I posted on Saturday about the COVID-related news concerning the famous German virologist Christian Drosten. Now Mr. Drosten is in the news again, due to what was apparently a little white lie about his participation in a conspiracy to suppress information concerning the laboratory origin of the Wuhan Coronavirus.
Many thanks to Hellequin GB for translating this article from Pleiteticker.de:
New explosive emails surfaced: did Christian Drosten lie about secret agreements?
by Janina Lionello
At the beginning of the year, the virologist Christian Drosten swore under oath that he had never tried to cover up a possible laboratory origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. E-mails that have now been published suggest that this is not true.
The most explosive passage is hidden on page 59 of the 174-page dossier. “Didn’t we join forces to challenge and, if possible, reject a particular theory?” it says. The message was written by Christian Drosten on February 9, 2020, and it refers to a conference call in which several scientists discussed a possible laboratory origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The journalist Jimmy Tobias received the bundled emails on November 22 with the help of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and published them online as “Farrar Fauci Comms”).
So, Drosten speaks here quite openly of the collusion of several international scientists in order to systematically discredit the laboratory theory.
The words also cry out for an explanation from Drosten, because in February 2022 he had taken legal action against the Hamburg physics professor Roland Wiesendanger, who had accused Drosten of precisely such a secret collusion. At the time, Drosten swore: “During my participation, no agreement was made to cover up the possibility of a laboratory origin in public. I am also not aware that such an appointment was made at a later date.”
Wiesendanger sees his assumption that scientists agreed in February 2020 to “cover up” a possible laboratory origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus by the current publication, as he explained to Pleiteticker.de. He also wants to keep further legal action against Drosten open — including the “disclosure and prosecution of potentially criminal acts at an international level.”
Background: The Drosten emails
In the spring of 2020, various international scientists, including Christian Drosten and the US immunologist Anthony Fauci, took systematic public action against the theory that SARS-CoV-2 originated in the laboratory — with all the harshness of the language.
Concerning scientists with a different opinion on this question, Drosten said in his NDR podcast: “What I hear, even from apparent experts, simply lacks any basis.” Their level of knowledge “does not go beyond a superficial familiarity with student textbook knowledge,” said Drosten.
As a result, the laboratory theory was branded an absolute conspiracy theory and even deleted from social networks across the board.
It later became clear that the background to this apparent scientific consensus was a secret collusion among these scientists.
Shortly before the telephone conference in which the agreement is said to have been reached, the director of the influential health foundation “WELLCOME TRUST”, Dr. Jeremy Farrar, contacted Christian Drosten. He reported that the Danish molecular biologist Kristian Andersen had found evidence that SARS-CoV-2 had a man-made genetic modification.
Said telephone conference was convened in a hurry, during which several of the participating scientists still considered a laboratory accident to be plausible. This emerges from e-mail traffic, the publication of which was forced earlier this year with the help of the American Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Then, in later articles in the scientific journals The Lancet and Nature, the same scientists suddenly argued vigorously to the contrary and presented all opposing views as a conspiracy theory.
An inquiry about the emails on Saturday morning remained unanswered by Drosten as of Saturday noon.
Afterword from the translator:
As above, so below. And if politicians care little for the graveyards they scatter in their wake, why should their servants care more?
Why do you think he became an advisor to the federal government and Prof. Dr. Bhakdi was sidelined, persecuted and now even prosecuted?
Life is just so much better as a governmental contract “killer” scientist, isn’t it?