By Art Moore
What constitutes “authoritative information”?
That’s the question the Fox News Channel’s Tucker Carlson raised Tuesday night when he noted the head of Google’s health division admitted at a recent Wall Street Journal forum that the Big Tech giant censored information about the possibility that the novel coronavirus escaped from a laboratory in China.
The Google official, David Feinberg, was asked by a reporter why Google was censoring searches for information about the lab-leak theory.
Feinberg essentially admitted Google was engaged in censorship, but he argued it was for the good of its users.
TRENDING: Man who led militia movement to occupy federal land runs for governor
The search giant didn’t want to “lead people down pathways that we would not find to be authoritative information.”
Carlson said it’s worth noting where Google got its “authoritative information.”
It came from the U.S.-based British zoologist Peter Daszak, who received funding from Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease to conduct research on bat coronaviruses in collaboration with Chinese virologist Shi Zhengli at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
In February 2020, Daszak organized a letter published in the prestigious British medical journal The Lancet stating there was no possibility the virus came from a lab in Wuhan, dismissing the idea as a “conspiracy theory.”
Carlson pointed out that “many people believed him and they stopped looking.”
“It was in The Lancet after all.”
The conflict of interest was “beyond belief,” he said.
‘Of all people on Earth’
And Google certainly knew about that conflict. In December 2019, Daszak appeared on a podcast on YouTube, which is owned by Google, boasting of the dangerous gain-of-function research he and his colleagues were conducting in which the virulence and transmissibility of a virus is enhanced.
“So, why did Google continue to rely on Peter Daszak, of all people on Earth, to decide what the rest of the population could know about the origins of COVID?” Carlson asked.
One reason, according to Daszak himself, is that Google was funding the research.
The National Pulse reported this week that beginning in 2010, Daszak acknowledged in several of his research papers that the studies were funded by Google.
One paper was an observational study that analyzed the transmission of viruses from bats to humans. A decade later, Google was still funding Daszak. And among the projects was his study of bat viruses in southern China.
The funding was to study “[p]erceptions associated with transmission of pathogens with pandemic potential in highly exposed human populations at the animal human interface.”
See Carlson’s segment:
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Leave a Reply