Anthony Fauci Is The Criminal Responsible For This Pandemic

[Anonymous]

Fauci's work should be scrutinized.

[Anonymous]

The noose is tightening around old Gauci's neck.



Bombshell documents suggest Dr. Fauci was 'untruthful' about federal funding for risky coronavirus research in China

https://www.theblaze.com/news/bombshell-documents-fauci-untruthful-federal-funding-coronavirus-research-china?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210907Trending-DocumentsFauciUntruthful&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/news/bombshell ... ing%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/news/bombshell-documents-fauci-untruthful-federal-funding-coronavirus-research-china?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210907Trending-DocumentsFauciUntruthful&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News



The U.S. agency led by White House COVID adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci funded research experiments to infect humanized mice with novel coronaviruses at a laboratory in Wuhan, China, newly released documents reveal.



Over 900 pages of documents were obtained by The Intercept as part of a Freedom of Information Act request against the National Institutes of Health. The documents detail how EcoHealth Alliance, a U.S.-based nonprofit group that supports field research on coronaviruses around the world, awarded federal funding to study bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.



Newly revealed details include two previously unpublished grant proposals that were funded by Fauci's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. One of those grants appears to show gain-of-function research — experiments that intentionally make viruses more transmissible among mammals, and particularly among humans — being funded by U.S. taxpayers through NIAID's grant to EcoHealth Alliance and a subsequent sub-award to the Wuhan University Center for Animal Experiment. The grant was awarded for a five-year period between 2014 and 2019.



From The Intercept:



One of the grants, titled " Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence," outlines an ambitious effort led by EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak to screen thousands of bat samples for novel coronaviruses. The research also involved screening people who work with live animals. The documents contain several critical details about the research in Wuhan, including the fact that key experimental work with humanized mice was conducted at a biosafety level 3 lab at Wuhan University Center for Animal Experiment — and not at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as was previously assumed. The documents raise additional questions about the theory that the pandemic may have begun in a lab accident, an idea that Daszak has aggressively dismissed.



The bat coronavirus grant provided the EcoHealth Alliance with a total of $3.1 million, including $599,000 that the Wuhan Institute of Virology used in part to identify and alter bat coronaviruses likely to infect humans. Even before the pandemic, many scientists were concerned about the potential dangers associated with such experiments. The grant proposal acknowledges some of those dangers: "Fieldwork involves the highest risk of exposure to SARS or other CoVs, while working in caves with high bat density overhead and the potential for fecal dust to be inhaled."

Dr. Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University, reviewed the documents and determined that the research described fits the definition of gain-of-function experiments.



"The viruses they constructed were tested for their ability to infect mice that were engineered to display human type receptors on their cell," Ebright told The Intercept. He indicated that the documents show the Chinese researchers were able to infect humanized mice with two different types of novel coronaviruses.



In a Twitter thread, Ebright elaborated that the materials "show that the 2014 and 2019 NIH grants to EcoHealth with subcontracts to WIV funded gain-of-function research as defined in federal policies in effect in 2014-2017 and potential pandemic pathogen enhancement as defined in federal policies in effect in 2017-present."



He also said the documents confirm that one of the experiments produced several " laboratory-generated SARS-related coronaviruses," and that one of these engineered viruses "was more pathogenic to humanized mice than the starting virus from which it was constructed."



"The documents make it clear that assertions by the NIH Director, Francis Collins, and the NIAID Director, Anthony Fauci, that the NIH did not support gain-of-function research or potential pandemic pathogen enhancement at WIV are untruthful," Ebright said.



Fauci, the director of NIAID, has repeatedly denied that his agency or any part of the National Institutes of Health provided federal funding for gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. In July, Fauci accused Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) of lying after Paul pressed him on NIAID's funding for coronavirus research in Wuhan.



The Wuhan Institute of Virology lab has been the focus of efforts to discover the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. While many scientists maintain that the most likely origin for the SARS-CoV-2 virus is natural spillover — a bat coronavirus, for example, making the evolutionary leap to infect humans — others have raised questions about the possible role the Wuhan lab played in the virus' origins, given its proximity to the first outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan and the research that was conducted there.



The most relevant question is whether Chinese scientists in Wuhan performed gain-of-function experiments to engineer coronaviruses, and whether its possible one of those viruses escaped and caused the COVID-19 pandemic.



Scientists have so far been unable to conclusively prove that SARS-CoV-2 had a natural origin, which has led many in the scientific community to call for intense scrutiny of the Wuhan lab as part of any investigation of the origins of the pandemic. President Joe Biden in May ordered the intelligence community to investigate the matter, and the classified August 27 report he received was inconclusive.



But the new documents obtained by The Intercept support accusations that scientists in Wuhan, at the Wuhan University Center for Animal Experiment if not the Wuhan Institute of Virology, were performing the kinds of dangerous experiments that many had previously warned could cause a pandemic under unsafe conditions.



And according to Sen. Paul, the documents show that "Fauci lied."

[Anonymous]

https://twitter.com/R_H_Ebright/status/1435053512396656641?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1435053513482985474%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es2_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theblaze.com%2Fnews%2Fbombshell-documents-fauci-untruthful-federal-funding-coronavirus-research-china">https://twitter.com/R_H_Ebright/status/ ... arch-china">https://twitter.com/R_H_Ebright/status/1435053512396656641?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1435053513482985474%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es2_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theblaze.com%2Fnews%2Fbombshell-documents-fauci-untruthful-federal-funding-coronavirus-research-china



https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/1435198662456586242?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1435198662456586242%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theblaze.com%2Fnews%2Fbombshell-documents-fauci-untruthful-federal-funding-coronavirus-research-china">https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/143 ... arch-china">https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/1435198662456586242?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1435198662456586242%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theblaze.com%2Fnews%2Fbombshell-documents-fauci-untruthful-federal-funding-coronavirus-research-china

[Anonymous]

The noose is tightening around old Gauci's neck.



Bombshell documents suggest Dr. Fauci was 'untruthful' about federal funding for risky coronavirus research in China

https://www.theblaze.com/news/bombshell-documents-fauci-untruthful-federal-funding-coronavirus-research-china?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210907Trending-DocumentsFauciUntruthful&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/news/bombshell ... ing%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/news/bombshell-documents-fauci-untruthful-federal-funding-coronavirus-research-china?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210907Trending-DocumentsFauciUntruthful&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News



The U.S. agency led by White House COVID adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci funded research experiments to infect humanized mice with novel coronaviruses at a laboratory in Wuhan, China, newly released documents reveal.



Over 900 pages of documents were obtained by The Intercept as part of a Freedom of Information Act request against the National Institutes of Health. The documents detail how EcoHealth Alliance, a U.S.-based nonprofit group that supports field research on coronaviruses around the world, awarded federal funding to study bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.



Newly revealed details include two previously unpublished grant proposals that were funded by Fauci's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. One of those grants appears to show gain-of-function research — experiments that intentionally make viruses more transmissible among mammals, and particularly among humans — being funded by U.S. taxpayers through NIAID's grant to EcoHealth Alliance and a subsequent sub-award to the Wuhan University Center for Animal Experiment. The grant was awarded for a five-year period between 2014 and 2019.



From The Intercept:



One of the grants, titled " Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence," outlines an ambitious effort led by EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak to screen thousands of bat samples for novel coronaviruses. The research also involved screening people who work with live animals. The documents contain several critical details about the research in Wuhan, including the fact that key experimental work with humanized mice was conducted at a biosafety level 3 lab at Wuhan University Center for Animal Experiment — and not at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as was previously assumed. The documents raise additional questions about the theory that the pandemic may have begun in a lab accident, an idea that Daszak has aggressively dismissed.



The bat coronavirus grant provided the EcoHealth Alliance with a total of $3.1 million, including $599,000 that the Wuhan Institute of Virology used in part to identify and alter bat coronaviruses likely to infect humans. Even before the pandemic, many scientists were concerned about the potential dangers associated with such experiments. The grant proposal acknowledges some of those dangers: "Fieldwork involves the highest risk of exposure to SARS or other CoVs, while working in caves with high bat density overhead and the potential for fecal dust to be inhaled."

Dr. Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University, reviewed the documents and determined that the research described fits the definition of gain-of-function experiments.



"The viruses they constructed were tested for their ability to infect mice that were engineered to display human type receptors on their cell," Ebright told The Intercept. He indicated that the documents show the Chinese researchers were able to infect humanized mice with two different types of novel coronaviruses.



In a Twitter thread, Ebright elaborated that the materials "show that the 2014 and 2019 NIH grants to EcoHealth with subcontracts to WIV funded gain-of-function research as defined in federal policies in effect in 2014-2017 and potential pandemic pathogen enhancement as defined in federal policies in effect in 2017-present."



He also said the documents confirm that one of the experiments produced several " laboratory-generated SARS-related coronaviruses," and that one of these engineered viruses "was more pathogenic to humanized mice than the starting virus from which it was constructed."



"The documents make it clear that assertions by the NIH Director, Francis Collins, and the NIAID Director, Anthony Fauci, that the NIH did not support gain-of-function research or potential pandemic pathogen enhancement at WIV are untruthful," Ebright said.



Fauci, the director of NIAID, has repeatedly denied that his agency or any part of the National Institutes of Health provided federal funding for gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. In July, Fauci accused Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) of lying after Paul pressed him on NIAID's funding for coronavirus research in Wuhan.



The Wuhan Institute of Virology lab has been the focus of efforts to discover the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. While many scientists maintain that the most likely origin for the SARS-CoV-2 virus is natural spillover — a bat coronavirus, for example, making the evolutionary leap to infect humans — others have raised questions about the possible role the Wuhan lab played in the virus' origins, given its proximity to the first outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan and the research that was conducted there.



The most relevant question is whether Chinese scientists in Wuhan performed gain-of-function experiments to engineer coronaviruses, and whether its possible one of those viruses escaped and caused the COVID-19 pandemic.



Scientists have so far been unable to conclusively prove that SARS-CoV-2 had a natural origin, which has led many in the scientific community to call for intense scrutiny of the Wuhan lab as part of any investigation of the origins of the pandemic. President Joe Biden in May ordered the intelligence community to investigate the matter, and the classified August 27 report he received was inconclusive.



But the new documents obtained by The Intercept support accusations that scientists in Wuhan, at the Wuhan University Center for Animal Experiment if not the Wuhan Institute of Virology, were performing the kinds of dangerous experiments that many had previously warned could cause a pandemic under unsafe conditions.



And according to Sen. Paul, the documents show that "Fauci lied."

The smoking gun.

[Anonymous]

Dr Fauci knew the Israeli study was about durability. He is a pathological liar.



Fauci can't give a 'really firm answer' on why Americans with natural immunity need vaccines

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the White House's top adviser for the COVID-19 pandemic, told CNN on Thursday that he doesn't have "a really firm answer" on the accuracy of a study that found natural immunity provides better protection against the virus than vaccines alone.



During an interview on "Anderson Cooper 360," CNN chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta asked Fauci about a study done in Israel that found natural immunity from previous COVID-19 infection conferred longer-lasting protection against the Delta variant of coronavirus than two shots of the Pfizer vaccine.



"So, as we talk about vaccine mandates, I get calls all the time, people say, I've already had COVID, I'm protected. And now the study says maybe even more protected than the vaccine alone. Should they also get the vaccine? How do you make the case to them?" Gupta asked.



"You know, that's a really good point, Sanjay. I don't have a really firm answer for you on that," Fauci replied.



"That's something that we're going to have to discuss regarding the durability of the response," he continued. "The one thing that paper from Israel didn't tell you is whether or not — as high as the protection is with natural infection — what's the durability compared to the durability of a vaccine?"



Fauci explained that it is possible that natural immunity from previous COVID-19 infection only provides temporary protection from viral infection.



This answer is misleading. The Israeli researchers specifically addressed the durability of natural immunity compared to vaccine immunity, writing that their study demonstrated "natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant" than does the two-dose Pfizer vaccine.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/fauci-no-answer-why-americans-with-natural-immunity-need-vaccines?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210910Trending-FauciNaturalImmunity&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/news/fauci-no- ... ing%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/news/fauci-no-answer-why-americans-with-natural-immunity-need-vaccines?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210910Trending-FauciNaturalImmunity&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News

[cc]

This answer is misleading. The Israeli researchers specifically addressed the durability of natural immunity compared to vaccine immunity, writing that their study demonstrated "natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant" than does the two-dose Pfizer vaccine.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/fauci-no-answer-why-americans-with-natural-immunity-need-vaccines?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210910Trending-FauciNaturalImmunity&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/news/fauci-no- ... ing%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/news/fauci-no-answer-why-americans-with-natural-immunity-need-vaccines?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210910Trending-FauciNaturalImmunity&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News

Having been through the process, vaccine passports & requirements for vaccine proof make no provision for those who have had covid



I'm amazed most regs have made no provision  .. there is no excuse for failing to do so

[Anonymous]

This answer is misleading. The Israeli researchers specifically addressed the durability of natural immunity compared to vaccine immunity, writing that their study demonstrated "natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant" than does the two-dose Pfizer vaccine.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/fauci-no-answer-why-americans-with-natural-immunity-need-vaccines?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210910Trending-FauciNaturalImmunity&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/news/fauci-no- ... ing%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/news/fauci-no-answer-why-americans-with-natural-immunity-need-vaccines?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210910Trending-FauciNaturalImmunity&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News

Having been through the process, vaccine passports & requirements for vaccine proof make no provision for those who have had covid



I'm amazed most regs have made no provision  .. there is no excuse for failing to do so

I'm not following you. Do you have a problem with the Israeli study's findings?

[cc]

This answer is misleading. The Israeli researchers specifically addressed the durability of natural immunity compared to vaccine immunity, writing that their study demonstrated "natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant" than does the two-dose Pfizer vaccine.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/fauci-no-answer-why-americans-with-natural-immunity-need-vaccines?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210910Trending-FauciNaturalImmunity&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/news/fauci-no- ... ing%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/news/fauci-no-answer-why-americans-with-natural-immunity-need-vaccines?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210910Trending-FauciNaturalImmunity&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News

Having been through the process, vaccine passports & requirements for vaccine proof make no provision for those who have had covid



I'm amazed most regs have made no provision  .. there is no excuse for failing to do so

I'm not following you. Do you have a problem with the Israeli study's findings?

To an extent, I do find it extreme & quite different from all other Country's & our own Province's  results.



But what I was trying to say was that in any references everywhere (including here in BC who has now rolled out cards) make no allowance or provision for those with previous infections - They all are vaxxed vs unvaxxed based.

They are missing a major consideration .. natural protection via having had it



In fact, calculated over the last 10 weeks (i.e. current), highly vaccinated  Israel & UK lead the world in lowest death / case rate .. mainly by a wide margin



COVID-19 vaccines cut the risk of serious illness or death — even if they aren't perfect





The latest Canadian data released on Friday shows that from late July to late August — while the more-contagious delta variant was circulating widely —



unvaccinated individuals were 36 times more likely to be hospitalized for COVID-19 than those who were fully vaccinated.



https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/news/2021/09/statement-from-the-chief-public-health-officer-of-canada-on-september-10-2021.html">https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/ ... -2021.html">https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/news/2021/09/statement-from-the-chief-public-health-officer-of-canada-on-september-10-2021.html

[Anonymous]

They all are vaxxed vs unvaxxed based.

They are missing a major consideration .. natural protection via having had it

Yes, our immunity is ignored. I had a convo with my MPP about this. At this time, Ontario is treating us the same as people who have not been vaccinated.

[Anonymous]

Fauci's friends who denied that it was a lab leak had ties to the Wuhan lab and Fauci's grotesque gain-of-function research.

Wuhan Story That Refuses to Die: New Probe Shows Scientists Who Dismissed Lab Leak Theory Have Links to Chinese



Nearly two years since Covid-19 was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan, the question of the virus's origin still remains unanswered. However, in recent weeks, the controversial claim that the virus must have been leaked from a Chinese laboratory- which has been dismissed earlier- is gaining momentum.



Recently, a probe carried out by The Telegraph has revealed that 26 out of 27 scientists who wrote a letter in The Lancet medical journal trashing the lab-leak theory of the COVID-19 outbreak have or had links to researchers from China's Wuhan Institute of Virology.



In February 2020, a letter published by The Lancet stated that they "strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin," and had claimed that scientists from multiple countries overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife.'The authors of the letter had not revealed any link with the Wuhan lab, soon it was revealed that the letter was orchestrated by British zoologist Peter Daszak, president of the US-based EcoHealth Alliance, which funded research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.



In June last year, the journal issued a clarification regarding Peter Daszak's link with the laboratory, admitting that vital information was not revealed earlier when the letter was published.

https://www.news18.com/news/world/wuhan-story-that-refuses-to-die-new-probe-shows-scientists-who-dismissed-lab-leak-theory-have-links-to-chinese-4194464.html">https://www.news18.com/news/world/wuhan ... 94464.html">https://www.news18.com/news/world/wuhan-story-that-refuses-to-die-new-probe-shows-scientists-who-dismissed-lab-leak-theory-have-links-to-chinese-4194464.html

[Anonymous]

Fauci's friends who denied that it was a lab leak had ties to the Wuhan lab and Fauci's grotesque gain-of-function research.

Wuhan Story That Refuses to Die: New Probe Shows Scientists Who Dismissed Lab Leak Theory Have Links to Chinese



Nearly two years since Covid-19 was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan, the question of the virus's origin still remains unanswered. However, in recent weeks, the controversial claim that the virus must have been leaked from a Chinese laboratory- which has been dismissed earlier- is gaining momentum.



Recently, a probe carried out by The Telegraph has revealed that 26 out of 27 scientists who wrote a letter in The Lancet medical journal trashing the lab-leak theory of the COVID-19 outbreak have or had links to researchers from China's Wuhan Institute of Virology.



In February 2020, a letter published by The Lancet stated that they "strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin," and had claimed that scientists from multiple countries overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife.'The authors of the letter had not revealed any link with the Wuhan lab, soon it was revealed that the letter was orchestrated by British zoologist Peter Daszak, president of the US-based EcoHealth Alliance, which funded research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.



In June last year, the journal issued a clarification regarding Peter Daszak's link with the laboratory, admitting that vital information was not revealed earlier when the letter was published.

https://www.news18.com/news/world/wuhan-story-that-refuses-to-die-new-probe-shows-scientists-who-dismissed-lab-leak-theory-have-links-to-chinese-4194464.html">https://www.news18.com/news/world/wuhan ... 94464.html">https://www.news18.com/news/world/wuhan-story-that-refuses-to-die-new-probe-shows-scientists-who-dismissed-lab-leak-theory-have-links-to-chinese-4194464.html

I don't think anyone can seriously deny anymore that this virus was manufactured and that many scientific leaders had a part to play in making it and covering it up after it's release.....unless they're connected to the lab in Wuhan.

[Anonymous]

Fauci's friends who denied that it was a lab leak had ties to the Wuhan lab and Fauci's grotesque gain-of-function research.

Wuhan Story That Refuses to Die: New Probe Shows Scientists Who Dismissed Lab Leak Theory Have Links to Chinese



Nearly two years since Covid-19 was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan, the question of the virus's origin still remains unanswered. However, in recent weeks, the controversial claim that the virus must have been leaked from a Chinese laboratory- which has been dismissed earlier- is gaining momentum.



Recently, a probe carried out by The Telegraph has revealed that 26 out of 27 scientists who wrote a letter in The Lancet medical journal trashing the lab-leak theory of the COVID-19 outbreak have or had links to researchers from China's Wuhan Institute of Virology.



In February 2020, a letter published by The Lancet stated that they "strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin," and had claimed that scientists from multiple countries overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife.'The authors of the letter had not revealed any link with the Wuhan lab, soon it was revealed that the letter was orchestrated by British zoologist Peter Daszak, president of the US-based EcoHealth Alliance, which funded research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.



In June last year, the journal issued a clarification regarding Peter Daszak's link with the laboratory, admitting that vital information was not revealed earlier when the letter was published.

https://www.news18.com/news/world/wuhan-story-that-refuses-to-die-new-probe-shows-scientists-who-dismissed-lab-leak-theory-have-links-to-chinese-4194464.html">https://www.news18.com/news/world/wuhan ... 94464.html">https://www.news18.com/news/world/wuhan-story-that-refuses-to-die-new-probe-shows-scientists-who-dismissed-lab-leak-theory-have-links-to-chinese-4194464.html

In February, 2020 COVID-19 was not even a global pandemic yet. China was not sharing any information, How could any scientist so quickly dismiss the possibility of a lab leak. Very suspicious indeed.

[Anonymous]

The WHO worked with China and Dr Fauci to cover-up the origins of the pandemic.



WHO Failed to Investigate Deleted Virology Database and Evidence Indicating Earlier Start of Pandemic



On Sept. 12, 2019, the Wuhan Institute of Virology's database of viral sequences was taken offline. The deleted database, which has never been publicly recovered, contained more than 22,000 unpublished samples and sequences of bat and rodent viruses.



Notably, the database contains crucial data and may hold the key to determining whether the lab in Wuhan, China, had COVID-19 or a progenitor virus in its possession.



The importance of having access to virus sequence data was illustrated earlier this year, when sequences from early COVID-19 cases were recovered from another dataset that had been deleted in June 2020 from a National Institutes of Health (NIH) database at the behest of a Chinese researcher. That data confirmed that the pandemic didn't start at the Huanan Seafood Market as Chinese authorities had claimed.



Despite the potential importance of the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) data, there have been no known requests from public health officials to reinstate or examine the Institute's database and none of the major health officials and experts involved in the pandemic response, such as Dr. Anthony Fauci, British pharmaceutical trust Director Jeremy Farrar or NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins, have publicly acknowledged the database's existence.



In February 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) sent an investigative team to Wuhan. The team's report states that as part of their analysis they "reviewed data collected through the China National Centre for Bioinformation integrated database on all available coronaviruses sequences."



But the team failed to request an examination of the database of viruses collected, maintained, and later deleted by the WIV.



The WHO's failure to pursue what could have been its most promising investigative lead is notable as the Wuhan Institute of Virology is widely regarded as perhaps the most likely source of a viral lab leak.



Peter Daszak, the president of EcoHealth Alliance, a group used by Fauci's NIH to fund the Wuhan Institute lab, claimed that the WHO's investigative team didn't request to see the deleted Wuhan database because Daszak told them that the data didn't contain relevant information on the pandemic's origins.



It seems surprising that WHO officials would accept Daszak's assertions at face value, rather than insisting upon examining the database for themselves. It's also worth noting that Daszak was inherently conflicted as he had been enmeshed with the WIV's activities for years.



When asked about the deleted database in January 2021, WIV Director Shi Zhengli claimed that she deleted the database because of alleged hacking attempts—despite the fact that this information was supposed to be publicly available, according to Daszak's funding agreement with Fauci's NIH.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/who-failed-to-investigate-deleted-virology-database-and-evidence-indicating-earlier-start-of-pandemic_3999742.html?utm_source=morningbriefnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-09-16&mktids=349d3d5c85e05ecb26238284a36a896c&est=aNrje0CLv%2BQ58GIY4mpJeLrPy8j5BFx7SPl2sF4VwtTVOwSATdDJyecdp2jWmrylTw%3D%3D">https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morni ... ylTw%3D%3D">https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/who-failed-to-investigate-deleted-virology-database-and-evidence-indicating-earlier-start-of-pandemic_3999742.html?utm_source=morningbriefnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-09-16&mktids=349d3d5c85e05ecb26238284a36a896c&est=aNrje0CLv%2BQ58GIY4mpJeLrPy8j5BFx7SPl2sF4VwtTVOwSATdDJyecdp2jWmrylTw%3D%3D

[Anonymous]

Anthony Fauci could not recuse himself since it would involve his part in creating this virus through gain of function research and it's shady funding.





Cash, COVID, and cover-up, part 3: 'You will have tasks that must be done'



On Jan. 27, 2020, EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak sent an email to Dr. David Morens, a subordinate of Dr. Anthony Fauci at NIAID, that contained a not-very-subtle warning. Fauci had not yet been appointed to former President Donald Trump's Coronavirus Task Force and was thus largely unknown to the public at large at this point. Daszak would later become perhaps the most prominent public scientific figure in the world to denounce the lab-leak theory.



He was also, perhaps not coincidentally, the link between U.S. taxpayer dollars and research funded at the Wuhan Institute of Virology — it was through his EcoHealth Alliance that the WIV had received NIAID grants.



As the coronavirus pandemic was emerging in Wuhan and scientists began looking for the source of the outbreak (some of whom were considering the possibility that the virus might have leaked from the WIV), Daszak alerted Morens to a rather explosive fact: The NIAID had, in fact, been funding the WIV indirectly. Not only that, Daszak provided Morens with a handy list of talking points that Fauci could use, if he saw fit, if he was asked about what, exactly, the NIAID had been funding at the WIV.



It is reasonable to assume that, prior to this point, Fauci may not have personally known that NIAID had funded research at the WIV that any reasonable person would have concluded constituted gain-of-function research. However, he certainly knew after this heads-up from Daszak — who was aggressively shaping the public message even this early in the pandemic.



The first officially reported human cases of COVID-19 were identified in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, although there is evidence the virus was circulating and infecting people at the Wuhan Institute of Virology before December. At the beginning of the month, patient zero, a 55-year-old man from Hubei, went to the hospital with pneumonia-like symptoms. Though the outbreak would later be traced to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan, patient zero had not been there. In the next few weeks, more patients would present themselves to the hospital with similar symptoms, and on Dec. 8, 2019, the Wuhan City Health Committee and the World Health Organization reported that 41 people had been tested and confirmed positive for a new viral disease that would come to be called COVID-19.



Reports of this novel coronavirus were of immediate interest to Drs. Fauci, Baric, Daszak, and the other virologists, researchers, and public health officials who had dedicated their lives to studying, controlling, and preventing infectious disease. Their jobs, after all, were to guide the public response to a pandemic. But the circumstances surrounding the outbreak of the virus, and the possible, though unproven, connection of its origins to dangerous gain-of-function research — which those involved had an ideological and financial stake in — created a conflict of interest that perhaps motivated their public statements and compromised their official response to COVID-19.



While we might know but little of the full picture, what we do know does not look good. In the early days of the pandemic, a group of scientists led by Fauci, Farrar, and Daszak held a number of teleconferences and meetings, over which there remains a blanket of almost total secrecy. The end result of these initial teleconferences is that all the participants would emerge to publicly declare the lab-leak theory a conspiracy, including some (like Dr. Kristian Andersen), who had just days earlier announced that the virus looked potentially engineered.



In the months following these internal discussions, Fauci, Dasak, and other public officials and influential members of the scientific community would coordinate a messaging campaign to discredit the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 leaked from the Wuhan lab. Discussion of the lab-leak theory would be shut down in public spaces by their repeated insistence that such questions were conspiracy-theory, fringe ideas that promote disinformation during a global pandemic.



They instead advanced the hypothesis that COVID-19 had natural, or zoonotic origins — that the virus began in some animal host, possibly bats or pangolins, and evolved to become transmissible among humans. This became the prevailing narrative accepted by the media, and those who questioned its truthfulness were smeared as conspiracy theorists and in some cases de-platformed by tech companies for contradicting the opinions of respected, scientific experts and organizations — read: the views endorsed and promoted by government officials like Fauci.

https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/cash-covid-and-cover-up-part-3-you-will-have-tasks-that-must-be-done?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210916Trending-CashCovidCoverup3&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/cash-cov ... ing%20News">https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/cash-covid-and-cover-up-part-3-you-will-have-tasks-that-must-be-done?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20210916Trending-CashCovidCoverup3&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News

[Anonymous]

Here is how the plan unfolded.



+++++++++



The chain began in late December 2019. On Dec. 31, 2019, at 8:16 a.m., Dr. Baric emailed Daszak with the subject line, "RE: have you heard any news on this? maybe as many as 27 cases with 7 severe in wuhan---ards like pneumonia." The email contained an update from ProMed, an email list that provides readers all over the world with crowdsourced disease alerts, on the latest news regarding an emerging pneumonia-like disease reported in Wuhan.



Daszak, a zoologist, was the leader of the only U.S.-based nonprofit organization researching coronavirus evolution and transmission in China. He is also a strong proponent of and fundraiser for gain-of-function research. For years, his organization has received federal funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health and its sub-agency the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases to support research on bat coronaviruses conducted in China. He was on friendly terms with Wuhan researcher Dr. Shi Zhengli, as well as NIAID Director Fauci, and had contacts with both of their colleagues.



He replied to Baric indicating that his EcoHealth colleague Hongying Li was feeding him information on the pneumonia cases in what appeared to be real time. Daszak's emails were made public as part of a records request from U.S. Right to Know.



On Jan. 6, 2020, Daszak replied to an email from Erik Stemmy, the program officer for the Respiratory Diseases Branch Division of Microbiology and Infections Diseases at NIAID, indicating that he had some off-the-record information on the viral outbreak in China. Chinese scientists on Jan. 12 published the genetic sequence of the virus causing the outbreak. EcoHealth Alliance analyzed the Chinese data and determined the virus was related to SARS. Daszak wrote another email to Stemmy informing him that the new virus is "close to SARSr-CoV Rp3 that we published from our past NIAID work. This came from a Rhinolophus bat in S. China." He added that Baric was "already working to reconstruct and rescue the virus in the lab from the sequence, so he can do further work on it."



It would appear that Daszak had early access to information Shi's research team wouldn't make public until Jan. 23, when they reported the genetic sequence for SARS-CoV-2 was 96.2% similar to a previously discovered bat coronavirus called RaTG13. Daszak confirmed as much in another Jan. 9 email exchange with NIAID senior scientific adviser Dr. David Morens, who had emailed Daszak asking if he had any "inside info on this new coronavirus that isn't yet in the public domain."



"Yes — lots of information and I spoke with Erik Stemmy and Alan Embry yesterday before the news was released," Daszak replied. "Erik is my program officer on our coronavirus grant specifically focused on China." These emails were obtained by Judicial Watch.



Later in a Jan. 27 email, Daszak sent Morens talking points on EcoHealth Alliance's work with the Wuhan lab for Fauci to mention "when he's being interviewed re. The new CoV." He highlighted that NIAID had been funding research at the Wuhan lab through EcoHealth Alliance for "the past 5 years" and that the work involves identifying "cohorts of people highly exposed to bats in China" and determining "if they're getting sick from [coronaviruses]."



Daszak also pointed out the "results of our work," which included the discovery of "SARS-related CoVs that can bind to human cells (Published in Nature), and that cause SARS-like disease in humanized mouse models." He was referring to Baric and Shi's 2015 collaborative gain-of-function study.



From the beginning, Daszak sought to influence the messaging around his work in China, casting it in the most positive light.



"Great info, thanks," Morens replied. "[Dr. Fauci] doesn't maintain awareness of these things and doesn't know unless program officers tell him, which they rarely do, since they are across town and may not see him more than once a year, or less."



The early work of scientists to identify SARS-CoV-2 and trace its origins inevitably attracted the attention of the media. Science magazine published an article on Jan. 31 detailing those efforts, covering Shi's work and leaning in to the emerging hypothesis that the virus occurred naturally in bats and made the leap to infect humans. The article also briefly discussed "conspiracy theories" linking China's coronavirus research to weapons research. At the time there were unsubstantiated claims that China engineered the virus at the Wuhan lab as a bioweapon, but soon the "conspiracy theory" label would be expanded to any suggestion that the virus originated in the lab, no matter how credentialed those promoting the idea were or how carefully they avoided drawing conclusions.



The Science article did note that there were concerns about the Wuhan lab's security and gain-of-function research. Dr. Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University and a critic of gain-of-function experiments, was quoted suggesting that data on SARS-CoV-2 was "consistent with entry into the human population as either a natural accident or a laboratory accident."



The mere suggestion that it was possible for COVID-19 to come from a laboratory accident drew immediate, fierce attack from Daszak.



"Every time there's an emerging disease, a new virus, the same story comes out: This is a spillover or the release of an agent or a bioengineered virus," Daszak told Science. "It's just a shame. It seems humans can't resist controversy and these myths, yet it's staring us right in the face."



This unjustified, angry reaction to a reasonable point was a prelude to what was to come.