Fauci lied and leftists falsely blamed Trump

mark francis

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2021
Messages
17,092
How sad the fact that so many modern government officials are quick to lie to cover up their own crimes, mistakes, and misdemeanors, while comfortably allowing the public to falsely fry someone else for their mistakes. Fauci spent months colluding with news media and government agencies actively covering up the lab origin of the coronavirus while the left excoriated the right for suggesting the truth - that covid was developed with money from Fauci to develop the deadly disease.

A scientist who helped Fauci discredit the lab leak theory is now speaking out (msn.com) 12-4-23

A scientist who helped Fauci discredit the lab leak theory is now speaking out

America’s former top infectious diseases adviser, in his effort to suppress the lab leak theory.

Kadlec says it’s a decision that keeps him up at night. Literally.

“I wake up at usually about 2 or 3 a.m. and think about it honestly, because it’s something that we all played a role in,” Kadlec told Sky News in an exclusive interview.

For much of 2020 and 2021, anyone who brought up the possibility that COVID-19 emerged from Wuhan risked being labeled a conspiracy theorist by legacy media and “fact-checkers.”

It started in February 2020 when Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) appeared on TV and raised questions about the Chinese government’s “duplicity and dishonesty” on the matter.
 
Werbung:
How sad the fact that so many modern government officials are quick to lie to cover up their own crimes, mistakes, and misdemeanors, while comfortably allowing the public to falsely fry someone else for their mistakes. Fauci spent months colluding with news media and government agencies actively covering up the lab origin of the coronavirus while the left excoriated the right for suggesting the truth - that covid was developed with money from Fauci to develop the deadly disease.

A scientist who helped Fauci discredit the lab leak theory is now speaking out (msn.com) 12-4-23

A scientist who helped Fauci discredit the lab leak theory is now speaking out

America’s former top infectious diseases adviser, in his effort to suppress the lab leak theory.

Kadlec says it’s a decision that keeps him up at night. Literally.

“I wake up at usually about 2 or 3 a.m. and think about it honestly, because it’s something that we all played a role in,” Kadlec told Sky News in an exclusive interview.

For much of 2020 and 2021, anyone who brought up the possibility that COVID-19 emerged from Wuhan risked being labeled a conspiracy theorist by legacy media and “fact-checkers.”

It started in February 2020 when Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) appeared on TV and raised questions about the Chinese government’s “duplicity and dishonesty” on the matter.
since no one knows what the origins are, you can't "cover up the lab origin"

and feel free to prove they "developed" covid, but you can't, liar
 
since no one knows what the origins are, you can't "cover up the lab origin" theory duh.
The ignorant have no clue how covid started, just as so many have no clue how life started on earth. That is because they are ignorant.
 
The ignorant have no clue how covid started, just as so many have no clue how life started on earth. That is because they are ignorant.
post the proof of how it started, liar. lol
but you wont
god hates when you lie
 
If you don't know how covid started then just chalk it up to ignorance.
hahahahhaha

everyone can see i called your bluff and you failed.

no one knows for sure how covid started, and you are a liar if you claim you do.
 
hahahahhaha

everyone can see i called your bluff and you failed.

no one knows for sure how covid started, and you are a liar if you claim you do.
Those who don't know how covid startede are ignorant. The evidence of covid's origin in the Wuhan lab is overwhelming. For your benefit, here is one of dozens of articles I have that prove, when taken together, covid was developed in the Wuhan lab.

Republic Broadcasting Network » Fauci’s Lies Exposed… Jim Jordan Goes Ballistic Over Scientists’ Lab-Leak Flip-Flop

Fauci’s Lies Exposed… Jim Jordan Goes Ballistic Over Scientists’ Lab-Leak Flip-Flop

March 8, 2023 in News by RBN Staff
Share

BY TYLER DURDEN

WEDNESDAY, MAR 08, 2023 – 03:40 PM

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) was on fire Wednesday during the first COVID select subcommittee investigating the origins of Covid-19, where former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield said he was “sidelined” from internal debates over the origins of the virus, and that former White House chief medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci didn’t appreciate Redfield’s support for the theory that it emerged from a lab.

“This was an a priori decision that there’s one point of view that we’re going to put out there, and anyone who doesn’t agree with it is going to be sidelined,” said Redfield. “And as I say, I was only the CDC director, and I was sidelined.”

The 71-year-old Redfield told Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) that his support for the lab leak theory likely prompted his exclusion.

Former CDC director Robert Redfield

“I think I made it very clear in January [2020] to all of them why we had to aggressively pursue this,” he said. “And I let them know as a virologist that I didn’t see that this was anything like SARS or MERS. … And they knew that was how I was thinking.”

Jordan then focused the conversation to two top Fauci advisers – Dr. Kristian Andersen and Dr. Robert Garry – who suddenly changed their stance on lab leak theory. The two notably emailed Fauci on Jan. 31, 2020 where they suggested that anomalies in the virus pointed to a non-natural origin. According to Anderson, the virus had “unusual features” that “(potentially) look engineered,” and that other scientists “all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.”

Jordan went on a tear…



“So three days after they say it came from a lab, they changed their position, and the only intervening event was a conference call with Dr. Fauci and Dr. Collins. Again, a call that Mr. Redfield (CDC Director at the time) was not allowed to be on … And then three months later, Shazam! They get 9 million bucks from Dr. Fauci. Why, isn’t that something?”

Watch (and consider following @VigilantFox):

Meanwhile, lawyers have claimed that statements by Fauci under oath aren’t credible due to contradicting evidence.



As The Epoch Times notes,

That includes the claim that Fauci didn’t think he had ever met with Dr. Ralph Baric, an American virologist who helped perform risky research on bat coronaviruses in China.

“I know who he is. I doubt if I’ve ever met him,” Fauci said during the late 2022 deposition—the first time he answered questions under oath since the pandemic began.

Fauci acknowledged the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which he headed until around the New Year, provided funding for Baric.

“But you don’t remember ever meeting him in person?” he was asked.

“I don’t recall. I could have met him. I run into several thousands of scientists that we refer to, but I don’t recall, certainly, having a relationship with him,” Fauci responded.

But Fauci’s official calendar lists a one-on-one meeting with Baric on Feb. 11, 2020. And a newly revealed message from a professor who recounted Baric’s account of the meeting showed they talked about man-made virus combinations.

“I talked to Ralph for a long time last night. He sounds beat,” Matt Frieman, a University of Maryland professor, wrote in a Feb. 18, 2020, message. “He said he sat in Fauci’s office talking about the outbreak and chimeras.”

A chimera is a combination of viruses.

The materials, unearthed from Freedom of Information Act requests from the nonprofits OpentheBooks.com, Judicial Watch, and U.S. Right to Know, and other evidence, including a 2020 email of talking points for Fauci that mentioned Baric being “on our team,” show that “Dr. Fauci’s testimony on this point is not credible,” the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana told a federal court in the new filing.

Fauci also claimed that he was not “100 percent certain” of the name of Dr. Shi Zhengli, known for her experiments on bat viruses in China. “I get sometimes confused with Asian names,” Fauci testified.

“Yet Dr. Shi Zhengli, the so-called ‘bat woman,’ is world-renowned as the researcher who may have caused the COVID-19 pandemic, and has been so since the beginning of the pandemic, and the name ‘Shi’ is included in the title of the article that Dr. Fauci forwarded to Dr. Hugh Auchincloss after midnight on February 1, 2020. Dr. Fauci’s testimony is not credible on this point,” Andrew Bailey and Jeff Landry, the attorneys general, wrote.

Fauci also repeatedly said in the deposition that he could not recall details about a secret phone call, held after he and deputies discussed how the NIAID had funded coronavirus experiments in Wuhan, China, where the first COVID-19 cases were detected. Shortly after the existence of the call became public, though, Fauci told USA Today, “I remember it very well.”

“Dr. Fauci’s testimony about lack of recall is not credible,” the lawyers said.

They also noted that when Fauci did characterize the call, he said that it involved a “good faith discussion back and forth between people who knew each other” and that “the general feeling among the participants on the call is that they wanted to get down to the truth and not wild speculation about things.” After the call, a number of participants wrote papers decrying the theory that COVID-19 started in a lab.

“Dr. Fauci thus seeks to have his cake and eat it too—he claims both to remember little or nothing of what was said on the call, and to clearly remember that the entire discussion was done in good faith and without any bias,” the attorneys general said. “In any event, subsequent communications and events make clear that Dr. Fauci’s testimony on this point is not credible.”

The filing was issued to U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, who is overseeing a lawsuit brought against the federal government for its censorship campaign with Big Tech firms.

The lawyers are asking Doughty to block the government from violating the First Amendment rights of Americans.
 
Those who don't know how covid startede are ignorant. The evidence of covid's origin in the Wuhan lab is overwhelming. For your benefit, here is one of dozens of articles I have that prove, when taken together, covid was developed in the Wuhan lab.

Republic Broadcasting Network » Fauci’s Lies Exposed… Jim Jordan Goes Ballistic Over Scientists’ Lab-Leak Flip-Flop

Fauci’s Lies Exposed… Jim Jordan Goes Ballistic Over Scientists’ Lab-Leak Flip-Flop

March 8, 2023 in News by RBN Staff
Share

BY TYLER DURDEN

WEDNESDAY, MAR 08, 2023 – 03:40 PM

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) was on fire Wednesday during the first COVID select subcommittee investigating the origins of Covid-19, where former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield said he was “sidelined” from internal debates over the origins of the virus, and that former White House chief medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci didn’t appreciate Redfield’s support for the theory that it emerged from a lab.

“This was an a priori decision that there’s one point of view that we’re going to put out there, and anyone who doesn’t agree with it is going to be sidelined,” said Redfield. “And as I say, I was only the CDC director, and I was sidelined.”

The 71-year-old Redfield told Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) that his support for the lab leak theory likely prompted his exclusion.

Former CDC director Robert Redfield

“I think I made it very clear in January [2020] to all of them why we had to aggressively pursue this,” he said. “And I let them know as a virologist that I didn’t see that this was anything like SARS or MERS. … And they knew that was how I was thinking.”

Jordan then focused the conversation to two top Fauci advisers – Dr. Kristian Andersen and Dr. Robert Garry – who suddenly changed their stance on lab leak theory. The two notably emailed Fauci on Jan. 31, 2020 where they suggested that anomalies in the virus pointed to a non-natural origin. According to Anderson, the virus had “unusual features” that “(potentially) look engineered,” and that other scientists “all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.”

Jordan went on a tear…



“So three days after they say it came from a lab, they changed their position, and the only intervening event was a conference call with Dr. Fauci and Dr. Collins. Again, a call that Mr. Redfield (CDC Director at the time) was not allowed to be on … And then three months later, Shazam! They get 9 million bucks from Dr. Fauci. Why, isn’t that something?”

Watch (and consider following @VigilantFox):

Meanwhile, lawyers have claimed that statements by Fauci under oath aren’t credible due to contradicting evidence.



As The Epoch Times notes,

That includes the claim that Fauci didn’t think he had ever met with Dr. Ralph Baric, an American virologist who helped perform risky research on bat coronaviruses in China.

“I know who he is. I doubt if I’ve ever met him,” Fauci said during the late 2022 deposition—the first time he answered questions under oath since the pandemic began.

Fauci acknowledged the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which he headed until around the New Year, provided funding for Baric.

“But you don’t remember ever meeting him in person?” he was asked.

“I don’t recall. I could have met him. I run into several thousands of scientists that we refer to, but I don’t recall, certainly, having a relationship with him,” Fauci responded.

But Fauci’s official calendar lists a one-on-one meeting with Baric on Feb. 11, 2020. And a newly revealed message from a professor who recounted Baric’s account of the meeting showed they talked about man-made virus combinations.

“I talked to Ralph for a long time last night. He sounds beat,” Matt Frieman, a University of Maryland professor, wrote in a Feb. 18, 2020, message. “He said he sat in Fauci’s office talking about the outbreak and chimeras.”

A chimera is a combination of viruses.

The materials, unearthed from Freedom of Information Act requests from the nonprofits OpentheBooks.com, Judicial Watch, and U.S. Right to Know, and other evidence, including a 2020 email of talking points for Fauci that mentioned Baric being “on our team,” show that “Dr. Fauci’s testimony on this point is not credible,” the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana told a federal court in the new filing.

Fauci also claimed that he was not “100 percent certain” of the name of Dr. Shi Zhengli, known for her experiments on bat viruses in China. “I get sometimes confused with Asian names,” Fauci testified.

“Yet Dr. Shi Zhengli, the so-called ‘bat woman,’ is world-renowned as the researcher who may have caused the COVID-19 pandemic, and has been so since the beginning of the pandemic, and the name ‘Shi’ is included in the title of the article that Dr. Fauci forwarded to Dr. Hugh Auchincloss after midnight on February 1, 2020. Dr. Fauci’s testimony is not credible on this point,” Andrew Bailey and Jeff Landry, the attorneys general, wrote.

Fauci also repeatedly said in the deposition that he could not recall details about a secret phone call, held after he and deputies discussed how the NIAID had funded coronavirus experiments in Wuhan, China, where the first COVID-19 cases were detected. Shortly after the existence of the call became public, though, Fauci told USA Today, “I remember it very well.”

“Dr. Fauci’s testimony about lack of recall is not credible,” the lawyers said.

They also noted that when Fauci did characterize the call, he said that it involved a “good faith discussion back and forth between people who knew each other” and that “the general feeling among the participants on the call is that they wanted to get down to the truth and not wild speculation about things.” After the call, a number of participants wrote papers decrying the theory that COVID-19 started in a lab.

“Dr. Fauci thus seeks to have his cake and eat it too—he claims both to remember little or nothing of what was said on the call, and to clearly remember that the entire discussion was done in good faith and without any bias,” the attorneys general said. “In any event, subsequent communications and events make clear that Dr. Fauci’s testimony on this point is not credible.”

The filing was issued to U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, who is overseeing a lawsuit brought against the federal government for its censorship campaign with Big Tech firms.

The lawyers are asking Doughty to block the government from violating the First Amendment rights of Americans.
no proof there of how covid started.
you're a liar
god hates liars.
 
no proof there of how covid started.
you're a liar
god hates liars.
Like I said, if you want to find out where covid started then you will have to do research and not just sit there and cast dispersions on the research others do. Here is more evidence from dozens I have on file:

She’s at the center of the covid lab leak controversy. Now she’s telling her story. | MIT Technology Reviewuses that live in bats. Her NHUNG
February 9, 2022

Not everybody agrees, but the majority of virologists and infectious-disease experts, especially those working directly on the origins question, lean toward that theory, barring the emergence of new evidence that persuades them otherwise. ...

Scientists like David Relman, an expert on microbiology and biosecurity at Stanford University, are dismayed at the way the lab leak theory has been dismissed. He helped organize a group of 18 scientists to sign a letter published in Science last May calling for further investigation of a possible accident. ...

Probing covid-19’s origins will not only help us understand how coronaviruses work but shine a bright light on the human behaviors—including the types of scientific research—that risk causing a pandemic in the future. ...

In 2018, though, 4991 was brought back out again. The Wuhan Institute of Virology had bought a new desktop sequencing machine, which made it much faster and cheaper to get a complete view of a virus’s genomic secrets, and 4991 was among the first batch of samples to be sequenced with the new device. ...

They called it a conspiracy theory. But Alina Chan tweeted life into the idea that the virus came from a lab.

The whistleblowing scientist who advanced the lab-leak theory plans to change her name and disappear, but only after a book deal. ...

Genetic tinkering ...

As the researchers’ collection of bat coronavirus sequences grew—especially after 2012, when they first managed to culture live viruses—they wanted to pinpoint the genetic ingredients that allow those viruses to infect humans, so scientists could develop drugs and vaccines to counter them. ...

Meanwhile, Shi’s team was attempting similar tinkering in her own lab in a project funded by the US National Institutes of Health, which aimed to probe the genetic ingredients that could allow bat viruses to cause SARS-like diseases in humans. ...

Biosafety challenges

Even though none of those chimeric viruses was the source of covid-19, there are still concerns that the biosafety standards in the Wuhan lab might not have been rigorous enough to prevent research activities from causing the pandemic.

Studies involving live viruses and genetic tinkering are inherently risky. Accidents can happen even with the most stringent biosafety precautions in place. ...

The Wuhan institute’s biosafety committees ruled a decade ago that while work with animals must be carried out in BSL-3, molecular and cell-culture work involving bat coronaviruses can be done in BSL-2, albeit in biosafety cabinets with air filtration and under negative pressure to keep viruses inside. ...

This scientist now believes covid started in Wuhan’s wet market. Here’s why. ...

Angela Rasmussen, University of Saskatchewan

Such obstacles are hardly a secret. When the US embassy in Beijing sent a delegation to visit the Wuhan Institute of Virology in early 2018, managers of the institute lamented about them to embassy staff. ...

The newspaper column marked a turning point in the debate over covid-19’s origins, catapulting the lab leak theory into the mainstream. Several mainstream media outlets have used its assertions as evidence that the Wuhan institute has a record of “spotty” or “shoddy” biosafety practice. ...

Some scientists are appalled by what they perceive as misrepresentation of the embassy cables. ...

Politics of mistrust ...

To China experts like Joy Zhang, a sociologist at the University of Kent in Canterbury, UK, who specializes in science governance in China, it’s hard to separate the specific allegations against Shi from the general suspicions of China. “Shi is a victim of the Western mistrust of China and Chinese science,” she says.

Such mistrust of Chinese scientific practices is obvious among some. Filippa Lentzos, a biosecurity expert at King’s College London, told me in February last year that “it’s simply too late” to find out what happened because “everything, for instance, in the Wuhan Institute of Virology freezers would have been cleared out. The data records would have been scrubbed or cleaned up.” She says it’s still her view now. ...

Meanwhile, several Chinese institutions, including the Wuhan Institute of Virology, instructed their scientists—with rare exceptions—not to speak to the press. ...

“I just wanted to put my head down and concentrate on my work,” Shi told me. “I thought the storm would just blow over after some time.”

Some of the Wuhan institute’s behavior has certainly raised red flags. In February 2020, for example, it took its virus databases offline, and they remain unavailable to outsiders—prompting some to suggest that they might contain information critical to covid-19’s origins. ...

Instead of tackling the publicity crisis directly, China has exacerbated mistrust by running obfuscation and disinformation campaigns of its own. ...

Instead of tackling the publicity crisis directly, China has exacerbated mistrust by running obfuscation and disinformation campaigns of its own. ...

Many scientists in the West are dismayed by such obfuscation. Even those who consider the lab leak theory highly unlikely are adamant that this behavior is unacceptable. “If China is lying about this, what else is it lying about?” says one virologist who strongly supports the natural origins theory. ...


Adding fuel to the mistrust, though, is the role of the EcoHealth Alliance’s Daszak. His close ties with Shi’s lab and his role as a member of the WHO mission’s international team are potentially in conflict. ...

Daszak told me in an email that his potential conflicts of interest had been declared to the WHO before he joined the mission team. He says that there is lots of misreporting about him and his work in the media and that he is often not given the chance to respond to accusations. EcoHealth Alliance, he adds, has acted “with scientific integrity and honesty.”

“It’s now over two years since the first efforts to willfully politicize the pandemic origins, and to undermine science and the work that scientists do in often difficult circumstances,” says Daszak. “All of us have lost due to this politicization. When you mix politics with science, you get politics.”
 
Like I said, if you want to find out where covid started then you will have to do research and not just sit there and cast dispersions on the research others do. Here is more evidence from dozens I have on file:

She’s at the center of the covid lab leak controversy. Now she’s telling her story. | MIT Technology Reviewuses that live in bats. Her NHUNG
February 9, 2022

Not everybody agrees, but the majority of virologists and infectious-disease experts, especially those working directly on the origins question, lean toward that theory, barring the emergence of new evidence that persuades them otherwise. ...

Scientists like David Relman, an expert on microbiology and biosecurity at Stanford University, are dismayed at the way the lab leak theory has been dismissed. He helped organize a group of 18 scientists to sign a letter published in Science last May calling for further investigation of a possible accident. ...

Probing covid-19’s origins will not only help us understand how coronaviruses work but shine a bright light on the human behaviors—including the types of scientific research—that risk causing a pandemic in the future. ...

In 2018, though, 4991 was brought back out again. The Wuhan Institute of Virology had bought a new desktop sequencing machine, which made it much faster and cheaper to get a complete view of a virus’s genomic secrets, and 4991 was among the first batch of samples to be sequenced with the new device. ...

They called it a conspiracy theory. But Alina Chan tweeted life into the idea that the virus came from a lab.

The whistleblowing scientist who advanced the lab-leak theory plans to change her name and disappear, but only after a book deal. ...

Genetic tinkering ...

As the researchers’ collection of bat coronavirus sequences grew—especially after 2012, when they first managed to culture live viruses—they wanted to pinpoint the genetic ingredients that allow those viruses to infect humans, so scientists could develop drugs and vaccines to counter them. ...

Meanwhile, Shi’s team was attempting similar tinkering in her own lab in a project funded by the US National Institutes of Health, which aimed to probe the genetic ingredients that could allow bat viruses to cause SARS-like diseases in humans. ...

Biosafety challenges

Even though none of those chimeric viruses was the source of covid-19, there are still concerns that the biosafety standards in the Wuhan lab might not have been rigorous enough to prevent research activities from causing the pandemic.

Studies involving live viruses and genetic tinkering are inherently risky. Accidents can happen even with the most stringent biosafety precautions in place. ...

The Wuhan institute’s biosafety committees ruled a decade ago that while work with animals must be carried out in BSL-3, molecular and cell-culture work involving bat coronaviruses can be done in BSL-2, albeit in biosafety cabinets with air filtration and under negative pressure to keep viruses inside. ...

This scientist now believes covid started in Wuhan’s wet market. Here’s why. ...

Angela Rasmussen, University of Saskatchewan

Such obstacles are hardly a secret. When the US embassy in Beijing sent a delegation to visit the Wuhan Institute of Virology in early 2018, managers of the institute lamented about them to embassy staff. ...

The newspaper column marked a turning point in the debate over covid-19’s origins, catapulting the lab leak theory into the mainstream. Several mainstream media outlets have used its assertions as evidence that the Wuhan institute has a record of “spotty” or “shoddy” biosafety practice. ...

Some scientists are appalled by what they perceive as misrepresentation of the embassy cables. ...

Politics of mistrust ...

To China experts like Joy Zhang, a sociologist at the University of Kent in Canterbury, UK, who specializes in science governance in China, it’s hard to separate the specific allegations against Shi from the general suspicions of China. “Shi is a victim of the Western mistrust of China and Chinese science,” she says.

Such mistrust of Chinese scientific practices is obvious among some. Filippa Lentzos, a biosecurity expert at King’s College London, told me in February last year that “it’s simply too late” to find out what happened because “everything, for instance, in the Wuhan Institute of Virology freezers would have been cleared out. The data records would have been scrubbed or cleaned up.” She says it’s still her view now. ...

Meanwhile, several Chinese institutions, including the Wuhan Institute of Virology, instructed their scientists—with rare exceptions—not to speak to the press. ...

“I just wanted to put my head down and concentrate on my work,” Shi told me. “I thought the storm would just blow over after some time.”

Some of the Wuhan institute’s behavior has certainly raised red flags. In February 2020, for example, it took its virus databases offline, and they remain unavailable to outsiders—prompting some to suggest that they might contain information critical to covid-19’s origins. ...

Instead of tackling the publicity crisis directly, China has exacerbated mistrust by running obfuscation and disinformation campaigns of its own. ...

Instead of tackling the publicity crisis directly, China has exacerbated mistrust by running obfuscation and disinformation campaigns of its own. ...

Many scientists in the West are dismayed by such obfuscation. Even those who consider the lab leak theory highly unlikely are adamant that this behavior is unacceptable. “If China is lying about this, what else is it lying about?” says one virologist who strongly supports the natural origins theory. ...


Adding fuel to the mistrust, though, is the role of the EcoHealth Alliance’s Daszak. His close ties with Shi’s lab and his role as a member of the WHO mission’s international team are potentially in conflict. ...

Daszak told me in an email that his potential conflicts of interest had been declared to the WHO before he joined the mission team. He says that there is lots of misreporting about him and his work in the media and that he is often not given the chance to respond to accusations. EcoHealth Alliance, he adds, has acted “with scientific integrity and honesty.”

“It’s now over two years since the first efforts to willfully politicize the pandemic origins, and to undermine science and the work that scientists do in often difficult circumstances,” says Daszak. “All of us have lost due to this politicization. When you mix politics with science, you get politics.”
Here's a direct clip from that article.


Even though none of those chimeric viruses was the source of covid-19, there are still concerns that the biosafety standards in the Wuhan lab might not have been rigorous enough to prevent research activities from causing the pandemic.

Studies involving live viruses and genetic tinkering are inherently risky. Accidents can happen even with the most stringent biosafety precautions in place. ...

Oops. You must have missed that bit.
 
Here's a direct clip from that article.


Even though none of those chimeric viruses was the source of covid-19, there are still concerns that the biosafety standards in the Wuhan lab might not have been rigorous enough to prevent research activities from causing the pandemic.

Studies involving live viruses and genetic tinkering are inherently risky. Accidents can happen even with the most stringent biosafety precautions in place. ...

Oops. You must have missed that bit.
No, I read the whole thing. What was clear in the account is that China, the WHO, and the US government were all fighting those researchers who suggested the evidence clearly showed the covid virus came from the Wuhan lab.
 
No, I read the whole thing. What was clear in the account is that China, the WHO, and the US government were all fighting those researchers who suggested the evidence clearly showed the covid virus came from the Wuhan lab.
That's is not true. The US govt was Trump and he did not suggest it came from anywhere else. He blamed them from the off.

With your volumes of knowledge, where did these recalcitrant researchers say it did come from?
Let's see how good you are now big mouth.
 
Werbung:
That's is not true. The US govt was Trump and he did not suggest it came from anywhere else. He blamed them from the off.

With your volumes of knowledge, where did these recalcitrant researchers say it did come from?
Let's see how good you are now big mouth.
Trump was not represented by government officials like Fauci, Collins, Lt. Col. Vindmann, Christopher Wray and hundreds of others who showed greater allegiance to deep state dishonesty than allegiance to the Constitution and their Commander in Chief.
 
Back
Top