UPDATE 02. May 2021: Also former British top-spy out to confuse - - against the evidence

UPDATE 21. April 2021: “SARS-Cov-2 Laboratory Accident?”. U.S. Intelligence and MIT Review validated Manmade Virus’ Theory

PROLOGUE: The 5-Eyes agencies are obviously out to obfuscate 

Over a year and $85bn later, US spies still don’t know ‘where, when or how’ Covid-19 hit the world – but it ‘could've been a lab’

Over a year and $85bn later, US spies still don’t know ‘where, when or how’ Covid-19 hit the world – but it ‘could've been a lab’
Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines speaks during a House Intelligence Committee hearing on worldwide threats © Reuters

By Kit Klarenberg - 17 April 2021

The question of how SARS-CoV-2 came to wreak havoc on the planet is one many have asked but none, so far, have answered. The truth is out there, but the very people on the case could have every reason to ensure it doesn’t emerge.

On April 14, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines revealed that after over a year of determined sleuthing, US spying agencies had no concrete answers on basic questions regarding the origins of the 2019 coronavirus. 

“It is absolutely accurate the intelligence community does not know exactly where, when, or how Covid-19 virus was transmitted initially,” Haines told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “Components have coalesced around two alternative theories, these scenarios are it emerged naturally from human contact with infected animals, or it was a laboratory accident.”

This time last year, Donald Trump alleged he’d seen evidence confirming covid was laboratory-made and, throughout 2020, former MI6 chief Richard Dearlove also claimed the virus was “an engineered escapee” from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. 

Haines’ public admission that a “laboratory accident” is a possible explanation is significant because intelligence services have thus far been quick to dismiss the suggestion as a conspiracy theory whenever it’s been aired in public. In response to Trump’s statement for example, the Director of National Intelligence’s office firmly refuted the idea Covid-19 was “manmade or genetically modified.” Of course, the virus could be neither and still have escaped from a lab.

WHO, what, why, where and Wuhan?

While the World Health Organization (WHO) is yet to comment on Haines’ seeming change of heart, the lab theory stands in stark contrast with the agency’s long-held public position. In March, it issued a report, based on the findings of an international team of scientists who spent four weeks in Wuhan probing covid’s origins. They concluded that of all the various explanations, a laboratory leak was by far and away the least likely.

For many though, the report raised far more questions than it answered. Even WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus was critical of the team’s investigation – his response to the scientists’ public presentation of their findings was measured yet withering. 

“The team…visited several laboratories in Wuhan and considered the possibility that the virus entered the human population as a result of a laboratory incident. I do not believe this assessment was extensive enough,” he said. “Further data and studies will be needed to reach more robust conclusions…this requires further investigation, potentially with additional missions involving specialist experts, which I am ready to deploy.”

Quite an indictment of the 10-strong squad of researchers, considering they had been presented by the mainstream media ahead of their excursion as unimpeachable, world-class authorities on virology and public health determined – and destined – to get to the truth. That their investigation of the laboratory leak theory was so undercooked is particularly striking given the only US-based representative on the team, Peter Daszak, is President of EcoHealth Alliance, which has in recent years conducted extensive work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). 

Friends and funding

Then again, Daszak would have a great many reasons for leaving certain stones unturned. For one, he’s a close friend and ardent supporter of Shi Zhengli, director of the Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases at WIV, who has been repeatedly forced to deny her lab was the source of coronavirus. In June 2020, Scientific American described the pair as “long-time collaborators” – Daszak also staunchly defended his associate, stating she “leads a world-class lab of the highest standards,” and rubbished allegations she or her organization were in any way responsible for covid’s spread.

From 2014 to 2019, Daszak worked with Zhengli on investigating and cataloging bat coronaviruses across China, an initiative funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) to the tune of $3.7 million. Thereafter, the EcoHealth chief transferred this effort to the University of North Carolina, where he began ‘gain-of-function’ research on coronaviruses and chimeras in humanized mice. 

In a December 2019 interview, he somewhat ominously told virologist Vincent Racaniello that some coronaviruses may “get into human cells,” one can “manipulate in the lab pretty easily,” are untreatable with antibodies, and “you can’t vaccinate against them with a vaccine.”

NIH withdrew its backing for the EcoHealth project in April 2020 under pressure from the Trump administration, a move that garnered significant sympathetic media attention for the organisation, and Daszak. The move was reversed to much fanfare in August, and EcoHealth’s funding more than doubled to $7.5 million. However, what no media outlet noted at any stage was the non-profit’s NIH support represents a negligible fraction of its US government income. The overwhelming majority of EcoHealth’s revenue, accounting for almost $40 million between 2013 and 2020, flows from the Department of Defense (DoD).

What happened in 2019? 

A State Department factsheet on WIV published in January notes that “several researchers” at the Institute became sick in autumn 2019, “before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illnesses,” raising questions about the credibility of Zhengli’s claims that there was “zero infection” among WIV staff and students prior to the pandemic. 

The factsheet also asserted that “scientists in China have researched animal-derived coronaviruses under conditions that increased the risk for accidental and potentially unwitting exposure,” and “secret Chinese military projects” may have been conducted at the Institute since at least 2017.

Perhaps predictably, there was no mention that the US military may have funded, whether directly or indirectly, projects conducted at WIV. It’s notable that $34.6 million of EcoHealth’s DoD funding came from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, a Pentagon division working to “counter and deter weapons of mass destruction and improvised threat networks.” 

‘Rumours and misinformation’ 

Daszak’s clear conflict of interest in the WHO probe is rendered all the more shocking when one considers he was lead author of a joint statement published in The Lancet in February 2020, which strongly condemned “rumours and misinformation” relating to covid – namely, that it may have emerged from a laboratory. 

“Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus,” the statement, signed by 27 scientists – four of whom hold positions with EcoHealth – contended. 

The letter’s publication was highly significant, as it publicly cemented the notion of a scientific consensus around covid’s origins. This ‘consensus’ emerged shortly after a draft genome of the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 had been released for analysis. As MIT’s Technology Reviewnotes, numerous scientists who’d begun studying the draft were surprised by what they found. 

Among them was Nikolai Petrovsky, a highly-regarded professor at Australia’s Flinders University and chair of Vaxine, a company that develops immunizations for infectious diseases, which since 2005 has received millions in NIH funding. 

“[Computer modeling] generated a startling result: the spike proteins studding SARS-CoV-2 bound more tightly to their human cell receptor, a protein called ACE2, than target receptors on any other species evaluated. In other words, SARS-CoV-2 was surprisingly well adapted to its human prey, which is unusual for a newly emerging pathogen,” Technology Review records. 

Petrovsky and his associates immediately set about writing a speculative paper asking whether the virus was “completely natural” or had originated from “a recombination event that occurred inadvertently or intentionally in a laboratory handling coronaviruses.” 

The virological is political 

But Petrovsky struggled to find a publisher, with at least one open access repository rejecting his work outright. It wasn’t until May 2020 that the paper was finally released, and by that time suggestions of a lab leak had been comprehensively discredited – not least due to Trump’s pronouncements on the matter having made the issue political. 

As Technology Review notes, it had become “career suicide for scientists to voice suspicions about a possible lab leak,” and the community was “unwilling to challenge the orthodoxy” as a result. In turn, it was virtually impossible for journalists to write credible stories questioning covid’s origins without being branded Trump apologists, conspiracy theorists, or worse. 

The WHO Director General’s pledge to redeploy experts to Wuhan has prompted several scientists, who reluctantly fell victim to this conspiracy of silence, to come forward and voice their concerns. It also raises the prospect that some answers might finally be found. 

One would hope that between the WHO, grossly overpaid US intelligence services ($85 billion last year), and millions of independent researchers the world over, the truth may one day emerge. But one shouldn’t hold one’s breath. When powerful people have a vested interest in suppressing inconvenient facts, secrets can be kept forever, and that’s without factoring in the cottage industry that has emerged dedicated to stigmatizing laboratory accident explanations for the pandemic.

A case in point; The Lancet has established a 12-member COVID Commission panel to investigate the origins of the virus. Its chair is none other than the ubiquitous Peter Daszak – and half his taskforce’s members were signatories to the February 2020 statement that did so much to muzzle so many. 

 

Author:

Kit Klarenberg, an investigative journalist exploring the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions.

Peter Daszak and EcoHealth have been approached for comment.

===

UPDATE:

Also former British top-spy still out to confuse

- against the evidence

PROLOGUE: Ex-MI6 boss Dearlove seems to become old by now and might have forgotten that he uttered the same lines already last year in May 2020. See: SARS-CoV-2 a human-created virus says Australian research Or is he just preparing for a launch of a book for which someone might have paid him to further try and diffuse the truth? However, it is clear that all the 5-Eyes agencies know very well that it is a lab-made contagion and they were very well aware what was going on in the BSL-4 lab in Wuhan, dubbed WUHAN 34.

MI6 Chief Backs Wuhan Lab Theory, Blasts China’s Co-Opting of Scientific Community

By Natalie Winters - 02. May 2021

covid

A former head of the British Secret Intelligence Service insisted it was “far more likely” COVID-19 leaked from a Chinese lab as opposed to originating in nature, calling out “significant Chinese influence” from preventing an open debate on virus origins. 

Sir Richard Dearlove, who headed the agency between 1999 and 2004, added that aspects of the virus “point in the direction of it being somewhat tailored.” Dearlove also slammed the Chinese Communist Party’s cover-up of relevant data and the recent World Health Organization investigation as “farcical.”

“I think there’s a balance of probability. Obviously, if it cannot be proven, and I don’t think it can, because the evidence that could have proved it one way or another has been destroyed, because of the extent of the Chinese clean up,” Dearlove asserted.

While he conceded “it’s possible” the virus jumped to humans from nature, the former intelligence chief reasoned “it’s far more likely, if you’re a scientist, that it was put together.”

“I think the onus is on the Chinese to prove that it’s zoonotic because the evidence strongly suggests to me and a number of eminent scientists that the greater probability is is that it’s a lab escapee,” he adds while asking for an “open debate” on the origins of COVID-19. “I think that there is a significant Chinese influence active in this specific area, and China has worked very, very hard in terms of influence in finance to make sure their narrative is dominant,” he emphasizes.

Author:

 is an Investigative Reporter at the National Pulse and contributor to The National Pulse podcast.

===

Exclusive

'Far more likely' coronavirus came from lab, ex-MI6 chief tells LBC

By Will Taylor - 02. May 2021

Coronavirus was more likely to have escaped from a lab than to have come from an animal, the former head of MI6 has told LBC.

Sir Richard Dearlove said aspects of the virus "point in the direction of it being somewhat tailored" though he warned this may never be proven.

 

The former "C" of the Secret Intelligence Service – equivalent to "M" in James Bond – also told LBC's Tom Swarbrick that more information on the coronavirus' origin will soon come out.

Some have theorised the coronavirus could have escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Work to establish the origin of the virus is ongoing.

Sir Richard, who headed up the spy agency between 1999 and 2004, told Tom the World Health Organisation's report, which said a lab leak was highly unlikely but further work was needed, was a "farcical investigation".

Dearlove was 'C' of MI6 for five years
Dearlove was 'C' of MI6 for five years. Picture: PA

While he admitted "it's possible" the virus jumped to humans from nature, Sir Richard said: "But the fact that... it's far more likely, if you're a scientist, that it was put together.

"All right, put it like this… It's a natural virus that's been, as it were, mucked around with and the characteristics of things like the spike protein, which make it so highly infectious, also point in the direction of it being somewhat tailored."

He alleged that Chinese influence was hindering the publication of scientific articles on the matter.

Read more: Aid to China slashed by 95% in overseas assistance cuts

“I honestly don't think that this issue can be resolved one way or another," he continued.

"I think there's a balance of probability. Obviously, if it cannot be proven, and I don't think it can, because the evidence that could have proved it one way or another has been destroyed, because of the extent of the Chinese clean up.

"Okay, so you can't prove it's zoonotic. You can't prove it's a lab escapee. What I'm saying is there's a balance of probability."

Some have theorised the virus escaped from a lab in Wuhan
Some have theorised the virus escaped from a lab in Wuhan. Picture: Photo by YFC / Costfoto/Sipa USA

He expects forthcoming books to further outline the argument for coronavirus' lab origin.

Sir Richard described China as a more "acute" threat, though he added that Russia presents the most immediate challenge.

He also said the UK should commit to training the security forces in Afghanistan for another two decades, after President Joe Biden announced the Americans would leave ahead of the September 11 20-year anniversary.

It is a "mistake" to leave and the UK had become safer by deposing the old Taliban regime, he argued.

"It could be (another 20 year stay)," Sir Richard said."I'm not arguing for the massive deployment of troops. I'm arguing for the continued training and equipping of Afghan forces to fight this battle.

"I mean, you can't really afford now to have these geopolitical vacuums when there are such potent threats."

Islamist terror remains the biggest threat to the UK, and far-right terrorism has "so far" been more containable, he said.

In the wide-ranging interview, Sir Richard also said freedom of movement in Europe and the migrant crisis throughout the 2010s had impacted British security "to an extent".

Asked about reports of Boris Johnson and the use of his phone – with suggestions in recent days that his number was readily available online, and news he has been contactable by people in the private sector – Sir Richard said: "Politicians and phones have always been a problem.

"It is not a unique problem to any single politician, every single politician I have ever known, foreign and British, have used their phones in a way which probably is unwise, that's the nature of political life.

"It's not to do with the behaviour of politician

===

“SARS-Cov-2 Laboratory Accident?”. U.S. Intelligence and MIT Review validated Manmade Virus’ Theory

WUHAN-GATES – 36

By Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio - 21. April 2020

The SARS-Cov-2 virus may have come out of a laboratory. To admit it, this time, is the head of the most important secret services in the world: the American ones.

WUHAN-GATES – 36. “SARS-Cov-2 Laboratory Accident?”. Us Intelligence and MIT Review validated Manmade Virus’ Theory

But she is also an old acquaintance of Gospa News who in four different inquiries and in the book WuhanGates defined her as the “prophetess of the pandemic” for predicting a terrible Coronavirus respiratory disease during a conference in 2018, having called for a “world order” (evocative of the NWO) and having led the suspected Event 201 drill, on a simulated planetary contagion, funded, among others, by Bill & Melinda Gates.

Avril Haines, Director of National Intelligence.

On April 14, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines revealed that after over a year of determined sleuthing, US spying agencies had no concrete answers on basic questions regarding the origins of the 2019 coronavirus.

“It is absolutely accurate the intelligence community does not know exactly where, when, or how Covid-19 virus was transmitted initially,” Haines told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “Components have coalesced around two alternative theories, these scenarios are it emerged naturally from human contact with infected animals, or it was a laboratory accident.”

INTELLIGENCE AND THE LABORATORY VIRUS

To report the sensational statements of the head of the ODNI, the office that coordinates the entire US Intelligence Community on which 17 federal agencies depend, including the most powerful on earth such as Central Intelligence Agency CIA (civil counter-espionage) and National Security Agency NSA (the 007 military) was the German investigative journalist Kit Klarenberg in an excellent article on Russia Today in which the history of the pandemic was reconstructed through intelligence and science analysis.

The admission, even if only hypothetical of the ‘laboratory leak’ (a more moderate theory than that of an intentional release that emerged during our 45 reportages on the subject), is a sensational revelation for three reasons.

Firstly, because the lawyer Haines, long-time Democrat wanted by Joseph Biden at the top of American intelligence and appointed by the Senate the day after the inauguration of the new president in the White House, confirms the allegations of the SARS-Cov-2 built artificially launched by former President Donald Trump, immediately accused of conspiracy by the Dems themselves.

The second reason is detailed by the same journalist "Around this time last year, Donald Trump claimed to have seen evidence confirming that covid had been produced in a laboratory and, throughout 2020, former MI6 chief Richard Dearlove also claimed that the virus was "an engineered fugitive" from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Haines' public admission that a "laboratory accident" is a possible explanation is significant because the intelligence services have so far been quick to dismiss the suggestion as a conspiracy theory whenever it has been aired in public. In response to Trump's statement, for example, the office of the Director of National Intelligence (Haines' predecessor - ed) had firmly rejected the idea that Covid-19 was 'man-made or genetically modified'. Obviously, the virus could be neither and it still escaped from a laboratory'.

Finally, this revelation is important for what it conceals rather than for what it reveals. Ironically Klarenberg, in fact, in his conclusion recalls how much the US allocates to its spy agencies: 'One hopes that between the WHO, the vastly overpaid US intelligence services ($85 billion last year) and millions of independent researchers around the world, the truth will one day emerge. But one should not hold one's breath. When powerful people have a vested interest in suppressing inconvenient facts, secrets can be kept forever, and that's regardless of the cottage industry that has emerged dedicated to stigmatising laboratory accident explanations for the pandemic'.

FROM CIA TO PANDEMIC PROPHETESS

One of the cleverly concealed secrets of the Director of National Intelligence is her undoubted knowledge of Coronaviruses that led her to make that prophecy about the impending pandemic emergency at a 2018 Camdem lecture, three years after the same prediction made by Bil Gates on the TED show, and a year before Biden's prediction in the fall of 2019 at the height of the election campaign.

Haines, in fact, was deputy director of the CIA (and then deputy White House national security adviser) during the years when the Obama-Biden administration, together with the Gates foundation, funded the dangerous experiments on superviruses with viral charges enhanced by Functional Gain for "dual use" purposes (vaccine and bioarma) in the laboratories of the Wuhan Institute of Virology and North Carolina University in Chapel Hill. What's more, she is a great expert on biological weapons, so much so that she is a consultant in this field for NTI (Nuclear Threat Initiative), a non-profit and bipartisan organisation (also founded by former Dem senator Sam Nunn).

An answer to the darkness in which the US intelligence is groping or pretending to grope in the face of a 'pandemic planned for decades by Gates', as claimed by the lawyer Robert F. Kennedy, orphan of his father of the same name, Attorney General, and his uncle JFK, both assassinated in mysterious circumstances in the shadow of the intrigues of the Deep State (an international potentate of Zionist politicians, Freemasons and military 007), was clearly given by another great expert in counter-espionage.

Lieutenant Colonel Dr. Dany Shoham, microbiologist and expert in chemical and biological warfare in the Middle East, former senior analyst of intelligence Aman of the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) and the Israeli Ministry of Defence had in fact published an alarming article on the site of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, where he is a research associate. Drawing on his scientific expertise, he wrote unequivocal sentences about SARS-Cov-2.

"This debate is very complicated and contains the potential for explosive revelations on many levels, but the intelligence communities around the world have remained largely silent on the issue. This is intriguing and not surprising. Several Western countries, as well as Russia, India, Japan and Australia, had formulated intelligence estimates as early as January 2020, but kept their conclusions under wraps. The very persistence of the intelligence agencies' silence implies that they judge the initial contagion to be unnatural. If they had concluded that the pandemic was the result of natural contagion, they probably would have made that conclusion public."

DANGEROUS EXPERIMENTS IN CHINA AND THE USA

On the same wavelength are the considerations of journalist Klarenberg in his intriguing article, which only suffers from the very serious omission of the obvious role of Gates and the CIA in the virus research experiments.

"While the World Health Organisation (WHO) has yet to comment on Haines' apparent change of heart, the lab's theory stands in stark contrast to the agency's long-standing public position. In March, it published a report based on the findings of an international team of scientists who spent four weeks in Wuhan probing the origins of Covid. They concluded that of all the various explanations, a lab leak was by far the least likely. For many, however, the report raised far more questions than it resolved Even WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus was critical of the team's investigation: its response to the scientists' public presentation of their findings was measured yet weakened," RT reads.

"The team ... visited several laboratories in Wuhan and considered the possibility that the virus had entered the human population as a result of a laboratory accident. 'I do not believe that this assessment was broad enough,' the WHO director-general said, 'Further data and studies will be needed to reach more robust conclusions ... this requires further investigation, potentially with additional missions involving specialised experts, which I am prepared to deploy.'

" The fact that their investigation of the lab leak theory was so poorly "cooked" is particularly surprising given that the team's sole US representative, Peter Daszak, is the president of EcoHealth Alliance, which has done extensive work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in recent years," notes the RT reporter, citing the name of the Anglo-American zoologist who was the subject of at least five Gospa News investigations before being targeted by international newspapers such as the Daily Mail and Die Velt for his egregious conflict of interest: He was called on to investigate a Coronavirus manipulated in Wuhan and Chapel Hill thanks to generous funding from EHA, a New York-based NGO sponsored by, among others, the well-known vaccine manufacturer Johson & Johnson.

But EHA's partners also include King Saudi University, the kingdom's first public university, founded in 1957 by King Saud bin Abdulaziz in the capital and with a prestigious College of Pharmacy. This is one of the most prestigious universities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which in turn financed the Global Health Security Agenda global immunisation plan promoted by Obama and Gates and culminating in the pilot project of 12 compulsory school-age vaccines in Italy, thanks to which the multinational GlaxoSmithKline (also strong with its subsidiary GSK Saudi Arabia) became rich and for which the current WHO deputy director Ranieri Guerra was scientific ambassador for the Renzi government.

LANCET GURU'S CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Daszak enjoys such great prestige in the international scientific community that he was called by the journal The Lancet to lead the WHO-like commission on the origin of the SARS-Cov-2 virus although its implications with the Wuhan laboratory are well known, which the Russia Today investigation explores in detail.

"First, he is a close friend and ardent supporter of Shi Zhengli, director of the Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases at WIV, who has been repeatedly forced to deny that his lab was the source of the coronavirus. In June 2020, Scientific American described the pair as 'long-time collaborators' - Daszak also strenuously defended his collaborator, stating that she 'leads a world-class laboratory of the highest standards' and dismissed accusations that she or her organisation was in any way. responsible for the spread of Covid'.

Anglo-American zoologist Peter Daszak together with Chinese batwoman Shi Zhengli

From 2014 to 2019, Daszak worked with Zhengli to investigate and catalogue bat coronaviruses across China, a $3.7 million initiative funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). Subsequently, the head of EcoHealth transferred this effort to the University of North Carolina, where he began "Gain of Function" research on coronaviruses and chimeras in humanised mice. Gain of Function is an enhancement of viral load similar to the concept of uranium enrichment for atomic weapons.

In a December 2019 interview, he somewhat ominously told virologist Vincent Racaniello that some coronaviruses can "enter human cells," can be "manipulated in the lab fairly easily," are incurable with antibodies, and "you can't vaccinate against them with a vaccine."


NIH withdrew its support for the EcoHealth project in April 2020 under pressure from the Trump administration, a move that garnered significant media attention for the organisation and Daszak. The move was reversed with much fanfare in August and EcoHealth's funding more than doubled to $7.5 million. However, what no media outlet has noticed at any stage is that the non-profit organisation's NIH support represents a negligible fraction of US government revenue. The vast majority of EcoHealth's revenue, amounting to nearly $40 million between 2013 and 2020, comes from the Department of Defense (DoD)."

THE PENTAGON AGENCY AND SUPERVIRUSES

A State Department fact sheet on WIV published in January and cited by Klarenberg notes that "several researchers" at the Institute became ill in fall 2019, "prior to the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illnesses," raising questions about the credibility of Zhengli's claims that "zero infection" among WIV staff and students prior to the pandemic. The fact sheet also stated that "scientists in China conducted research on animal-derived coronaviruses under conditions that increased the risk of accidental and potentially unintentional exposure" and "secret Chinese military projects" may have been conducted at the Institute since at least 2017.

"Perhaps predictably, there was no mention that the US military may have funded, directly or indirectly, projects conducted at WIV. Interestingly, $34.6 million of EcoHealth's DoD funding came from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), a division of the Pentagon that works to "counter and deter weapons of mass destruction and improvised threat networks,"" the reporter on RT remarked.

We should not forget that the DTRA agency controls at least 25 bacteriological laboratories around the world, secreted by diplomatic immunity and the CIA, especially in the former Soviet Union countries such as Georgia and Ukraine where coup revolutions took place, financed by the Hungarian-American pultar George Soros and the USA, through the government agency USAID which is considered a CIA financial tool for regime-change. But USAID has also financed research on superviruses in China and the US as part of the PREDICT 2 coronavirus project commissioned by Obama when Haines was deputy director of counterintelligence at Langley (CIA headquarters in Virginia).

One of these bio-laboratories, the Lugar Center near Tblisi, has been accused by Russia of developing dangerous bacteriological weapons experiments after a death of human guinea pigs during clinical trials conducted on a drug by the multinational pharmaceutical company Gilead, a Pentagon contractor, which enriched itself in the Covid-19 emergency through the anti-inflammatory Remdesivir, of which the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the first to acquire the patent for its production in China.

Despite these intrigues behind chimeric superviruses Daszak, as confirmed by the emails, convinced 27 other colleagues to deny the origin of the lab-made SARS-Cov-2 from the outset, although Gospa News has since unveiled extensive research into recombinant viruses since 2004, created from 2003 HIV/AIDS-infected SARS strains, the presence of which was identified in SARSCov-2 by studies by Indian biologists, virologist Luc Montagnier and bioengineer Pierre Bricage.

"The publication of the letter was very significant, as it publicly cemented the idea of a scientific consensus on the origins of Covid. This 'consensus' emerged shortly after a genome selection of the new SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus had been released for analysis," Russia Today recalls.

MIT WRITES ABOUT ARTIFICIAL VIRUS

As Charles Schmidt noted on 18. March in the Technology Review of MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge), several scientists who had begun studying the draft were surprised by what they discovered. Among them was Nikolai Petrovsky, a highly regarded professor at Australia's Flinders University and chairman of Vaxine, a company that develops immunisations for infectious diseases, which has received millions in NIH funding since 2005.

"[Computer modelling] generated a surprising result: the spike proteins that attach SARS-CoV-2 bind more tightly to their human cellular receptor, a protein called ACE2, than the target receptors on any other species evaluated. In other words, SARS-CoV-2 was surprisingly well adapted to its human prey, which is unusual for an emerging pathogen," the Technology Review records. Petrovsky and his collaborators immediately began writing a speculative paper asking whether the virus was 'completely natural' or had originated from 'a recombination event that occurred inadvertently or intentionally in a laboratory handling coronaviruses'. As Technology Review notes, however, it had become 'professional suicide for scientists to express suspicions of a possible leak from the lab' and the community was 'reluctant to challenge orthodoxy' as a result....

"Petrovsky struggled to find a publisher, with at least one open access repository rejecting his work outright. It wasn't until May 2020 that the paper was finally released, and by then suggestions of a leak from the lab had been completely discredited, not least because of Trump's statements on the issue that had made the matter political. In turn, it was virtually impossible for journalists to write credible stories questioning Covid's origins without being branded as Trump apologists, conspiracy theorists or worse," Klarenberg concludes.

Now even pandemic prophetess Avril Haines, head of the US Intelligence Community, has begun to make a tentative admission about the possibility that SARS-Cov-2 was created in a laboratory. But strong in her CIA background, sooner or later she will have to explain what she knows about a pandemic planned for decades that contributed to the electoral success of President Biden, funded by Pfizer, among the first to produce the anti-Covid vaccine, which joined the cartel of Big Pharma created by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation on 30 September to support the WHO's immunisation plan in poor countries called COVAX, run by Gates' NGO Gavi and administered by a former GSK manager, a multinational that controls Pfizer's commercial pharmaceutical network. It is therefore not surprising to learn that Biden has funded COVAX to the tune of $4 million, thus giving back to Gates' Big Pharma even more than he received in the election campaign...

For all the background, buy the book WuhanGates...

Author:

Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio
© COPYRIGHT GOSPA NEWS
divieto di riproduzione senza autorizzazione

ORIGINAL ARTICLE HERE

(Translation 1/3 FGCC - 2/3 ET)

 

May 2021
S M T W T F S
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31