strafford used to cover this topic x and civilly, but hasn't done a single article on this since 2006. wikileaks says this is because of the financial relationship between strafford and companies such as nonsense. would you care to comment on not quite >> we have no relationship with monsanto and the other company wikileaks -- >> why have you ignored -- >> we don't know enough about it. the heavy technical subject in which science is divided and there is nothing we can fan out to it. there are many issues we don't discuss. we confine ourselves to those issues in which we have something significant to. when the issue first broke out we also don't discuss questions of ebola very much. >> but hezbollah doesn't have the geopolitical point of this contention. >> i'm not sure it has a geopolitical importance. you've made your mind up on the subject and i am saying i'm ignorant. we don't cover it because we don't cover issues that are technical. as for wikileaks and what it's claimed, i hope you go onto their website and read the e-mails because the distance between what is claimed to be in

strafford used to cover this topic extensively but hasn't done a single article on this since 2006. wiki leaks says this is because of the financial relationship between stratford and influential companies. would you care to comment on that? >> we have that relationship with wiki leaks and many things. >> the big point -- >> we don't know enough about it. it is a high technical subject in which science is divided. there is nothing we can add to it. there are many issues we don't discuss. we can find the issues in which we have something significant to say which is distinct. when the issue first broke out we may have looked at it but we don't discuss questions of ebola very much except to mention. >> ebola doesn't have the geopolitical importance. >> i'm not sure it has geopolitical importance. you make up your mind that this subject and i am contending i am ignorant. we don't cover it because we don't cover issues that are technical. as for wiki leaks, i really hope you go to their web site and read our e-mails because the distance between what is claimed to be in those e-mails and

strafford used to cover this topic extensively but has not run a single articles since 2006. wiki leaks says that this is because of the financial relationship between this and influential companies such as monsanto. >> we have no relationship with monsanto or any other company. >> why have you ignored such a big thing? >> essentially we don't know enough about it. it is a highly technical subject in which science is divided and there is nothing that we can say or add to it. we have had many issues that we do not discuss. we consign ourselves to issues in which we have something significant to say. when the issue first broke out we may have looked at it but we also don't discuss, you know, questions of this very much except as you mention it. >> but the ebola virus doesn't have the point of contention. >> i'm not sure that it has a geo-political importance. you've made up your mind on the subject. so we don't cover it because we don't cover issues that are technical. as for wiki leaks and what it claims, i really hope that you go to their website and read the e-mails because