Fauci’s Colleague Receives Another US Grant to Study COVID, Despite Fears That His Initial Work at Wuhan Lab Triggered a Pandemic

HNewsWire: We Are Engaged in a Major Battle Against Evil, NWO Push From Our Elected, Romney Is Worthless and a Danger to the American People…

Both Anthony Fauci and Peter Daszak are definitely PSYCHOPATHS who most likely supported, engaged, and funded research through a CCP lab in Communist China, our nation's greatest enemy.

The resulting bioweapon was almost certainly dropped on purpose, killing millions. It's a reasonable suspicion that these two psychos are up to no good, and it needs to be investigated. This financing must be halted immediately.

This money, I believe, is a large SCEAM to COVER UP the FACT that Anthony Fauci and Peter Daszak helped fund, build, and unleash a BIOWEAPON on our country and the world.

So far, that makes the most sense.

They would do anything to avoid accountability, and they are arrogant enough to believe they can continue to conceal the truth.

Allowing this event to be funded is a crime! It must be halted immediately.

For a long time, our government has not been held accountable.

Afghanistan, where we were constructing infrastructure and the inspector discovered billions of dollars that had gone unaccounted for.

Both parties in our government are not working for "we the people." We would have an immigration policy, a debt reduction program, and so on if they were.

 

Despite suspicions that similar dangerous studies may have started the epidemic, US health regulators have approved an extremely contentious research company another $650,000 grant to experiment on Covid-like viruses.

The EcoHealth Alliance, led by British biologist Peter Daszak, supported research on modified coronaviruses in Wuhan, China, where the pandemic began.

This type of research, known as 'gain of function,' can result in viruses being purposefully engineered to become more hazardous to people.

The EcoHealth Alliance's five-year experiment will look into "the possibility for future bat coronavirus emergence" in Asia, with scientists scouring caverns in Myanmar, Laos, and Vietnam in the hope of averting another viral outbreak.

Anthony Fauci is always selective about who he interviews. This is evident from the quantity of emails that has been revealed thus far.

Friendly, subservient, and admiring interviews are preferred. Any interviewees or locations who are extremely inquisitive or rude are out. However, he does not always have complete control over the content. Every now and again, a reporter will ask a serious question that will elicit an answer that goes beyond his regular "I'm-the-Science" act.

Fauci must have reasoned that an interview with Dan Diamond of The Washington Post, presented by the University of Southern California's Center for Health Journalism, would be a great safe zone for him. However, about halfway through an otherwise meaningless performance, Fauci was confronted with a crucial question.

"As part of the investigation into the lab leak, there are rumors that EcoHealth Alliance, which conducted gain of function research in Wuhan, is once again being supported by your agency," Diamond inquired. "How do you know this is a good financial partner?"

To set the stage, my first impression was that the NIH award to EcoHealth was worth $653,000. However, The Epoch Times went deeper and discovered a whopping $3 million in donations awarded just last month! This is the most investment EcoHealth has ever received, despite the fact that Peter Daszak, the company's CEO, has been a key actor throughout the entire saga.

Because else, Fauci and the NIH would have sued and won.

"If something is peer-reviewed and receives a good recommendation for financing, you can't just decide, 'I just don't want to finance it,' because people don't like them," he said. They could sue us and win in a microsecond if they ever brought that to court. So you must exercise caution."

The reporter then walks on.

Not to belabor the topic, but this does sound like someone is being blackmailed. That is effectively what it means to say: pay me $3 million or I will sue. Is that what Fauci is implying Daszak did, even if only implicitly? It's completely strange. Also, when did any nonprofit have a court-enforced right to get millions in funds from an agency that is designed to foster scientific research with public benefit?

I questioned some of my scientific pals, and no one could recall a single case of an organization, scientist, or institution successfully challenging the NIH for failing to support. They were all completely taken aback by the claim.

So, if this isn't credible, why would Fauci bring up the possibility of legal repercussions? A Freudian error?

Many of us were taken aback when this financing was announced over the weekend. We had all thought that Fauci and his global cohorts would try to sweep this whole issue under the rug as quickly and thoroughly as possible. We never anticipated Fauci would be so bold, forceful, and shameless as to sign off on another $3 million to the party responsible for causing this terrible problem for the entire world.

The Wall Street Journal even ran an editorial on it:

"The EcoHealth Alliance has been tight-lipped about how it used National Institutes of Health money for coronavirus research in China, which may have resulted in the Covid-19 outbreak." Yet, as he prepares to retire this year, Anthony Fauci rewards the organization by increasing funding for... coronavirus research....

"Early in the pandemic, EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak attempted to stifle debate over the virus's origins by organising a letter from experts published in The Lancet condemning the lab-leak idea as a conspiracy theory." We'll never know for sure how the virus got started, but the evidence for a lab leak has become stronger over time....

"A coronavirus is likely to leap from animals to humans again, like MERS and SARS did, therefore more research in this area is worthwhile with sufficient caution and protection against a lab breakout." But aren't other organizations with a better track record than EcoHealth Alliance?

"The NIH has repeatedly chastised the organization for failing to oversee its partners and comply with the terms of its grants." The NIH informed the House Oversight Committee in August that it had twice requested that [EcoHealth Alliance] share the laboratory notebooks and original electronic data from the research conducted at WIV [Wuhan Institute of Virology]. WIV has yet to furnish these records.'"

According to the NIH website, "the NIH invests the majority of its $45 billion budget in medical research for the American people."

Sure thing. That's a fantastic adage, but how much influence do we, the people, have over Fauci's and the agency's financing decisions? There is no answer. True, Congress allocates funds and has the authority to slash the budget. Apart from the deep-state bureaucrats operating the committees, no one appears to have any oversight or control over expenditures in any detail.

And, let's be honest, $45 billion is a lot of money. With that amount of money comes enormous power, as well as the possibility of group-think stagnation and corruption.

Professor Marty Makary of Johns Hopkins University and colleagues chose to investigate the NIH's funding goals in 2020. Some rather strange findings: barely 2% of the budget was allocated to COVID research over the entire fiscal year. "NIH's inability to support speedy research on the main Covid problems early on (Airborne vs surface, fabric vs quality mask, distance, nat immunity, etc.) resulted in an evidence blank," Makary stated on Twitter. Opinions filled the void, resulting in Covid policy that is governed by groupthink rather than science."

Makary went on to say on a podcast, "Why hasn't the NIH done a research on natural immunity?" 'We don't know,' it keeps saying. They are ignoring the 141 studies that the Brownstone Institute has highlighted. It's not that difficult. Go to New York and interview folks who had the virus and test their blood. Why is my research team conducting this without the support of the NIH? Because the NIH is not only not funding it, but they are also not carrying it out, and they are relying on two seriously erroneous studies published by the CDC. This is a distortion of science itself, shutting down scientific debate, and that should be our most important lesson."

If you reflect back to those days, you'll recall Fauci parading around the media for a year, bragging about all he and his colleagues had discovered about "the science" and how it meant we had to stay locked down and disguised up. It turns out that very little COVID-related work was being produced, particularly on pressing concerns like masks and natural immunity.

Instead, he and others were making up stories the entire time.

Early therapy research is one area that might have been extremely beneficial. This was done all across the world, resulting in fewer deaths in several nations such as India. In one country, the CDC/NIH apparatus actually pushed pharmacists not to dispense approved repurposed drugs that doctors had recommended!

 

 

Profile-332
Profile-266
Profile-287

Leave a Comment