Community News
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) have proven once more that liars always have something to hide
BY MICHAEL THOMAS
A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., ruled that The National Institutes of Health (NIH) violated the U.S. Constitution when it used keyword filters on its Facebook and Instagram pages to block and censor comments criticizing the agency’s funding of animal testing.
Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), is accused of lying to Congress about using his personal email for official business. Why would he do so, one might ask? Let’s try to unravel the web of deceit.
This controversy, arising from the “Beaglegate“ scandal which blew up in October 2021 comes amid new scrutiny of government-funded experiments conducted on animals.
Records obtained through a Freedom of Information Act and shared with the New York Post include an email dated October 29th, 2021, in which Fauci told a Washington Post reporter, “I will send you an email via my Gmail account.”
According to news commentator Kim Iversen, the email, Iversen said, contradicts Fauci’s June 2024 testimony to Congress, during which he explicitly said, “Let me state for the record that to the best of my knowledge, I have never conducted official business using my personal email.” I read somewhere long ago that liars must possess a sharp memory, but I digress.
The NIH has plenty of reasons to try and block folks from commenting about animal cruelty on their social media sites, here is one reason. The experiments, according to other documents obtained by the White Coat Waste Project, involved injecting and force-feeding 44 beagle puppies between six and eight months old with an experimental drug before euthanizing them, The Epoch Times reported in December 2022.
To shed some more light on people like Fauci and their diabolical mindset, here is more. In June 2022, a major supplier of research animals to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) closed its Cumberland, Virginia, beagle breeding facility after being cited for over 70 animal welfare infractions. That same month, Fauci discontinued $1.8 million in research funding with dogs, turning instead to rodents for his drug development scheme.
If anyone is still confused about why so-called governments are so relentless in the censoring of online content, all one needs to do is a bit of digging and the real criminals will surely be unearthed.
When questioned as to the reason for the blocking of comments on their social media pages, the NIH tried using this as an excuse, “It was just implementing reasonable content guidelines that included a prohibition against public comments that were “off-topic to the agency’s social media posts.”
Speaking of censoring, Canada has become the flagship store in that department. Has anyone noticed how our government has gone to great lengths to ensure Canadians can’t access, or post real news online, especially on social media? As the record would show, there are many things to hide here in Canada, and so it is in your best interest Canadians that our Prime Minister keeps you blindfolded. After all, if you find and post real news, then that is called misinformation and disinformation.
Back to the NIH censorship of social media comments and why they lost this bout. Nearly 50% of NIH’s research project funding pays for experiments using: dogs, rats, monkeys, mice, and other animals. According to the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), one would think that it is only fair that concerned citizens from PETA investigated this traumatic matter involving animals.
PETA along with the Animal Defense Fund and The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University in 2021 sued the NIH and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on behalf of PETA and two individual social media users whose comments were erased from NIH posts.
The lawsuit augured that NIH social media platforms are “public forums” and that the agency’s policy of automatically blocking comments containing keywords associated with animal rights advocacy, such as “torture” and “cruelty,” unconstitutionally excluded speech from public forums based on viewpoint.
In its conclusion, the US court ruled that the NIH’s keyword-blocking policy was “unreasonable under the First Amendment.” It said in its July 30th ruling that the right to praise, or criticize governmental agents “Lies at the heart of the First Amendment’s protections.”
This effectively reinforced what many members of the public knew and were saying all along; that many of these agencies are liars and do not have the public’s best interest at heart.
I am just wondering, could it be possible to get such a stern ruling against the present government here considering all the lies that they have told, and are still telling Canadians? Maybe not. The judge’s bank accounts might just get frozen, and it won’t be as a result of Canada’s arctic weather.