NIAID did not immediately respond to an after-hours email from Fox News about the comments in the FT.
Posted on 06/04/2021 9:32:54 AM PDT by conservative98
Dr. Anthony Fauci gave a wide-ranging interview that was published late Thursday that mainly focused on the origins of the coronavirus, and he was asked if he believed his own National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases could have any responsibility for the global pandemic.
"Are you really saying that we are implicated because we gave a multibillion-dollar institution $120,000 a year for bat surveillance?" he asked, according to the Financial Times.
The paper did not post the precise question asked to Fauci, but the top disease doctor has been facing increased criticism by Republicans, including Sen. Rand Paul over a $600,000 grant that went to a group called EcoHealth Alliance and ended up at the Chinese lab. The lab was reportedly tasked with studying the risk that bat coronaviruses.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
NIAID did not immediately respond to an after-hours email from Fox News about the comments in the FT.
Check ECO HEALTH and OTHER LEFTY COMPANIES!
No, you are lying to protect your Federal Grant Funding across the board!
There is a reason 65 is mandatory retirement age at many companies and government agencies.
Are you seriously saying that that "implicates" me?!
Regards,
Perfect
From the comments:
Are you really saying that we are implicated because we gave a multibillion-dollar institution $120,000 a year for bat surveillance?” he asked, according to the Financial Times.
Answering a question with a question. Usually means the answer is yes.
Sure, why can’t you be implicated for $120,000 in China, where the average income is less than $15,000 a year? (And it was at least $120,000/year for several years, not $120K total.) You hire some miners to catch bats while working in the mines. This disturbs the natural life of the bats, and they otherwise would have had no physical contact with humans. You ship them to a large, densely populated urban area for study. You then get bit by them while trying to collect saliva/bodily fluid samples from them in the lab. So, even without highly technical “gain of function” science you can transmit a virus from deep in the wild among animals to an urban center among humans and, I think, rightly be BLAMED for it and its consequences.
Flippant little a&&hole.
That’s a non-denial denial.
Disingenuous.
And USAID gave them huge amounts of funds.
See last paragraph here.
https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1864/Predict2-factsheet.pdf
What a jerkball.
Nobody is saying anything except for calling you, Dr FoulCheese out for never even considering the possibility that the Chinese in the form of the CCP *MIGHT* use this research to produce a ‘gain of function’ which you yourself are perfectly aware of, and MIGHT either a: release it deliberately or b: accidentally; with their known substandard lab procedures.
It is YOU who ignored “science”, because you dismiss out of hand, based upon your “feelings”, either release scenario, both of which are entirely possible. And now, your feelings are apparently hurt because so much evidence, circumstantial though it might be, is piling up on the side of discrediting all of your assumptions.
This little exercise of yours and your CCP pals killed about the same number of US citizens as world war 2, cost as much or more, and ruined a helluva lot of peoples’ lives. So sorry if your butt cheeks get a little squeezed when these facts are brought up.
What evil is this?
An evil unmasked.
The ‘best’ kind. (if there is such a thing)
Smug, self-righteous, indifferent.
One more bureaucratic slimeball that over-stayed his stint in the swamp.
Especially a smart a*s question. Like Biden's..are you on crack man?
That’s exactly what we are saying.
L
Yes
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.