dChan
Anonymous ID: ed2592 Jan. 21, 2022, 11:16 p.m. No.15434713   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>4883 >>5145 >>5351

>>15431807

Join: https://t.me/WendiStrauchMahoneyUDC

 

The Dangers of Bias in Higher Institutions

 

A cursory look at the values espoused by the University of Rhode Island or its past and present Board of Trustees seems to show bias favoring more progressive values. Diversity and inclusion, climate change, globalism are on its agenda and are closely held convictions of many of its Trustees. One of the board members, Christine M. Heenan, “previously served as Senior Vice President for Global Policy and Advocacy at the Rockefeller Foundation, Senior Advisor at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and Vice President of Public Affairs and Communications for Harvard University…and was a White House senior policy analyst and speechwriter for President Clinton, focused primarily on health care policy and women’s empowerment.”

 

https://uncoverdc.com/2022/01/21/general-flynn-canceled-again-uri-revokes-honorary-degree/

 

 

Of course the University of Rhode Island with close ties to China would attack General Flynn…Their board members are just as scandalous as the Mayo Clinics' Board of Emeritus Trustees. Our higher Education Institutions as well as our Medical, have no business in Political biased behavior.

 

The University of Rhode Island has ended its association with the Confucius Institute, a controversial public education organization connected to the Ministry of Education in China. … The institute has been at URI since 2007, when URI became one of 20 U.S. universities to host the program.Jan 10, 2019

 

Confucius Institutes, Chinese government-backed centers that entangle colleges and universities with the Chinese Communist Party, have been closing around the country. Already Bryant University, in Rhode Island, has become the seventy-third. Tufts' Confucius Institute will finish out its programming this summer and close upon the expiration of the university's contract in September.

 

The university's decision appeared a major reversal, since, in 2019, the university proudly renewed its Confucius Institute, declaring that a university committee studied the Confucius Institute and found "no evidence of undue influence, suppression of academic freedom or censorship at Tufts."

 

That's not to say that the Chinese Communist Party is pulling out of American higher education. Far from it. American academia, with its cutting-edge technology, access to American thought leaders, and ability to shape future generations of American citizens, remains a top target for the Chinese government. But China knows that Confucius Institutes have become politically toxic, and it has shifted its focus toward other means of engagement.

 

Last year the Chinese government reorganized and rebranded Confucius Institutes, and I predicted colleges and universities would start to walk away from the name as well. Already, Asia Society, a private nonprofit that cosponsors a K-12 version of Confucius Institutes, has renamed its program the “Chinese Language Partner Network.” Colleges and universities, too, are busily "closing" their Confucius Institutes, only to replace them with other, substantially similar, forms of partnership with the Chinese government. Sometimes these universities establish new China-focused initiatives, retaining some Confucius Institute staff and programs.

 

For example, the University of Michigan continued to receive funding from the Hanban, the Chinese government agency responsible for Confucius Institutes, even after its Confucius Institute closed, according to foreign gift disclosures. Other universities, like Tufts, are establishing new partnerships with the same Chinese universities that were their partners in hosting Confucius Institutes. Tufts has said it is closing its Confucius Institute in order "to focus on expanding and deepening its relationship with [Beijing Normal University].

 

The Chinese government launched Confucius institutes to establish close ties within American higher education, ties that would enable it to spread propaganda but also exert influence.

 

The Chinese Communist Party knows that and is prepared. Chinese government influence is appearing under new names, in new guises.

 

https://www.realcleareducation.com/articles/2021/03/31/chinas_confucius_institutes_might_be_closing_but_they_succeeded_110559.html

Anonymous ID: ed2592 Jan. 21, 2022, 11:25 p.m. No.15434737   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>4747

>>15434682

 

Hell, I'd volunteer to pull the switch, kick out the chair, pull the trigger or inject the needle for DS and any one of these treasonous bastards…

 

Obama

Hillary Clinton

Bill Clinton

George Soros

Fauci

Bill Gates

John Podesta

CEO's big pharma mRNA death Jabs

Peter Daszak

Francis Collins

John Brennan

James Comey

Adam Schiff

Peter Strzok

And about 20 other treasonous bastards in politics,media, big tech or Pedowood/Pedoland

Anonymous ID: ed2592 Jan. 22, 2022, 2:23 a.m. No.15435214   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5351

IS THIS CONSTITUTIONAL?

 

Jan 6 Committee Claims Absolute Power to Investigate Citizens with No Regard for Judicial Limits

 

On Wednesday, three men from Illinois were charged in connection with Jan. 6, after they were tracked down by investigators who found them by obtaining geolocation data from their phones through a likely-illegal subpoena.

 

The trio becomes the latest victims of the 1/6 witch hunt, joining the hundreds of other Americans who have been charged since the event.

 

Cody Vollan, Anthony Carollo, and Jeremiah Carollo, have been hit with four federal charges each, according to the criminal complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia this week.

 

“They were charged with one count each of: entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds; disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds; disorderly conduct in a capitol building and parading, demonstrating or picketing in a capitol building, per the complaint.”

 

In short, they support Trump, were at the event on 1/6, went inside, hung out, and left – just like the vast majority of the other individuals who have been charged in connection with the event.

 

But, somehow, we’re still waiting on charges for Ray Epps and several other fed-connected provocateurs…

 

Federal authorities were able to locate the three men, two of which were brothers and the other their cousin, after Big Tech giant Google responded to a 1/6 commission subpoena and provided the trio’s geolocation data, which showed their mobile devices and connected Google accounts were likely located in and around the restricted area of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

 

Tracking your geolocation through your Google account to hunt you down a full year later? Wow, what a freaking hellhole dystopian nightmare, right? But that ain’t even half of it – this is just more in the same as the DC Swamp steps up its political purge of those who dare to question the legitimacy of the current fraudulent regime.

 

In its rogue mission to persecute and gather information about private U.S. citizens, Nancy Pelosi’s sham 1/6 Committee has been freely acting with impunity while flouting several traditional civil liberties that are protected by the constitution.

 

And now, with Biden’s poll numbers tanking weekly, the congressional commission is ramping up their witch hunt by way of surveillance powers that not even the FBI or other law enforcement agencies are cleared to use.

 

Under the US Constitution, in addition to several Supreme Court rulings on the subject, it is the executive branch – with the supervision by the Judiciary – who is traditionally responsible for investigating crimes, not Congress. Nevertheless, the people’s house does have the power to conduct investigations, but it is extremely limited.

 

Traditionally, there are only two scenarios in which Congress is permitted to open an investigation – The first being when an investigation is designed to directly assist in its law-making duties, for example – directing executives of companies to testify when considering new laws. The only other reason for Congress to open a criminal investigation is if it’s in order to provide check and balance over the executive branch.

 

Despite the clear precedent being set for these congressional investigations, Pelosi’s rogue commission is actively conducting a criminal investigation in order to find and punish political thought crimes that have been committed by private law-abiding citizens, which is precisely what they are prohibited from doing – calling into question the legality of the commission’s entire existence, let alone its nefarious actions throughout the past year.

 

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/01/constitutional-jan-6-committee-claims-absolute-power-investigate-citizens-no-regard-judicial-limits/

Anonymous ID: ed2592 Jan. 22, 2022, 2:40 a.m. No.15435244   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5248 >>5253 >>5296 >>5351

Fauci Helped Loosen Weak Rules For Risky Virus Research

Part One

 

Discussing new rules for risky virus research when they were finalized a few years ago, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci acknowledged, “I don’t think this is going to be foolproof, things are going to slip through.”

 

As senators sparred yet again with Fauci at a congressional hearing last week, he stated that his agency has followed the regulations for funding “gain of function” research, which can make certain viruses more deadly or transmissible. But he obfuscated how he played a role in creating those same regulations, which officials and some scientists say are too weak.

 

“The guide rails for what can be done were not established by me, they were by a three-year process led by the Office of Science and Technology at the White House,” Fauci said of gain-of-function research at the hearing.

 

After some high-profile lab accidents, in 2014 the U.S. government paused federal funding of gain-of-function research. In 2017, the research resumed under a new Potential Pandemic Pathogens Control and Oversight (P3CO) Framework, with a review committee established within the Health and Human Services Department (HHS) to oversee federal funding of such research.

 

But during those three years, with Fauci’s input, the review committee was stripped of its power to veto proposed research, as The Washington Post’s Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter David Willman and Madison Muller noted in an in-depth investigation last year. The definition of the research the panel reviews (the definition that Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and other senators keep arguing about with Fauci) was also narrowed to exclude some potentially dangerous viruses.

 

Summarizing its findings on the research review committee, the Post says that both Fauci and then-director of the National Institutes of Health Francis Collins:

 

…in recent years have helped shape policy changes, directly and through their aides, that undercut the committee’s authority, according to federal documents, congressional testimony and interviews with dozens of present and former officials and science experts.

 

In 2017, a change made under their watch removed the committee’s power to block the [gain of function] projects, recasting the panel as strictly an advisory body.

 

Another change at that time redefined gain-of-function research, giving NIH leaders greater leeway to approve projects without referring them to the review committee. Some researchers had complained that far-reaching reviews would slow NIH approvals and scientific progress.

 

Since then, the experiments have continued to unfold amid secrecy, and HHS, which administers the review committee, has kept its work confidential…

 

In an interview for this report, both Collins and Fauci and their senior aides disputed that the policy changes had weakened oversight of the research.

 

Committee Members Say They Lack Power

 

A member of the grant review committee has said the definition of the research the committee reviews needs broadening. Another member told the Post that from 2017 to 2020, no more than “three or four” projects were forwarded to the review committee. “They were grading their own homework,” said Robert Kadlec, who also served as the Trump administration’s assistant HHS secretary for preparedness and response.

 

Twenty-one gain-of-function grants were halted during the 2014-2017 period, but ten were allowed to proceed with exceptions, Collins told The New York Times in 2017 — signaling that fewer grants have been defined as gain of function since then.

 

https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/20/fauci-helped-loosen-already-weak-rules-for-risky-virus-research/

Anonymous ID: ed2592 Jan. 22, 2022, 2:42 a.m. No.15435248   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5253 >>5351

>>15435244

Part 2 Fauci Helped Loosen Weak Rules For Risky Virus Research

 

Washington Post columnist Josh Rogin has described Fauci’s role in gain-of-function research thus: “The head of the entire field really is Anthony Fauci — he’s the godfather of gain-of-function research as we know it,” Rogin told “The Megyn Kelly Show” in April 2021. The National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Fauci currently leads had a $6 billion budget in 2021.

 

A good question for Fauci would be: Is “three or four” grants being forwarded to the review committee from 2017 to 2020 accurate, and is it enough? Were all approved and funded? In an exchange with Fauci, Paul stated “the committee has granted every exemption.” An NIH spokesperson has said the agency doesn’t discuss unfunded grant applications, which avoids providing information on rejection rates.

U.S. Grant to Wuhan Slipped Through Review Process

 

An example of a grant the committee did not review is one that sent U.S. taxpayer money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which is considered a possible origin of Covid-19. The NIH has said its grant to the EcoHealth Alliance for bat-based coronavirus research did not meet the definition of gain of function and thus was not submitted to the committee.

 

The EcoHealth grant was originally approved during the 2014-2017 “pause,” before the review committee process was created. The head of EcoHealth referred in 2016 to the research as “gain of function” and the NIAID program official who oversaw the grant flagged it as possibly meeting that definition.

 

EcoHealth convinced NIAID its research was not gain of function in part because the virus being studied “has never been demonstrated to infect humans or cause human disease.” Yet months earlier, the virus had been shown in other research to do just that. The purpose of the grant was also to study which bat viruses might easily spread to humans.

 

More questions for Fauci: How did NIAID determine that the EcoHealth research was not meeting their definition of gain of function? How could the possible evolution of those viruses be studied without making them more transmissible among humans, which would make them gain of function research? How well did NIH oversee the total of ten gain-of-function grants it exempted during the pause, and are any ongoing?

Fauci, Should the Government’s Definition Change?

 

Yet more questions for Fauci: Is the government’s definition of “gain of function” research too narrow? Did he and does he still support the changes made to it back in 2017?

 

The 2014 government definition referred to pathogens “transmissible among mammals” that might accidentally cause human infections. It was narrowed in December 2017 to cover viruses “likely capable of wide and uncontrollable spread in human populations.”

 

If the definition had remained as the original, would the EcoHealth project have been reviewed by the committee?

Anonymous ID: ed2592 Jan. 22, 2022, 2:43 a.m. No.15435253   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5351

>>15435248

>>15435244

Part 3 Fauci Helped Loosen Weak Rules For Risky Virus Research

 

Too Many Exemptions for Such Research?

 

Does Fauci support the other exemptions for committee review, such as for research that involves “naturally occurring pathogens that are circulating in or have been recovered from nature, regardless of their pandemic potential”? Would this have also exempted the EcoHealth grant from review?

 

Does Fauci agree that “Activities associated with developing and producing vaccines, such as generation of high growth strains” should be exempt from the review as gain of function?

 

As Rutgers University professor of chemical biology Richard H. Ebright told the Daily Caller News Foundation, referring to the exemptions in the review framework, NIAID and the NIH have “systematically thwarted — indeed systematically nullified — the HHS P3CO Framework by declining to flag and forward proposals for review.”

When Did Fauci Know About Lax Lab Security?

 

Also, when and how did Fauci learn of security concerns at the Wuhan Institute of Virology? Fauci’s agency had its own official in Beijing who had visited the Wuhan lab in 2017.

 

Dr. Ping Chen, the director of the NIAID office in China located in the U.S. embassy in Beijing, “visited the WIV [Wuhan Institute of Virology] in 2017 and co-wrote one of the 2018 State Department cables from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing on the WIV that highlighted concerns there” about lab security, according to House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans.

 

Whom at NIAID was notified of Chen’s warning and how did such persons follow up? How does Fauci believe the research grant approval process needs to be improved so U.S. taxpayer money does not go to a lab with known security lapses?

Action and Legislation Addressing Gain of Function

 

Several bills are working their way through Congress, having passed in the House or Senate, restricting future U.S. funding toward the Wuhan Institute of Virology or gain-of-function research in China or other adversarial nations. The National Defense Authorization Act, which became law in December, bans EcoHealth from receiving any Department of Defense funding for research “in China on research supported by the government of China.”

 

Collins said in an interview in December, before he retired, that he expects current NIH policy on gain-of-function research will be revisited “in the coming months” by the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity.

 

NIAID and EcoHealth Alliance could not be reached for comment by publication time.

 

https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/20/fauci-helped-loosen-already-weak-rules-for-risky-virus-research/

Anonymous ID: ed2592 Jan. 22, 2022, 2:53 a.m. No.15435278   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5351

Iran, China, Russia Launch 3-Day Joint Naval Drill in Indian Ocean

 

The navies of Iran, China, and Russia launched a three-day joint maritime drill on Friday in the northern Indian Ocean designed to signal a “common future” between the three nations, Iranian Rear Admiral Mostafa Tajoldini told Iranian state television.

 

The naval drills will take place across a 6,600-square-mile stretch of the northern Indian Ocean including the Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf, according to reports this week by Iranian state media.

 

The purpose of this drill is to strengthen security and its foundations in the region, and to expand multilateral cooperation between the three countries to jointly support world peace, maritime security and create a maritime community with a common future,” Tajoldini told Iranian state TV on January 21 hours after the exercises began.

 

“Strengthening the security of international maritime trade, combating piracy and maritime terrorism, exchanging intelligence in the field of maritime rescue missions, and exchanging operational and tactical experience are among the objectives of the 2022 Marine Security Belt exercise,” Iranian state-run news outlet Press TV reported on January 21, referring to the joint military drill by its official name.

 

The navies simulated scenarios in the early morning hours of January 21 including “a pirate seizure of two vessels,” Tajoldini told the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).

 

“Naval and aerial units of the three countries liberated two merchant ships hijacked by pirates in international waters,” as part of the drill, according to the Iranian rear admiral.

 

The three navies practiced specific tactics during Friday’s exercise such as “rescuing burning vessels … shooting at specific targets, [and] shooting at air targets at night,” according to Press TV.

 

Iran, China, and Russia first held joint maritime drills in the northern Indian Ocean in 2019. Friday’s launch of coordinated naval exercises between the three nations marks their third such joint venture. Tehran’s participation in the 2022 Marine Security Belt Exercise signals an “improvement of the Islamic Republic’s standing in the world,” Iranian Rear Admiral Tajoldini told IRNA on January 21.

 

Iran’s 15-year-long bid to gain full membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) came to fruition in September 2021 when the security bloc announced it had formally accepted Tehran’s application to become a full member.

 

“The accession process is expected to take up to two years to complete,” the Middle East Institute noted of Iran’s SCO admittance at the time.

 

Observers consider the SCO an eastern counterweight to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO.). Russia and China lead the SCO as a security alliance that also organizes economic and political cooperation between its member states. The SCO has limited Iran’s access to the SCO since 2005 by granting the Islamic Republic a lesser “observer” status. Iran first applied for full membership to the SCO in 2008.

 

https://www.breitbart.com/asia/2022/01/21/iran-china-russia-launch-3-day-joint-naval-drill-in-indian-ocean/