UPDATE 29. May 2020: Britain failed to protect America from a flu pandemic in China - Declassified UK
PROLOGUE: It is evident that the so-called "free" world is impotent, since it still could not implement an independent international investigation to establish the facts nor a tribunal to prosecute those responsible for the outbreak and the subsequent cover-up.
Australian researchers see 'virus' design manipulation
By Bill Gertz - 21. May 2020
A forthcoming Australian scientific study concludes that the coronavirus causing the global pandemic contains unique properties suggesting it was manipulated in a Chinese laboratory and was not the result of a natural occurrence.
Five scientists who conducted the study discovered an unusual ability of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, as the pathogen behind COVID-19 is called, to easily infect humans.
The scientists said there is no sign so far that the virus can be found in other animals, including bats or the exotic wildlife sold for fresh meat at a market in the Chinese city of Wuhan, where the virus was first identified and where China maintains a major laboratory studying such viruses.
The preliminary report of the study, which is now being peer-reviewed, is based on computer modeling of the virus’ ability to infect various animals, including humans. It was published May 13 on the Cornell University website arXiv.org, which is used for discussion of pre-publication papers.
The virus’ binding strength for human cells “far exceeds” similar properties for infecting other animals, he said in a statement on the forthcoming report.
“This, plus the fact that no corresponding virus has been found to exist in nature, leads to the possibility that COVID-19 is a human-created virus,” said Mr. Petrovsky, a professor at the College of Medicine and Public Health at Flinders University in Adelaide, Australia.
“It is therefore entirely plausible that the virus was created in the biosecurity facility in Wuhan by selection on cells expressing human ACE2, a laboratory that was known to be cultivating exotic bat coronaviruses at the time.”
ACE2 is the acronym for angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, which is on cell surfaces. The enzyme is the entry point the coronavirus uses to infect organisms and spread.
Human lung cells contain ACE2 receptors that have been shown to be key targets of the SARS-CoV-2.
A laboratory-treated coronavirus also could have escaped the facility through an accidental infection of a staff member who then visited the Wuhan wild animal market, Mr. Petrovsky said. Other potential sources include inappropriate disposal of medical waste at a Wuhan laboratory or transmission from a cat or other animal that came into contact with infected waste.
Mr. Petrovsky said the research team believes the quick evolution of the coronavirus and its unique ability to infect humans are either “a remarkable coincidence or a sign of human intervention.”
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying denied again this month that the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which houses China’s high-security laboratory studying pathogens, was the source of the outbreak. The head of the Wuhan laboratory has also said she is convinced after a review that her lab played no role in the virus’ spread.
Another Chinese Foreign Ministry official, Zhao Lijian, suggested that the U.S. Army brought the virus to China. President Trump and other top officials angrily denied that accusation.
The Australian study contradicts other scientists’ assertions that there is no evidence the virus originated in a Chinese laboratory or that it is the result of laboratory bioengineering.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and a key adviser to Mr. Trump on the pandemic, has dismissed any suggestion that the virus came from a Chinese laboratory.
“If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what’s out there now, [the scientific evidence] is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated,” he told National Geographic this month.
“Everything about the stepwise evolution over time strongly indicates that [this virus] evolved in nature and then jumped species.”
‘Highly adapted’ pathogen
The forthcoming study, however, concludes that the binding energy of the virus’ “spike” protein — the crownlike protrusions surrounding the surface of the round microbe — is highest for humans and greater than all other species tested, including bats, which have been widely targeted as the likely original source.
“This indicates that SARS-CoV-2 is a highly adapted human pathogen,” the Australian report said.
The team analyzed spike protein binding of the virus on a range of other animals, including pangolins, civets, mice, hamsters, cats, dogs, snakes, horses, tigers and cows.
“Overall, the data indicates that SARS-CoV-2 is uniquely adapted to infect humans, raising important questions as to whether it arose in nature by a rare chance event or whether its origins might lie elsewhere,” the report said.
Jonathan J. Couey, a research assistant professor of neurobiology at the University of Pittsburgh, said he agrees with the Australian findings.
“Understanding the exact origin of this virus is vital to ensure that all scientific and medical data are interpreted correctly by policymakers and health care professionals alike,” Mr. Couey said.
However, he said, debate on the laboratory origin of the virus has been stymied by scientists opposed to even considering the possibility.
“Several scientists with obvious conflicts of interest have been permitted to go on the record denying that it would be possible to generate such a virus in a laboratory and stating specifically that the sequence of SARS-CoV-2 would never have been chosen by any ‘gene jockey,’” he said in an email.
“Both of these denials are not genuine scientific rebuttals, but rather semantic pseudo-denials formulated by some of those most closely tied to the funding of these [gain of function] research lines.”
“Gain-of-function research” is laboratory work to increase the ability of pathogens to cause disease. It is carried out to study pandemics and how to respond to them.
Research institutions and U.S. intelligence agencies are investigating the origin of the virus, which has now infected nearly 5 million people worldwide and is blamed for at least 323,000 deaths. The 106,000 new cases of infections recorded Tuesday was the most in a single day since the outbreak began, World Health Organization officials said in Geneva.
U.S. intelligence agencies say they agree with a “wide scientific consensus” that the virus was not man-made or genetically modified, according to an April 30 statement by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. But public and private researchers have said it is impossible to dismiss the possibility of an accidental leak from the Wuhan laboratory of what became the COVID-19 strain.
The spy agencies are studying emerging information and intelligence “to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals, or if it was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan,” the ODNI said in an unusual public statement.
Knowing the origin of the virus could prove critical to finding vaccines and treatments and responding to future outbreaks, researchers say.
The Australian study is the second scientific paper to suggest laboratory manipulation played a part.
A group of Indian scientists published a paper on Jan. 31 that found the new coronavirus contained four insertions to the spike protein that are unique to SARS-CoV-2 and not found in other coronaviruses. The features, they said, are similar to those found in the virus known as HIV.
Those scientists concluded that similar structures are “unlikely to be fortuitous in nature.”
The Indian paper was withdrawn under pressure from China, but the scientists involved refused to repudiate their research and promised to publish their findings eventually.
Mr. Petrovsky, who is also research director for Vaxine Pty Ltd., a biotechnology company based in Bedford Park, South Australia, said the source of the virus remains a vitally important question.
“While COVID-19 has close similarities to SARS and other bat viruses, no natural virus matching to COVID-19 has been found in nature despite an intensive search to find its origins,” he said. “This raises the very legitimate question of whether the COVID-19 virus might be the result of human intervention.”
Like other scientists who studied the virus, the Australian team did not find easily recognizable artificial gene inserts that would signal virus engineering. Mr. Petrovsky said there are ways to manipulate viruses without such inserts.
For example, laboratory technicians could take a bat coronavirus that is not infectious to humans and force its evolution by culturing the virus with cells that have the human receptor.
That process was used to culture SARS coronaviruses in laboratories.
The result would be that “you can force the bat virus to adapt to infect human cells via mutations in its spike protein,” Mr. Petrovsky said.
Laboratory development of viruses also can create other random mutations.
“The result of these experiments is a virus that is highly virulent in humans but is sufficiently different that it no longer resembles the original bat virus,” he said.
Since those mutations would be acquired randomly in a laboratory, there would be no signature of bioengineering “but this is clearly a virus still created by human intervention.”
The Chinese government initially said the virus appeared to originate in the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan but later changed its official version to say the origin is something for scientists to study.
Beijing initially opposed international calls for an investigation into how the disease outbreak began but this week said it would support an independent WHO probe of the handling of the disease outbreak at an unspecified date.
Critics say Chinese secrecy has prevented scientists from learning about the virus.
However, “the nature of this event and its proximity to a high-risk biosecurity facility at the epicenter of the outbreak demands a full and independent international inquiry to ascertain whether a virus of this kind of COVID-19 was being cultured in the facility and might have been accidentally released,” Mr. Petrovsky said.
By Bill Gardner - 0
Beijing faces growing pressure to explain precisely how coronavirus first began to spread late last year Credit: Telegraph
A former head of MI6 has said he believes the coronavirus pandemic "started as an accident" when the virus escaped from a laboratory in China.
In an interview with The Telegraph, Sir Richard Dearlove said he had seen an "important" new scientific report suggesting the virus did not emerge naturally but was man-made by Chinese scientists.
The apparent discovery will raise the prospect of China paying "reparations" for the death and economic catastrophe wreaked upon the world, the former intelligence chief said. It comes as Beijing faces growing pressure to explain precisely how coronavirus first began to spread late last year.
International scientists have reached a near-unanimous consensus, however, that the virus emerged in animals – most likely bats or pangolins – before jumping to the human population.
But Sir Richard, 75, pointed to a scientific paper published this week by a Norwegian-British research team who claim to have discovered clues within Covid-19's genetic sequence suggesting key elements were "inserted" and may not have evolved naturally.
From the outset, the Chinese government has endeavoured to "lock down" any debate about the origins of the virus and Beijing's handling of the crisis, he claimed.
"I do think that this started as an accident," Sir Richard told The Telegraph's new Planet Normal podcast (listen through the player at the top of this story). "It raises the issue, if China ever were to admit responsibility, does it pay reparations? I think it will make every country in the world rethink how it treats its relationship with China and how the international community behaves towards the Chinese leadership."
Sir Richard, who was the head of MI6 between 1999 and 2004, cited startling new peer-reviewed research produced by Professor Angus Dalgleish, of St George's Hospital at the University of London, and the Norwegian virologist Birger Sorensen.
In their paper, the scientists claim to have identified "inserted sections placed on the SARS-CoV-2 Spike surface" that explain how the virus binds itself to human cells.
It warns that current efforts to develop a vaccine are destined for failure because the true aetiology of the virus has been misunderstood. To remedy the problem, the researchers are developing their own vaccine, produced by Immunor AS, a Norwegian pharmaceutical company led by Mr Sorensen.
Sir Richard described the study as "a very important contribution to a debate which is now starting about how the virus evolved and how it got out and broke out as a pandemic", adding: "I think this particular article is very important, and I think it will shift the debate."
Sir Richard Dearlove Credit: Martin Pope
He revealed that the Dalgleish/Sorensen paper had been rewritten several times. An earlier version, seen by The Telegraph, concluded that coronavirus should correctly be called "Wuhan virus" and claimed to have proven "beyond reasonable doubt that the Covid-19 virus is engineered".
"We are aware that these findings could have political significance and raise troubling questions," the authors originally wrote. The paper was widely circulated behind the scenes after being distributed for peer review, while intelligence officials reportedly examined its findings.
People wearing face masks walk by the river in Wuhan, the Chinese city in which the coronavirus outbreak began Credit: Barcroft Media
However, one of the authors, John Fredrik Moxnes, the chief scientific adviser to the Norwegian military, asked for his name to be withdrawn from the research, throwing its credibility into doubt. Scientists from the Francis Crick Institute and Imperial College London also dismissed its conclusions, it is understood.
Correspondence seen by The Telegraph shows that, in April, the initial paper was rejected by leading academic journals including Nature and the Journal of Virology, which deemed the research "unsuitable for publication".
Much of the paper was watered down to remove explicit accusations against China, and the rewritten study was then judged to be of sufficient scientific merit to be accepted for publication in the Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery, a journal chaired by leading scientists from Stanford University and the University of Dundee.
A further analysis produced by Prof Dalgleish and his colleagues, due for release in the coming days, claims the Covid-19 virus has "unique fingerprints" that cannot have evolved naturally and are instead "indicative of purposive manipulation".
Entitled "A Reconstructed Historical Aetiology of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike", the new study, seen by The Telegraph, suggests the virus is "remarkably well-adapted virus for human co-existence" and is likely to be the result of a Wuhan lab experiment to produce "chimeric viruses of high potency".
The paper concludes: "Henceforth, those who would maintain that the Covid-19 pandemic arose from zoonotic transfer need to explain precisely why this more parsimonious account is wrong before asserting that their evidence is persuasive, most especially when, as we also show, there are puzzling errors in their use of evidence."
The paper has not yet been accepted for publication in any scientific journal.
"This [the first] article was submitted to a… journal, which refused it within a week of receiving it, and in the same period accepted for publication two or three Chinese articles that relate to the virus, within 48 hours," Sir Richard said.
"So I mean, as this debate about the virus develops, I think all this material is going to be in print and is going to embarrass a number of people, I think. Let's suggest that the Chinese maybe have too much say in their journals, in what appears and what doesn't."
Wuhan Seafood Market, where experts believe the outbreak started, was sealed off by authorities in the city Credit: Sophia Yan
The Chinese government has always insisted that the outbreak began in a "wet market" in the city of Wuhan late last year. But critics have questioned why some early human cases and their contacts appeared to have no connection to the area.
Two laboratories in Wuhan studying bat coronaviruses – the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the Wuhan Centre for Disease Control – have been suggested as the possible true sources of the outbreak.
Sir Richard suggested scientists may have been conducting secret gene-splicing experiments on bat coronaviruses when Covid-19 somehow escaped through a lapse in biosecurity.
"It's a risky business if you make a mistake," he said. "Look at the stories... of the attempts by the leadership to lockdown any debate about the origins of the pandemic and the way that people have been arrested or silenced.
"I mean, we shouldn't really have any doubt any longer about what we're dealing with."
Sir Richard said he did not believe the Chinese had released the virus deliberately, but accused Beijing of subsequently covering up the scale of its spread.
"Of course, the Chinese must have felt, well, if they've got to suffer a pandemic maybe we shouldn't try too hard to stop, as it were, our competitors suffering the same disadvantages we've got," he said.
"Look, the Chinese understand us extremely well. They have made a study of us over the last decade or longer, particularly through attending our universities. We understand the Chinese very poorly. It's an imbalanced relationship in that respect."
Last month, the US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, claimed there was "enormous evidence" that the coronavirus outbreak originated in a Chinese laboratory, but did not provide any proof. However, the US National Intelligence Director's office later said it had determined that Covid-19 "was not manmade or genetically modified".
During a television interview on May 9, Matt Hancock, the Health Secretary, said: "We don't have any evidence that this is a man-made coronavirus."
Matt Hancock said: 'We don't have any evidence that this is a man-made coronavirus.' Credit: Shutterstock
Scientists analysing Covid-19 have also reported no signs that the genetic sequence was manipulated or distorted in any way. Nevertheless, Beijing is facing growing pressure to reveal everything it knows about the origins of Covid-19 amid accusations that the rest of the world may have been misled.
Sir Richard praised the Australian government for leading calls for an official inquiry after Scott Morrison, the Prime Minister, suggested that the World Health Organisation needed tough new "weapons inspector" powers to investigate the origins of Covid-19.
"I think it's very courageous of the Australians to take China on," Sir Richard said. "I mean, there's an obvious, huge imbalance in terms of power, both economic and military and political, but they are showing the way. You have to have a critical relationship with China."
He urged the UK Government to abandon plans to allow the Chinese telecoms firm Huawei to have a role in building Britain's new 5G network, and to reduce the reliance on Chinese factories to make cheap personal protective equipment (PPE) for frontline NHS health workers.
"We need to go into reverse," he said. "It's important that we do not put any of our critical infrastructure in the hands of Chinese interests. So telecommunications, Huawei, nuclear power stations, and then things that, you know, we require and need in a crisis, like PPE.
"We have allowed China so much rope that we are now suffering the consequences, and it's time to pull the rope in and to tighten the way we do business. It's very, very important that we keep a keen eye on this and do not allow the Chinese to, as it were, benefit strategically from this situation that has been imposed on all of us."
Sir Richard criticised George Osborne, the former Chancellor, for proclaiming that Britain would be China's "best partner in the West" during a charm offensive in September 2015.
"I think the problem with young politicians, and when he was in office he was young, is that they lack experience and they lack depth of knowledge, and I don't think that George Osborne really understood what the leadership of a real communist party is like," Sir Richard said.
"I spent most of my career dealing with the issue of communism, with the autocratic nature of the way that these parties are run and their immense disregard for law, for human rights, for all of these areas, and I mean George Osborne just conveniently disregarded all of that."
Earlier this week, Liu Xiaoming, the Chinese ambassador to the UK, said Beijing would welcome an international investigation into the origins of the pandemic, insisting his country had nothing to hide.
"China's record is clean. It can stand the test of time and history," he said.
“It’s all Bullsh*t” – 3 Leaks that Sink the Covid Narrative
In recent days a series of leaks across the globe have further shown the “official line” on coronavirus does not hold water
By Kit Knightly - 31. May 2020
The science of the coronavirus is not disputed. It is well documented and openly admitted:
- Most people won’t get the virus.
- Most of the people who get it won’t display symptoms.
- Most of the people who display symptoms will only be mildly sick.
- Most of the people with severe symptoms will never be critically ill.
- And most of the people who get critically ill will survive.
This is borne out by the numerous serological studies which show, again and again, that the infection fatality ratio is on par with flu.
There is no science – and increasingly little rational discussion – to justify the lockdown measures and overall sense of global panic.
Nevertheless, it’s always good to get official acknowledgement of the truth, even if it has to be leaked.
Here are three leaks showing that those in power know that the coronavirus poses no threat, and in no way justifies the lockdown that is going to destroy the livelihoods of so many.
1. “It’s all bullshit!”
Believing the interview over, and the camera turned off, Myasnikov said:
It’s all bullshit […] It’s all exaggerated. It’s an acute respiratory disease with minimal mortality […] Why has the whole world been destroyed? That I don’t know,”
2. “covid-19 cannot be described as a generally dangerous disease”
According to an e-mail leaked to Danish newspaper Politiken, the Danish Health Authority disagree with their government’s approach to the coronavirus. They cover it in two articles here and here (For those who don’t speak Danish, thelocal.dk have covered the story too).
There’s a lot of interesting information there, not least of which is the clear implication that politicians appear to be pressing the scientific advisors to overstate the danger (they did the same thing in the UK), along with the decision of some civil servants to withhold data from the public until after the lockdown had been extended.
But by far the most important quote is from a March 15th e-mail [our emphasis]:
The Danish Health Authority continues to consider that covid-19 cannot be described as a generally dangerous disease, as it does not have either a usually serious course or a high mortality rate,”
On March 12th the Danish parliament passed an emergency law which – among many other things – decreased the power of the Danish Health Authority, demoting it from a “regulatory authority” to just an “advisory” one.
3. “A Global False Alarm”
Earlier this month, on May 9th, a report was leaked to the German alternate media magazine Tichys Einblick titled “Analysis of the Crisis Management”.
The report was commissioned by the German department of the interior, but then its findings were ignored, prompting one of the authors to release it through non-official channels.
The fall out of that, including attacks on the authors and minimising of the report’s findings, is all very fascinating and we highly recommend this detailed report on Strategic Culture (or read the full report here in German).
We’re going to focus on just the reports conclusions, including [our emphasis]:
- The dangerousness of Covid-19 was overestimated: probably at no point did the danger posed by the new virus go beyond the normal level.
- The danger is obviously no greater than that of many other viruses. There is no evidence that this was more than a false alarm.
- During the Corona crisis the State has proved itself as one of the biggest producers of Fake News.
After being attacked in the press, and suspended from his job, the leaker and other authors of the report released a joint statement, calling on the government to respond to their findings.
* If the current crisis was being approached rationally by all parties, these leaks would seal the debate.
Evidence is piling up that the people in charge knew, from the very beginning, that the virus was not dangerous.
The question remaining is: Why are these leaks happening now?
N.B: The 1968 pandemic was caused by an influenza A (H3N2) virus comprised of two genes from an avian influenza A virus, including a new H3 hemagglutinin, but also contained the N2 neuraminidase from the 1957 H2N2 virus. It was first noted in the United States in September 1968. The estimated number of deaths was 1 million worldwide.
When Britain failed to protect America from a flu pandemic in China
By Phil Miller - 29. May 2020
Hong Kong was a British colony until it was handed back to China in 1997 (Photo: EPA / AP Pool)
Before Covid-19, British colonial authorities allowed a deadly flu virus to spread from Hong Kong in 1968 with devastating consequences for the US and the rest of the world – one million people died.
As President Donald Trump and rightwing figures in the UK increasingly blame China for rising deaths from Covid-19, a largely-forgotten deadly pandemic in the recent past shows that Covid-19 is not the first time that a virus emanating from China has imperilled the West.
The last flu pandemic of the 20th century, H3N2, killed an estimated one million people, including around 100,000 Americans. Like Covid-19, the H3N2 virus began somewhere in Communist China, probably amid the turmoil of Chairman Mao’s Cultural Revolution.
But the first reported case occurred in July 1968 in Hong Kong, which at that time was a British colony.
According to scientific protocol, the illness became known as the Hong Kong flu, a name which unsettled some British parliamentarians who preferred in Trumpian style to call it the “Mao flu”.
While Mao’s policies may have ultimately been to blame, the senior medical officer in Hong Kong’s virus unit, Dr Wai-kwan Chang acknowledged that the British outpost was “one of the few places which communicates freely with the Chinese mainland”.
Once the virus reached Hong Kong, Chang said the international trade hub proved to be “an effective place for virus exchange with other parts of the world by air and sea”.
Britain could have done more to stop H3N2. Rather than swiftly containing the virus, colonial authorities spurned a lockdown and failed to test, track and trace.
From riots to flu
The virus caught the colony’s rulers off guard. They had been preoccupied with internal repression for much of the previous year. Anti-colonial riots rocked Hong Kong in 1967 when left-wing workers and students mounted strikes, protests and eventually a bombing campaign to demand reforms.
Although Hong Kong would remain part of Britain for another 30 years, the riots did force colonial authorities to belatedly improve social housing and workers’ rights. But in the short term, their response was repression.
Thousands were arrested as British troops, Gurkha mercenaries and colonial police struggled to regain control. In dramatic scenes, Royal Navy helicopters dropped raiding parties on to the roofs of buildings occupied by left-wing activists. In total, 51 people died.
Riot police in Hong Kong using a colonial-style banner warning about tear gas during protests in 2019 (Photo: EPA-EFE / Jeon Heon-Kyun)
By July 1968, the authorities were facing another problem. Local journalists began to write about a strange new virus, a “heat sickness” or “summer heat”, with symptoms that were more commonly seen in wintertime.
Travellers had also reported a rise of influenza-like infections over the border in China, however, Chang would later lament “for various reasons, virus isolations were not carried out on arriving travellers to confirm these reports”.
This failure to screen new arrivals meant that the virus was able to enter Hong Kong, where one million residents of colonial housing schemes had just 2.8m² of living space per adult. Chang regarded this overcrowding as a public health hazard, which contributed to the “explosive outbreak” of influenza.
By 24 July, Hong Kong had up to 300,000 suspected influenza cases. It crippled the economy – 40% of government clerks and more than half of workers were off sick, according to local media.
Although only 22 people died in Hong Kong from the disease, the global ramifications were far worse. And in an echo of Wuhan, the World Health Organisation did not warn until 16 August that the virus was spreading further afield.
British colonial authorities could have done more to limit the impact of H3N2 had they learned lessons from previous flu outbreaks in Hong Kong and implemented a compulsory notification system for new cases.
As it was, only nine government clinics, which served a handful of the colony’s population, provided facilities for voluntary notification. The lack of mandatory monitoring meant the British authorities in Hong Kong struggled to keep track of the spread of influenza through their colony.
Chang would later admit that the 6,214 cases reported for the month of July “represented only a small proportion of the affected people”. Day workers continued to turn up at factories and did not report sick unless they had “severe symptoms”.
The authorities were also criticised for not closing public areas, which could have slowed the spread of the flu. However, they may have lacked political capital to take such steps after cracking down on public protests the previous year.
This lack of internal action meant that by August 1968, the virus had spread through south-east Asia, including at an air base in Thailand, where 6,000 US military personnel were deployed as part of the Vietnam war efforts.
According to the World Health Organisation, 13% of these US servicemen caught the virus and 8% fell ill. Some of these troops returned home, allegedly taking the virus with them. The first recorded outbreak in the US was among marines at a Drill Instructor School in California.
Although the virus spread first among troops, most of those who died in the US were aged over 65, according to the Centre for Disease Control. The first wave was the most deadly for Americans, although over in England, it was a second wave in 1969/70 which proved most fatal – a frightening reminder as Boris Johnson ponders when to lift the lockdown.
Phil Miller is a staff reporter for Declassified UK, an investigative journalism organisation that covers Britain’s real role in the world.
Bill Gates’ Web of Dark Money and Influence with Derrick Broze
By Ryan Cristián - 29. May 2020
Welcome to The Daily Wrap Up, a concise show dedicated to bringing you the most relevant independent news, as we see it, from the last 24 hours (5/29/20).
As always, take the information discussed in the video below and research it for yourself, and come to your own conclusions. Anyone telling you what the truth is, or claiming they have the answer, is likely leading you astray, for one reason or another. Stay Vigilant.
Video Source Links
No Needs for masks - they are dangerous for you!
No need for Lockdowns -
Prevent with Vit. C + D and take Zink
Prof Dolores J Cahill on Del Bigtree
•May 20, 2020