That is, who's right, Rand Paul or Anthony Fauci?
There's no decisive answer at the link, but room to argue that either or both are right. I can't do an excerpt, because I can't figure out what to leave out, so read the whole thing. Personally, I don't side with either man or care about designating one and not the other as a liar.
पोस्ट्स
३ टिप्पण्या:
Temujin writes:
"Well, I'm not going to lay it all out here either. Others have already done that. The information is out there: emails between Fauci and others he worked with, emails from Peter Daszak and others he worked with, and videos of Fauci himself describing the gain of function work they were doing. I'm well past the time where I'll look to our media as a 'fact checker'. Actually, I never entered that time. At no time in the past 10 or so years, would I have taken the press- written or broadcast- as our guide to truth. But for pretty much any topic, the information is out there. You have to work at digging through the muck to find it. But it's there. Fauci is not so much a liar, as he is a manipulator. But the press has given him saint status. So much so that they don't even do the simple work of checking the available information.
"So, no- I won't bother with the BBC on this. Unfortunate. But they created their own resume. It's hard for me to ignore it now. And the result is that we have what we have going on in our world. And their work will be with us forever. Pangolins took unnecessary hits during all this. Remember that? Pangolins were pointed to by the Chinese as being the source, and taken up by some of our 'scientific' experts. And dutifully, the same media trying to figure this all out, reported non-stop on the eating of bats and pangolins as the cause. All the while, the very lab whose work we helped pay for, had been working on this for 9 years."
Brian writes:
" All the while, the very lab whose work we helped pay for, had been working on this for 9 years."
I was talking my barber. while he was giving me a shave; and he told that
"entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity";
so, i asked him what the heck That meant?
And he nicked me with his razor
"Stewart shot back. “Oh my God, there’s a novel respiratory coronavirus overtaking Wuhan, China. What do we do?
Oh, you know who we could ask? The Wuhan novel respiratory coronavirus lab.”
Just Wondering writes:
"Dr. Fauci's responses to Sen. Paul were evasive and defensive, and the media coverage has been awful. The BBC should have more resources to research and succinctly summarize for us. This is my best summary: Dr. Fauci and Peter Daszak both have histories of supporting, vocally and financially (using US taxpayer dollars) the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and gain of function research (making viruses worse) generally. There are intensely technical debates about whether what US taxpayers supported at WIV constituted "gain of function," but they were supporting research of viruses and modified viruses. Further, US taxpayer support appears to have been earmarked for a virus other than COVID-19 (which we maddeningly cannot even conclude was/was not at WIV). The arguments mostly bypass each other, with Fauci arguing he didn't fund COVID-19 gain of function at WIV, and Rand arguing that Fauci supported gain of function and funded WIV."
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा