Fauci-funded researchers ‘de-barked’ tortured beagles, just as Big Tech has silenced nonconformists.
Fauci-funded researchers ‘de-barked’ tortured beagles, just as Big Tech has silenced nonconformists.
H aving your name associated with images of puppies in unbearable pain seems pretty bad. So it’s safe to say it’s been a pretty bad week for Dr. Anthony Fauci. A bipartisan group of congressmen wants to hold hearings on $375,000 of taxpayer money that the National Institutes of Allergies and Infectious Diseases invested in scientific research in which Tunisians drugged beagles, locked them up, and had sand flies peck at them and deposit larvae on them. The beagles were “de-barked” — a term I can never forget now. It means that their vocal cords were snipped, to spare Tunisian ears. Beagles! What’s next, a revelation that Fauci paid Montenegrins to suffocate American moms in their own apple pies?
Oh, and the puppy thing — that’s not all. The National Institutes of Health issued a letter last week confirming that Fauci, knowingly or unknowingly, lied to Congress when he denied that his office had funded, through grants, research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) on how to make bat coronaviruses more infectious in humans.
Here it is important to note that the NIH and many experts still agree that the research described in this grant letter could not be directly related to COVID-19, because the extra-infectious-to-humans bat coronavirus that we Americans did fund into existence at the WIV is substantially different from the one that has killed millions worldwide.
All those experts rely on NIH grants for their work and their jobs. The NIH subcontractor, EcoHealth Alliance, which funded this research, turned in its grant report in 2021, two years after the report’s 2019 deadline, according to the NIH. EcoHealth Alliance is the same outfit that paid for huge newspaper ads almost a year ago in which it assembled all sorts of experts and lackeys to cry “conspiracy theory!” in response to the notion that COVID-19 may have emerged from a lab in Wuhan. A World Health Organization official has since described those ads as “the worst form of bullying in full contravention of the scientific method.” So EcoHealth Alliance doesn’t exactly come across as forthright, candid, and guiltless.
And yet experts are still demanding that we believe that the bat coronavirus that started in Wuhan, where it began infecting humans, had nothing at all to do with the work we funded at WIV to make bat coronavirus more infectious in humans, though this lab had a lot of mysteriously sick employees shortly before the COVID outbreak became international news. This is as if O. J. Simpson’s alibi in the murder of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman were that he couldn’t have killed them because he was too busy that night stabbing to death two other people named Nichole Tan Simpson and Ron Silverman. If the furin cleavage site don’t fit, you must acquit.
Vanity Fair has been all over this story, corresponding with the group of scientist sleuths, centered around Paris, who are investigating the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic:
As one member, Gilles Demaneuf, a data scientist in New Zealand, told Vanity Fair, “I cannot be sure that [COVID-19] originated from] a research-related accident or infection from a sampling trip. But I am 100% sure there was a massive cover-up.”
With elite institutions behaving in such an openly conspiratorial fashion, populism has a long future.
It’s important to remember that when EcoHealth Alliance bullied its experts (nearly all of whom had major conflicts of interest) into writing a letter to the most esteemed medical journal about how the “conspiracy theory” of the lab leak was a scientific impossibility, it functioned as more than just a message to the scientific community. The fake consensus that the letter presented was the basis on which Facebook, the most important communications and media platform in the world, decided to remove posts discussing the lab-leak theory and ban users who flouted that rule repeatedly.
As an aside, do you think Facebook would ever ban or censor people telling your daughter that she might really be a boy or have a boy’s brain? Sounds like scientific disinformation to me.
No, of course not. If anything, they’ll start banning the “deniers,” the people saying that Dave Chappelle is right. Maybe someday Facebook will apply for an NIH grant to de-bark the rest of us.