Corrupted lab leak denier Peter Daszak and his group EcoHealth Alliance have gone from exploiting one taxpayer-funded PPP program—wasting millions on treacherous Potential Pandemic Pathogen (i.e. “gain-of-function”) experiments at the Wuhan Animal Lab—to bilking another, the Paycheck Protection Program.
Anatomy of a grift:
1- Send tax $ to Wuhan Animal Lab for coronavirus animal experiments that may have started pandemic 🦇🦠🧪
2- Rake in $25M in new govt grants & contracts to study pandemics💸
3- Receive TWO taxpayer-funded pandemic bailout checks💰💰https://t.co/EsEh4d62RJ
— White Coat Waste Project🥼🗑️ (@WhiteCoatWaste) April 17, 2021
Remember when we told you that the corrupted non-profit that sent your tax money to the Wuhan Animal Lab for reckless coronavirus experiments that may have caused the pandemic got a taxpayer-funded bailout of $750,000?
Well, it happened again. As first reported by The Daily Caller, our investigators just uncovered that EcoHealth Alliance got ANOTHER TAXPAYER-FUNDED BAILOUT of almost the same amount. …
… Collecting dangerous viruses is typically justified as a preventive and defensive activity, getting ahead of what “Nature” or “The Terrorists” might throw at us. But by its nature, this work is “dual use”. “Biodefense” is often just as easily biowarfare since biodefense and the products of biowarfare are identical. It’s simply a matter of what the stated goals are.
This is openly acknowledged [See below] by scientists associated with EcoHealth Alliance when talking about alleged programs in other counties — like Iraq.
For much of this year, Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance garnered a great deal of sympathetic media coverage after its $3.7 million five-year NIH grant was prematurely cut when the Trump administration learned that EcoHealth Alliance funded bat coronavirus research at the WIV.
The temporary cut was widely depicted in major media as Trump undermining the EcoHealth Alliance’s noble fight against pandemics. The termination was reversed by NIH in late August, and even upped to $7.5 million. But entirely overlooked amid the claims and counter-claims was that far more funding for the EcoHealth Alliance comes from the Pentagon than the NIH.
To be strictly fair to the media, Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance obscures its Pentagon funding. On its website EcoHealth Alliance states that “A copy of the EHA Grant Management Manual is available upon request to the EHA Chief Financial Officer at finance ( at ) ecohealthalliance.org”. But an email to that address and numerous others, including Peter Daszak’s, requesting that Manual, as well as other financial information, was not returned. Neither were repeated voicemails.
Even this listing is deceptive. It obscures that its two largest funders are the Pentagon and the State Department (USAID); whereas the US Fish and Wildlife Service, which accounts for a minuscule $74,487, comes before either.
Meticulous investigation of U.S. government databases reveals that Pentagon funding for the EcoHealth Alliance from 2013 to 2020, including contracts, grants and subcontracts, was just under $39 million. Most, $34.6 million, was from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), which is a branch of the DOD which states it is tasked to “counter and deter weapons of mass destruction and improvised threat networks.”
Most of the remaining money to EHA was from USAID (State Dept.), comprising at least $64,700,000 (1). …
Another $20 million came from Health and Human Services ($13 million, which includes National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control), National Science Foundation ($2.6 million), Department of Homeland Security ($2.3 million), Department of Commerce ($1.2 million), Department of Agriculture ($0.6 million), and Department of Interior ($0.3 million). So, total U.S. government funding for EHA to-date stands at $123 million, approximately one third of which comes from the Pentagon directly. The full funding breakdown is available here and is summarized by year, source, and type, in a spreadsheet format….
Four significant insights emerge from all this. First, although it is called the EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak and his non-profit work closely with the military. Second, the EcoHealth Alliance attempts to conceal these military connections. Third, through militaristic language and analogies Daszak and his colleagues promote what is often referred to as, and even then somewhat euphemistically, an ongoing agenda known as “securitization“. In this case it is the securitization of infectious diseases and of global public health. That is, they argue that pandemics constitute a vast and existential threat. They minimize the very real risks associated with their work, and sell it as a billion dollar solution. The fourth insight is that Daszak himself, as the Godfather of the Global Virome Project, stands to benefit from the likely outlay of public funds.
Already by the end of January 2020, elements within the U.S. government and the U.S. scientific establishment were becoming increasingly concerned that the American people might learn the truth about the origin of the COVID-19.
That is, it was an artificial virus created in a laboratory in the People’s Republic of China with the assistance of U.S. scientists and funding from the U.S. government.
In addition to pressure coming directly from the Chinese Communist Party, there was, no doubt, similar coercion being brought to bear on susceptible and compliant people in Washington D.C. by international financial interests, whose investments in China would be placed in jeopardy if it was widely accepted that China manufactured the COVID-19 virus.
Similarly at stake were the careers of prominent members of the U.S. scientific establishment, who could be considered complicit or potentially culpable.
There was also the likely loss of trust by the American people in the integrity of science overall.
Like their partners in China, what U.S. government officials and members of the U.S. scientific establishment feared most was accountability.
That was the primary selfish motive for the cover-up they appeared to have initiated.
It began on February 3, 2020, when a meeting was held at U.S. National Academy of Science, led by Kelvin Droegemeier, Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy; D. Christian Hassell, Senior Science Advisor, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; and Anthony Fauci, Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health.
The emails related to the February 3, 2020 meeting are below:…
According to the Statement of Task and Work Plan, which were distributed before the meeting, it was already decided that the COVID-19 pandemic originated as a natural-occurring or “evolutionary” event and that arguments to the contrary needed to be countered.
That is, it was the responsibility of U.S. government officials and members of the U.S. scientific establishment to provide a continuous stream of evidence to support a preordained outcome, one that protected China, international financial interests and themselves from potential complicity or culpability.
As revealed in their own emails, the deliberations by the scientists involved in preparing a response to the February 3, 2020 meeting were primarily focused on suppressing any discussion that the COVID-19 virus might have originated in a laboratory.
Yet, the efforts to create a narrative that the COVID-19 pandemic was a naturally-occurring transmission from animals to humans for which no one is to blame went far beyond the response to the February 3, 2020 meeting.
Before the ink was dry on that response, Peter Daszak of the EcoHealth Alliance, on February 6, 2020, separately contacted selected scientific participants from the February 3, 2020 meeting in order to launch a public relations campaign in scientific journals in support of China, the theory that the COVID-19 pandemic was a naturally-occurring event and to condemn a laboratory origin as a conspiracy theory.
The statements made in these emails are stunning and can be construed as conspiratorial….