Yeah....Dr. Fauci: Genius

Sunny said:
Wow, Carrymeaway, you have amazing inside knowledge about Dr. Fauci and his finances! Pray tell, what is your inside source of this information?

And what Seabreeze just said occurred to me too. When we are with close family members, or other people with whom we are in frequent contact, day after day, most of us don't need to wear a mask. Otherwise, we'd have to wear them at home all the time. And the stands are obviously empty around the three of them.

Also, even the mask wearers take off the mask briefly when dining or having a drink. Eating and drinking are nearly impossible while leaving a mask on.

Why the sudden rush to demonize a brilliant, highly skilled professional, who is doing his best to save all of our lives?
Click to expand...
Maybe this will help. https://onenewsnow.com/perspectives...i-knew-about-hcq-in-2005-nobody-needed-to-die
Sunny said:
Want to know where the poisonous lies about Dr. Fauci originated? This was in today's paper.

A conservative television network on Saturday canceled a planned program advancing a baseless conspiracy theory that Fauci was responsible for the creation of the coronavirus. The allegation originated with the former medical researcher behind the debunked “Plandemic” documentary.

Amid fierce criticism, Sinclair Broadcast Group on Saturday said it had decided to postpone the program to bring together “other viewpoints and provide additional context.”

The “America This Week” program would have featured host Eric Bolling interviewing former researcher Judy Mikovits, who claims that Fauci “manufactured” the coronavirus and shipped it to Wuhan, China, where the outbreak began. A chyron during the segment reads: “DID DR. FAUCI CREATE covid-19?”

The segment was first reported on by Media Matters, a liberal media watchdog.

In a statement on its Twitter account, Sinclair, which has 191 stations, insisted it was not “aligning with or endorsing” Mikovits’s views and said it supported Fauci “valiantly.”

Bolling later told The Post that “this segment does need to be reworked to provide better context, and as such we are delaying the airing of the episode for one week.”
AD

“Let me also add that I have immense respect for Dr. Fauci and recognize him as the leading expert on this topic,” he said in a statement. “For the past two months, I have consistently pursued the opportunity to bring Dr. Fauci on air so that he may provide critical information to the public about the virus. The invitation stands.”

A Sinclair spokesperson and Mikovits did not immediately respond to The Post’s requests for comment.

Well, at least they backed down. I googled Sinclair, and found this on Wikipedia:

Sinclair has faced scrutiny from some media critics, as well as some of its station employees, for the conservative slant of their stations' news reporting and other programming decisions, and how the company's rapid growth has aided the airing of content that supports these views.

And Sinclair owns Fox News.
Click to expand...
Fox News is not a very good news source. Check out who is the new VP.
 

Sunny said:
Want to know where the poisonous lies about Dr. Fauci originated? This was in today's paper.

A conservative television network on Saturday canceled a planned program advancing a baseless conspiracy theory that Fauci was responsible for the creation of the coronavirus. The allegation originated with the former medical researcher behind the debunked “Plandemic” documentary.

Amid fierce criticism, Sinclair Broadcast Group on Saturday said it had decided to postpone the program to bring together “other viewpoints and provide additional context.”

The “America This Week” program would have featured host Eric Bolling interviewing former researcher Judy Mikovits, who claims that Fauci “manufactured” the coronavirus and shipped it to Wuhan, China, where the outbreak began. A chyron during the segment reads: “DID DR. FAUCI CREATE covid-19?”

The segment was first reported on by Media Matters, a liberal media watchdog.

In a statement on its Twitter account, Sinclair, which has 191 stations, insisted it was not “aligning with or endorsing” Mikovits’s views and said it supported Fauci “valiantly.”

Bolling later told The Post that “this segment does need to be reworked to provide better context, and as such we are delaying the airing of the episode for one week.”
AD

“Let me also add that I have immense respect for Dr. Fauci and recognize him as the leading expert on this topic,” he said in a statement. “For the past two months, I have consistently pursued the opportunity to bring Dr. Fauci on air so that he may provide critical information to the public about the virus. The invitation stands.”

A Sinclair spokesperson and Mikovits did not immediately respond to The Post’s requests for comment.

Well, at least they backed down. I googled Sinclair, and found this on Wikipedia:

Sinclair has faced scrutiny from some media critics, as well as some of its station employees, for the conservative slant of their stations' news reporting and other programming decisions, and how the company's rapid growth has aided the airing of content that supports these views.

And Sinclair owns Fox News.
Click to expand...
Wikipedia, sure, that is always valid information.
 
StarSong said:
Please cite evidence of this.
Click to expand...
Financially, Dr. Fauci has no interest in any vaccine. For the time being, he is placing his chips on Moderna Therapeutics from Cambridge, Massachusetts. Moderna is using a method of producing a vaccine as did Dr. Salk did for polio. They are using a snippet from the true virus to manufacture their vaccine and not a snippet of weakened or dead virus material.
 
Carymeaway said:
Why do I have to have inside information? I don't save the links I find, I know what I find. I read medical articles, read who owns what, who is invested in what. which media company making the report is paid by whom, follow where the money comes from and who is connected to that money and then I research those folks. Secondly, I do not trust many Government Officials, he is one.

I research things like the Lancet article which first came out against Hydroxycholoroquine, it was used as evidence that it did not work, though it could have saved many lives and has been in use for over 50 years.

Fauci, as director at the NIH, and an immunologist would be well aware of the 2005 study, posted on the NIH website, that Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS Coronavirus infection and spread. Does he it seem strange to you that he would not know that,? It is very fishy to me, he says nothing. All of the sudden, recently the Lancet article was retracted, Oops our mistake. So that should help you to understand.
Click to expand...

Carrymeaway, that's a lot of words, but you have still not provided any evidence of the truth about your accusation:

"He is involved in the business of vaccines. "

Boasting about all the "research" you conduct proves nothing at all. You seem to be trying hard to deflect attention from your accusation against him, for what would probably be a criminal offense, if true. Where is the evidence that he stands to financially profit from the sale of vaccines? He is a civil servant.

Throwing in extraneous stuff about Hydroxycholoroquine is irrelevant to your accusation that he personally stands to profit financially if a vaccine proves effective. And it's good to know that your knowledge is superior to the medical journal, Lancet, not to mention the World Health Organization.

The accusation came from a sleazy news outfit, which has backed down from their claim. But those who choose to believe it will defend it to the death. Just as the same group are defending going out in crowds without wearing masks. It's hard to admit that you were taken in by charlatans, I guess.
 
StarSong said:
I'd put Dr. Fauci's credentials up against the credentials and intuition of anybody on this forum. Is he perfect? Absolutely not. But I'd wager he knows a helluva lot more about the transmission of this virus than all of us combined.

For the record, he'd tested negative for the virus just hours before the game.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jul/24/dr-anthony-fauci-says-photo-him-without-mask-baseb/
Click to expand...
Dr. Fauci is considered to be the top dog as an epidemiologist. He kind of got off to a rough start with explaining the do’s and don’t’s of the COVID-19. But since those first few weeks, he has been pretty much spot on, although some other scientists have continued to disagree with his findings or science.

This is what concerns me. For those of us that depend on the absolute truth of this very serious disease, it becomes somewhat confusing as to who or what to believe and this is why I think we each have to decide for ourselves what we are going to go with.

I am definitely an advocate for wearing a mask and any other type of mitigation.
 
Sunny said:
Carrymeaway, that's a lot of words, but you have still not provided any evidence of the truth about your accusation:

"He is involved in the business of vaccines. "

Boasting about all the "research" you conduct proves nothing at all. You seem to be trying hard to deflect attention from your accusation against him, for what would probably be a criminal offense, if true. Where is the evidence that he stands to financially profit from the sale of vaccines? He is a civil servant.

Throwing in extraneous stuff about Hydroxycholoroquine is irrelevant to your accusation that he personally stands to profit financially if a vaccine proves effective. And it's good to know that your knowledge is superior to the medical journal, Lancet, not to mention the World Health Organization.

The accusation came from a sleazy news outfit, which has backed down from their claim. But those who choose to believe it will defend it to the death. Just as the same group are defending going out in crowds without wearing masks. It's hard to admit that you were taken in by charlatans, I guess.
[/QUOTE

To answer your question begins to go deeper in the political realm. Not supposed to be discussed. I engaged in that because you brought up the fact that he is a Career Government Employee. Having said that, how is throwing HCQ into the mix about masks, irrelevant. It is on the NIH website, the article I gave you, contains links to the references you seek, did you click on them? Those are real references, just because you don't like the messenger, does not mean the the message is wrong. Fauci knew in 2005 the HCQ worked to fight the virus. You stated this is extraneous information, it is not. The use of masks would be very different if that had been the starting point, so it is very relevant, you of course are free to disagree but I will not back down on that.

As far as him being involved with making money on vaccines, I will not find it for you as you will only dispute it, so what is the point? It is obvious to those who can think for themselves, that if you sit on a board, you will benefit from what that board does, he sits on Bill and Melinda Gates Immunization Board, there are lots of ways to launder money/reep the benefits. Remember, much is hidden by Google .

Being a civil servant means he is honest? Ok, you can feel that way.

I won't back down on my statement. If you want to know the answers, you can figure it out.
Click to expand...
 
StarSong said:
I'd put Dr. Fauci's credentials up against the credentials and intuition of anybody on this forum. Is he perfect? Absolutely not. But I'd wager he knows a helluva lot more about the transmission of this virus than all of us combined.

For the record, he'd tested negative for the virus just hours before the game.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jul/24/dr-anthony-fauci-says-photo-him-without-mask-baseb/
Click to expand...

Indeed he does, since the NIH has been funding "gain of function"research on this virus, both in the US and later, in China, at least since 2005. There are any number of journal articles and papers documenting the research, as well as the source of funding.
Attached ( I hope) is an article addressing concerns about gain of function research.

No surprise that this research history of the covid19 virus ( and its predecessors), along with NIH ( and Dr. Fauci's as Viral Research director) involvement have been suppressed in the media.

While gain of function and other viral mutation research is ongoing and what viral researchers do, they sure don't want the accusation that Dr. Fauci, the NIH, or by extension, the federal guv'mint somehow has unleashed this viral "Frankenstein's monster" on the world, even if only by accident.

So the research information is suppressed, and the narrative that the covid19 mutation occurred in nature is handed off as the official explanation. It's plausible, as viruses do mutate in nature, and conceivably the Sars-cov2 predecessor could have jumped from a bat to another critter to a human somewhere and mutated, it could also well have been created in a lab. The research indicates it might well have been, but admitting that that would put the spectre of blame for any pandemic on those involved in the research (whether or not they were)so nope, can't have that information out there.

As for Dr. Fauci not wearing a mask in those bleachers, I assumed those with his were family members, and there didn't seem to be a soul outside within 6 or more feet of them, and it was outside, so I see no reason he, nor his companions should have been wearing masks. What I can't understand is why the player at bat WAS wearing a mask, as he was well outside that 6 foot radius too.
 

Attachments

  • gain-of-function.pdf
    42.5 KB · Views: 6
Last edited:
Hard to trust anyone with a vested interest. Then, you can tell a lot about a person by whom he hangs with.
The Leadership Council “is comprised of … Dr. Anthony S. Fauci,” the Gates Foundation reported.

Fauci, the same guy who just set the stage for the dire need for a protective coronavirus vaccine, has a vested interest in seeing this vaccine come to fruition — come to widely administered fruition.

fauci.jpg
 
squatting dog said:
Hard to trust anyone with a vested interest. Then, you can tell a lot about a person by whom he hangs with.
The Leadership Council “is comprised of … Dr. Anthony S. Fauci,” the Gates Foundation reported.

Fauci, the same guy who just set the stage for the dire need for a protective coronavirus vaccine, has a vested interest in seeing this vaccine come to fruition — come to widely administered fruition.

View attachment 115238
Click to expand...
Thanks for saying it much better than i did.
 
Birdlady said:
Indeed he does, since the NIH has been funding "gain of function"research on this virus, both in the US and later, in China, at least since 2005. There are any number of journal articles and papers documenting the research, as well as the source of funding.
Attached ( I hope) is an article addressing concerns about gain of function research.

No surprise that this research history of the covid19 virus ( and its predecessors), along with NIH ( and Dr. Fauci's as Viral Research director) involvement have been suppressed in the media.

While gain of function and other viral mutation research is ongoing and what viral researchers do, they sure don't want the accusation that Dr. Fauci, the NIH, or by extension, the federal guv'mint somehow has unleashed this viral "Frankenstein's monster" on the world, even if only by accident.

So the research information is suppressed, and the narrative that the covid19 mutation occurred in nature is handed off as the official explanation. It's plausible, as viruses do mutate in nature, and conceivably the Sars-cov2 predecessor could have jumped from a bat to another critter to a human somewhere and mutated, it could also well have been created in a lab. The research indicates it might well have been, but admitting that that would put the spectre of blame for any pandemic on those involved in the research (whether or not they were)so nope, can't have that information out there.

As for Dr. Fauci not wearing a mask in those bleachers, I assumed those with his were family members, and there didn't seem to be a soul outside within 6 or more feet of them, and it was outside, so I see no reason he, nor his companions should have been wearing masks. What I can't understand is why the player at bat WAS wearing a mask, as he was well outside that 6 foot radius too.
Click to expand...
C'mon, people, let's think. Viruses are not kind or considerate. You really think a virus would be kind & not infect anyone's loved one? Why would it matter WHO the people were around him? We have all seen Fauci NOT wearing a mask in public, indoors or outdoors; just as we've all seen Gov. Newsom, Ms. Ferrer & Eric Garcetti not wearing a mask (except for occasional photo ops). From what we're told by "experts," he can bring Coronavirus home, have no symptoms & infect his family. That's why the "experts" are telling us to stay home (asinine as it sounds). He only recently started wearing one occasionally when people started asking why he wasn't.
 
From Wikipedia:

Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (SBG) is a publicly traded American telecommunications conglomerate which is controlled by the family of company founder Julian Sinclair Smith. Headquartered in the Baltimore suburb of Cockeysville, Maryland,[2] the company is the second-largest television station operator in the United States by number of stations (after Nexstar Media Group), owning or operating a total of 193 stations across the country in over 100 markets (covering 40% of American households), many of which are located in the South and Midwest, and is the largest owner of stations affiliated with Fox, ABC, and The CW. Sinclair also owns four digital multicast networks (Comet, Charge!, Stadium, and TBD), sports-oriented cable networks (Tennis Channel and Fox Sports Networks), and a streaming service (Stirr), and owns or operates four radio stations in the Pacific Northwest. Among other non-broadcast properties, Sinclair also owns the professional wrestling promotion Ring of Honor and its streaming service Honor Club.

Sinclair has faced scrutiny from some media critics, as well as some of its station employees, for the conservative slant of their stations' news reporting and other programming decisions, and how the company's rapid growth has aided the airing of content that supports these views.[3][4][5] Sinclair has also faced criticism over business practices that circumvent concentration of media ownership regulations, particularly the use of local marketing agreements, accusations that the company had been currying favor with the Trump administration in order to loosen these rules[6] and about its management lacking diversity and being totally controlled by a single family.[7] Critics including former CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather have described Sinclair's practices as being "an assault on our democracy" by disseminating what they perceive to be Orwellian-like propaganda to its local stations.[8][9][10]

A 2019 study in the American Political Science Review found that "stations bought by Sinclair reduce coverage of local politics, increase national coverage and move the ideological tone of coverage in a conservative direction relative to other stations operating in the same market."[11][12]
 
Sunny said:
From Wikipedia:

Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (SBG) is a publicly traded American telecommunications conglomerate which is controlled by the family of company founder Julian Sinclair Smith. Headquartered in the Baltimore suburb of Cockeysville, Maryland,[2] the company is the second-largest television station operator in the United States by number of stations (after Nexstar Media Group), owning or operating a total of 193 stations across the country in over 100 markets (covering 40% of American households), many of which are located in the South and Midwest, and is the largest owner of stations affiliated with Fox, ABC, and The CW. Sinclair also owns four digital multicast networks (Comet, Charge!, Stadium, and TBD), sports-oriented cable networks (Tennis Channel and Fox Sports Networks), and a streaming service (Stirr), and owns or operates four radio stations in the Pacific Northwest. Among other non-broadcast properties, Sinclair also owns the professional wrestling promotion Ring of Honor and its streaming service Honor Club.

Sinclair has faced scrutiny from some media critics, as well as some of its station employees, for the conservative slant of their stations' news reporting and other programming decisions, and how the company's rapid growth has aided the airing of content that supports these views.[3][4][5] Sinclair has also faced criticism over business practices that circumvent concentration of media ownership regulations, particularly the use of local marketing agreements, accusations that the company had been currying favor with the Trump administration in order to loosen these rules[6] and about its management lacking diversity and being totally controlled by a single family.[7] Critics including former CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather have described Sinclair's practices as being "an assault on our democracy" by disseminating what they perceive to be Orwellian-like propaganda to its local stations.[8][9][10]

A 2019 study in the American Political Science Review found that "stations bought by Sinclair reduce coverage of local politics, increase national coverage and move the ideological tone of coverage in a conservative direction relative to other stations operating in the same market."[11][12]
Click to expand...
You do know Wikipedia can be edited easily and is meant to be edited right? Not saying it was, just saying it is not as trustworthy as you may think. It is good for figuring some of the rabbit holes to research in though. HAHAHA,
 
Pepper said:
Who should people use in your opinion?
Click to expand...
I don't think people should use fact checkers at all, I think people should look at all of the information from independent news, main stream news, liberal and conservative etc. Follow a couple rabbit trails, research those and make a decision. Fact Checkers areonly as good as those who provide their funding.
 
Last edited:
Carymeaway said:
I don't people should use fact checkers at all, I think people should look at all of the information from independent news, main stream news, liberal and conservative etc. Follow a couple rabbit trails, research those and make a decision. Fact Checkers areonly as good as those who provide their funding.
Click to expand...

DITTO. Use them all, and then form an opinion.
Oh yeah, I try to wait at least 24 hrs before putting something up. That allows time for fake stuff to get weeded out, and keep me from looking foolish......... Sometimes. 😋
 
fuzzybuddy said:
There's a group, which distrusts science. They feel there are all kinds of sinister plots in the guise of science. They are akin to the' moon landing was faked' crowd., as apart of some diabolic government plot. These are true believers, so little things, like lack of proof, are going to deter them from their beliefs.
Click to expand...
It's hard to trust science when there are studies, peer reviews, new tests and trials, which can refute the other findings or evidence. I remember when the entire Earth was going into a Global Freeze, that's what the "scientists" said. Eggs good, Eggs bad, synthetic butter good, synthetic butter bad, wine good, wine bad, I'm sure you get the point. There are groups which trust everything they are told without actually questioning and when they discover the facts, they're shocked and wonder how they were duped into complicity.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top