9 questions for Peter Daszak
That Congress won't dare ask on Wednesday
Bread and circuses
EcoHealth President Peter Daszak will testify at a public hearing on Wednesday, May 1, 2024. So here is a list of questions that Congress shall (not) ask. Remember, congressional staff, if you believe Wuhan engineered SARS2 and published RaTG13, you are a fool. Daszak already told us who did it, and Ralph Baric lied to you!
1) What was Dani doing in the Wuhan BSL4?
Danielle Anderson of Duke is listed on Daszak’s CREID documents, which Fauci admitted was awarded in 2019. Dani claimed to be working on Ebola, but her 2019 NIAID CV says “coronavirus replication.” In January 2020, Daszak said “Dani” was working on “SARSr-CoVs” and later joked about her being in the Wuhan BSL4.
On September 24th, 2021, Ralph Baric told CNN, “It’s not the BSL4 (of Dani’s) that concerns (me)—it’s coronavirus being worked on at lower biosafety level conditions, like (Shi’s) BSL2.” DARPA Defuse leaked with Dani's name next to Baric two days later. Both went radio silent.
2) Why was Daszak scared about phone signals?
Why did Daskak freak out over this mobile phone report singling out Linfa and Dani? An NBC News report showed both DARPA Defuse contractors inspecting a locked-down BSL4 from November 2019.
3) Was Fauci’s CREID actually DARPA Defuse 2?
In 2019, Daszak submitted what appears to be a refreshed version of DARPA Defuse for Fauci’s $82M CREID project. Daszak said it was “SARSr-CoV text.” Linfa said, “At the moment, it is too coronavirus-specific; I know we took a lot of text from our other grant proposal.” They even recycled Linfa’s “batified mice.”
If so, Fauci was funding two projects in Wuhan
It sounds like Congress wants a debate on Shi’s BSL2. This was the public record R01AI110964 grant involving NIAID, EcoHealth, and Shi. But Dani, not Shi, is listed in Daszak’s U01AI151797 grant. So, Fauci funded two 2019 projects in Wuhan.
Shi’s BSL2 vs Dani’s BSL4
Shi’s BSL2 is in downtown Wuhan, but Dani’s BSL4 is 20 miles south.
Ironically, Ralph Baric made this “freak out” BSL2 comment (BRS17 below) on Daszak's DARPA Defuse draft in February 2018. At the time, they were competing with Vincent Munster in Montana and his BSL4 pathogens, so Baric and Daszak bragged that their coronavirus work was cheaper than Munster's.
But Munster’s contagious vaccine technology bid was $8M, and Daszak's was $14M.
4) Why was Vincent Munster on the DARPA Defuse proposal?
Munster is Fauci’s “aerosol specialist” at Fauci’s “institute” inside Rocky Mountain Lab. In January 2018, he was partnered with Daszak and Defuse but was removed by March 2020. Daszak lost, but Munster won two of five DARPA projects.
5) When did Daszak know Linfa resigned?
On December 31, 2019, Daszak replied to Baric and cc’d Dani and Linfa.
On January 10, 2020, Linfa resigned as Duke’s EID director. On February 6th, Daszak and Baric discussed “our collaboration” with Linfa. Notice that no Wuhan Institute of Virology personnel are in the above emails.
6) Did Daszak plan to export work to Wuhan?
The other misleading headline had Baric and Daszak exporting virology work to China, but the DARPA Defuse draft document was the same as the final.
The DARPA Defuse draft is above, and the final document is below.
Shi Zhenli of the WIV only responded once, as shown below, in 1,417 FOIA pages, saying, “Great, thanks.”
7) Did Baric insert the furin cleavage site?
Daszak has been open, stating, “For the furin cleavage site, you should really ask Ralph Baric. He wrote that section of the DARPA grant. I don’t know what Ralph Baric has done. But I doubt that he would go ahead and do that work without the funding.”
Viruses designed in North Carolina could easily be used in China. “The mail is filled with little envelopes with plasmid dried onto filter paper that scientists routinely send each other,” said Jack Nunberg of the University of Montana.
It sounds like Daszak will claim Baric and UNC planned to work with pseudotypes (fake, safe viruses). Baric proposed experimenting with chimeras (live viruses) in DARPA Defuse; hence, DARPA asked him to “dual use” language. From the first line in DARPA Defuse, “We will sequence their spike proteins, reverse engineer them to conduct binding assays and insert them into bat SARSr-CoV (WIVl, SHC014) backbones (these use bat-SARSr-GoV backbones, not SARS-CoV, and are exempt from dual-use and gain of function concerns.”
Baric likes experimenting with live viruses (in his safe hACE2 mice), which caused controversy in his 2015 Nature paper. Baric calls psuedotypes the “ethical alternative.” However, in this 2015 presentation, Baric argued that he preferred live recombinant viruses based on his SHC014 results.
8) Please confirm Daszak’s 293 = Baric’s 279?
Daszak has playfully teased his Twitter followers on the “293” code, conspiracy, and conundrum. The USGS FOIA showed Baric had a chimera 20% different from SARS1 (SARS2 is 20% different), but it’s listed in Daszak’s notes as “293 and HK3.” If 293 was a Daszak typo and is actually 279, then Baric patented the SARS2 genome in 2018. Notice Baric’s 2015 slide shows his 2018 patented SARS-CoV-2 genome.
9) What’s in Baric’s fridge?
Who cares about the “700 coronaviruses” referenced in Daszak’s emails? He published them in early 2020. But what was this about?
.
I Wouldn’t Jump To Conclusions
About The Vaccine.
I’d Wait Until They’re All Dead
Just To Be Sure.
.
Forget Furin cleavage site, they were probably using bat coronaviruses to create a viral vector vaccine against HIV, where BSL2 would have been adequate. The "gain-of-function" hypothesis was never really plausible.