idea to create a chimeric bat virus in the lab, to insert a special furin cleavage site, to test it in “humanized” mice, and do this all, in part, to study its potential to emerge as a pandemic.

DARPA documents included in the leak show the agency rejected the grant proposal as too risky, but the fact that most all of the DARPA grant applicants are or were at the time recipients of NIH NIAID funds, under Dr. Fauci, either directly or through subgrants, has raised more than a few eyebrows.

Few of these controversies made it into mainstream news cycles, most likely never would have except that in December 2019 the world learned of a novel respiratory coronavirus emerging in Wuhan, China – the very same city that had a lab that did pandemic bat virus research. Ironically, the Wuhan lab was funded with $600,000 in NIAID subgrants from Fauci’s agency’s biodefense funds, as the doctor himself admitted to Congress.

Further background

On January 27 and May 17, 2021, we asked NIH for Dr. Fauci’s fiscal year 2020 and 2021 financial and conflict-of-interest disclosure forms; job descriptions; and all employment contracts, amendments, modifications, and addendums; respectively.

Dr. Fauci is required by federal law to file these forms with his employer, the National Institutes of Health. It has been nine months and NIH has yet to produce most of the requested documents.

To say that that the details of Dr. Fauci’s employment are of the public interest – after almost two years of government decisions influenced by him – is an understatement.

Note: Dr. Fauci and his agency did not respond to our request for comment before publication.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/dr-anthony-fauci-received-big-pay-increase-prevent-pandemics 

Money for nothing and get Covid for free.
View All Posts by User
DrMaddVibe
4 years ago
Fauci’s agency admits it funded gain-of-function work in Wuhan: What else are they keeping from us?



It turns out US taxpayer money did go for “gain of function” research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, despite Dr. Anthony Fauci’s heated denials of just that.

Gain-of-function work involves intentionally making a virus more effective against humans. The “lab leak” theory for COVID-19’s origins posits that WIV researchers so engineered a coronavirus, with some accident letting it reach the wider world and kill nearly 5 million worldwide.

Lawrence Tabak, a top National Institutes of Health official, just admitted the ugly truth, while blaming the NIH’s grantee, New York-based EcoHealth Alliance, for failing to report it.

This particular work doesn’t seem COVID-related, but the news increases the odds that other EcoHealth projects also went off the reservation.

Tabak, the NIH principal deputy director, broke the news in a letter to Rep. James Comer, the House Oversight Committee’s top Republican. The “limited experiment” used humanized mice to test infection with bat coronaviruses; the modified virus did indeed sicken more of them than the unmodified one. But “EcoHealth failed to report this finding right away, as was required by the terms of the grant,” Tabak wrote, vowing to demand full disclosure from the grantee.

Laughably, Tabak also claims the 2018 experiments didn’t fit the definition of the US ban on funding gain-of-function work on potential pandemic-causers “because these bat coronaviruses had not been shown to infect humans.”

This isn’t the only shady EcoHealth experiment coming to light now, nearly two years after COVID broke out. The Intercept reported starting last month that EcoHealth violated the terms of its grant at least four times by “creating new viruses using different parts of existing bat coronaviruses and inserting them into humanized mice” in the Wuhan lab, which was overseen by the NIH’s Fauci-led National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

NIH chief Francis Collins insists none of the bat viruses studied under this grant could “possibly have caused the COVID-19 pandemic.” But what of other grants? And how can he be sure EcoHealth or the Wuhan researchers didn’t break more rules than the one NIH just admitted? Notably, he’s still claiming the bug evolved naturally, while saying it’s impossible to prove without China’s help and ignoring the strong evidence implicating the Wuhan lab.

EcoHealth, the NIH and Fauci all have a lot of explaining to do.

https://nypost.com/2021/10/21/faucis-agency-admits-it-funded-gain-of-function-work-in-wuhan-what-else-are-they-keeping-from-us/ 

Fauci really is Dr.Mengele on steroids. A serial killer with taxpayer funding.
View All Posts by User
DrMaddVibe
4 years ago
"EcoHealth failed to report this finding right away, as was required by the terms of the grant,' Tabak wrote in his letter. 'EcoHealth is being notified that they have five days from today to submit to NIH any and all unpublished data from the experiments and work conducted under this award.'

Fauci has testified on several occasions before Congress that American taxpayers never financed what is called 'gain of function' research in China - which would make a virus more contagious or deadly.

In May, Fauci testified that the NIH 'has not ever and does not now fund gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.'

However, in September, The Intercept revealed it had received 900 pages of documents detailing the work of EcoHealth Alliance's research in Wuhan, China.

The files showed that in 2014, the National Health Institute approved a five-year, yearly grant of $666,000 a year for five years ($3.3million) for EcoHealth Alliance, a US research organization, into bat coronavirus.

EcoHealth Alliance, in its proposal to the NIH, acknowledged the risks involved were 'the highest risk of exposure to SARS or other CoVs' among staff, who could then carry it out of the lab.

The NIH gave them the money anyway - something Fauci was previously forced to admit when testifying before Congress in May this year. EcoHealth Alliance then gave $599,000 of the money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

The approval notice for the grant is 528 pages long. It describes how EcoAlliance would receive yearly payments, totaling $3.3million over five years.

The funding was renewed in 2019 but was abruptly cut short in April 2020, once COVID-19 had spread throughout the world."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10129521/NIH-tortured-monkeys-acid-toy-snake-Fauci-faces-calls-resign-dog-torture-tests.html 

Bats. dogs, mice, monkeys...the world is his twisted laboratory. Have some more taxpayer money...Nazis at Nuremberg faced more scrutiny than this mass serial killer.
View All Posts by User
RayR
4 years ago
SCUM OF THE EARTH FRANKING PUPPY MURDERER!

#FIREFAUCI

It Wasn’t Just Beagles and Monkeys – Fauci’s NIH Also Funded Medical Experiments on AIDS Orphans in NY City

By Jim Hoft
Published October 26, 2021 at 8:07am

In August Gateway Pundit contributor Cassandra Fairbanks broke the story on Dr. Fauci’s use of taxpayer money to torture beagles in barbaric animal testing.

Dr. Fauci funded a study in Tunisia where beagle dogs were eaten alive by parasite-infected flies.

Dr. Fauci also spent over $16 million in taxpayer funds on disturbing “toxic brain injection” experiments on monkeys in 2018.

And Dr. Fauci was more recently caught funding gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China laboratory blamed for the production and leak of the coronavirus.
Fauci lied about his funding of the lab under oath numerous times.

Now this…
Dr. Fauci’s NIH was also caught funding experiments on AIDS orphans at a New York City hospital in 2004.

More...

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/wasnt-just-beagles-monkeys-faucis-nih-also-funded-medical-experiments-aids-orphans-ny-city/ 





View All Posts by User
Brewha
4 years ago
You all should also be selling that Fauci stole the election.

Come on boys, swing for the bleachers!
View All Posts by User
DrMaddVibe
4 years ago
The slippery semantics of Anthony Fauci

Fauci’s absolutist answer on gain-of-function research from May has proven to be false




“I do not have any accounting of what the Chinese may have done, and I’m fully in favor of any further investigation of what went on in China. However, I will repeat again: the NIH and NIAID categorically has not funded ‘gain-of-function’ research to be conducted in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.” 

That was Dr Anthony Fauci during a May 2021 congressional hearing. It kicked off a months-long national media effort to frame questions around gain-of-function research and US-taxpayer-funded virus manipulation as a Royal Rumble between Fauci and Senator Rand Paul.

When he testifies or sits for friendly network interviews, Fauci depends on semantics. He relies on the naivety of the interviewer and the audience, employing terminology and definitions he believes only he understands.

But like the ponytailed Chad in Good Will Hunting attempting to flex his big brain, Fauci’s arguments fall apart in front of the initiated.

Last week, Lawrence Tabak, the principal deputy director of the NIH, sent a letter to Congress saying that EcoHealth Alliance failed to report certain aspects of the experimental work it had been conducting in China on bats and bat-borne viruses. Tabak pledged that the NIH and Fauci’s NIAID would take administrative action, but not much more than that.

So Fauci’s absolutist answer from May has proven to be false. At the very least, the doctor needs to answer directly why he chose to deflect questions on gain-of-function research, something his own agency is claiming it had no idea was happening. How could have Fauci have denied back in May something so “categorically” if EcoHealth Alliance, run by Fauci ally Peter Daszak, had failed to report the full extent of their experiments?

When Fauci sat for a cozy Sunday interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, he once again deployed his semantic game on the interviewer. Stephanopoulos framed the revealing letter from Tabak as “critics pouncing”:

“Some critics and analysts have seized on that to say you and others have misled the public about US funding of this so-called gain-of-function research. The NIH says that’s false.”

Fauci addressed Senator Rand Paul directly by responding, “The framework under which we have guidance about the conduct of research that we fund, the funding at the Wuhan Institute was to be able to determine what is out there in the environment, in bat viruses in China. And the research was very strictly under what we call a framework of oversight of the type of research.”

Fauci then went on to say “And under those conditions which we have explained very, very clearly, does not constitute research of gain-of-function of concern.” In his answer, Fauci hedges by admitting that there was US funding directed to the Wuhan Institute, but, now, that funding did not directly fund “gain-of-function of concern.”

“Of concern” is the new caveat Fauci has added to get around answering the question. He had never used the terminology “gain-of-function of concern” in prior interviews or testimony. He just slipped it in there because hardly anyone notices. Furthermore he knows that the general public and most of the press has no idea what “of concern” means.

We know that gain-of-function research was happening in Wuhan and we know Fauci categorically denied US involvement in it. So now he’s attempting to sneak one by the audience and change the terminology, on what the definition of “gain-of-function of concern” means. So what does it mean?

It all comes down to intent. “Of concern” is the term used to differentiate studying and manipulating viruses in the scientific environments as a purposeful method to produce bioweapons. Fauci said as much in 2012 when he testified that his department worked with the Defense Department on such experiments. What Fauci is seeking to do is tweak the argument with semantics and write off his critics and the critics of gain-of-function as people accusing Fauci and the Wuhan Institute of developing bioweapons. No one has done so. It’s a game: “Sure we funded gain-of-function, but how dare you insinuate we funded bioweapon research, you kook!”

These are not the actions of a medical professional, with a serious interest in a transparent inquiry into the origins of the virus that has led to the deaths of 16 million people worldwide, including 750,000 Americans. These are the games a bureaucrat plays when they are attempting to cover their own ass, their career and their life’s work. Pulling this thread leads to one place: more discovery, more leaks and more gleam off Fauci’s armor in the media. How much more damning information needs to come out before he retires?

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/slippery-semantics-anthony-fauci-gain-function-coronavirus/ 



It's no longer a matter of if he lied. Now, it's a matter of when he's held accountable for the millions of lives he snuffed out so he could play mad scientist with US taxpayer money.
View All Posts by User
MACS
4 years ago
The rubes who are convinced CNN, MSDNC, or any other number of mainstream media outlets are telling them the truth and not manipulating them still think Fauci's bold-faced lying ass is the bee's knees.
View All Posts by User
Stogie1020
4 years ago
^ this. And they even have their Fauci pillows to bury their faces in when they are getting reamed from behind with the truth.
View All Posts by User
rfenst
4 years ago

^ this. And they even have their Fauci pillows to bury their faces in when they are getting reamed from behind with the truth.

Stogie1020 wrote:


I heard that pillow is still better than "My Pillow". LOL



[sarcasm]
View All Posts by User
BuckyB93
4 years ago
It's becoming more and more evident that he played a role (intentionally or unintentionally, knowingly or unknowingly) in one of the biggest pandemics in history yet some folks want to defend him.
View All Posts by User
Brewha
4 years ago

It's becoming more and more evident that he played a role (intentionally or unintentionally, knowingly or unknowingly) in one of the biggest pandemics in history yet some folks want to defend him.

BuckyB93 wrote:


Dude, that was Trump.

The real Fauci infraction was offending the trumpanzees….
View All Posts by User
HockeyDad
4 years ago

Dude, that was Trump.

The real Fauci infraction was offending the trumpanzees….

Brewha wrote:



TRUMP! [argh]
View All Posts by User
Users browsing this topic
Mobile! Terms | Privacy | Contact Us | Help | © 1998-2026, CigarBid.com