Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.513 [SLACK_000727] · slack_pm:msg:05360

Date: 2021-02-14 10:38
Type: chat message · slack
mentioned: Andrew Rambaut
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Robert F. Garry
Topics: Wuhan Institute of Virology collaboration

Recipients on this medium are inferred from channel membership, not per-message addressing.

When Embarek says to "even discuss it or even put it on the table or on the agenda of any meeting or discussion" was a *Mission Impossible,* I strongly suspect that it was not just the Chinese that were pushing back, but membersof his own team. We correctly determined to include it in PO1 against the advice of at least one reviewer. Extremely unlikely sums it up *bordering* on impossible. As @Andrew Rambaut said above the only possibilty is that WIV et al.had SC2 itself or the immediate progenitor. To say this is to say they are pulling off the greatest conspiracy/cover-upin history.

Extracted statements

Rule-extracted, not adjudicated. The grade says what may be done with each one; read the document above before relying on any of them.

Statement	Grade	Attribution	Stance
As @Andrew Rambaut said above the only possibilty is that WIV et al.had SC2 itself or the immediate progenitor.	quoted / not their view	paraphrase_third_party reporting frame: 'Andrew Rambaut said'	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

As @Andrew Rambaut said above the only possibilty is that WIV et al.had SC2 itself or the immediate progenitor.

quoted / not their view

paraphrase_third_party reporting frame: 'Andrew Rambaut said'

asserts

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

2021-02-14 10:38 Robert F. Garry

When Embarek says to "even discuss it or even put it on the table or on the agenda of any meeting or discussion" was a *Mission Impossible,* I strongly suspect that it was not just the Chinese that were pushing back, but membersof his own team. We correctly determined to include it in PO1 against the advice of at least one reviewer. Extremely unlikely sums it up *bordering* on impossible. As @Andrew Rambaut said above the only possibilty is that WIV et al.had SC2 itself or the immediate progenitor. To say this is to say they are pulling off the greatest conspiracy/cover-upin history.
2021-02-14 10:44 Kristian G. Andersen open

I already have the tinfoil hats swooping in - I missed them. [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-02-14 at 10.44.17AM.png]
2021-02-14 10:54 Robert F. Garry open

Well done @Kristian Andersen - !channel let's hit them with some hard science with the cambobat post. Eddie nearly has it cleaned up nicely...
2021-02-14 11:14 Kristian G. Andersen open

@Eddie Holmes - do you know if this particular email will be made public as part of your FOIA? It reflects well wherewe stood early in our research. [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-02-14 at 11.12.37 AM.png]
2021-02-14 11:28 Edward C. Holmes open

No. The FOI request wanted emails related to the papers. As this is before the paper I didn't include it. But we couldof course release it ourselves if necessary.

Full conversation →