Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Scientist at center of lab leak controversy to lead the Lancet’s task force to investigate virus origin

By Steve Watson | Summit News | June 4, 2021

Revered scientific journal The Lancet has created a ‘task force’ to investigate the origins of the coronavirus that caused a global pandemic, yet it has decided to employ as its leader the very guy who funded the dangerous gain of function research at the Wuhan lab and subsequently allegedly ‘bullied’ other scientists into avoiding looking into the lab as a potential source of the outbreak.

In the wake of renewed scrutiny of the lab leak hypothesis, the Lancet’s task force will reportedly “focus on analyzing data on all of the theories put forward on the origins of COVID, on the reasons why SARS-CoV-2 was able to break out of Wuhan and spread globally, and on the most plausible strategies to prevent future pandemics.”

It also states that “The Task Force will review thoroughly and objectively all publicly available evidence, particularly the peer-reviewed literature, and conduct interviews with key leaders in science, medicine, policy and civil society.”

‘Objectively’. Right.

Dr Peter Daszak, who is heading up this task force, is perhaps the least suitable scientist on the planet to objectively analyse the data, given his track record.

Daszak, as President of the EcoHealth Alliance, shovelled at least $600,000 to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in the past few years to play around with coronaviruses inside the lab through the now infamous ‘gain of function’ research.

Daszak, who also works for the World Health Organisation, is on record admitting that he was involved with manipulating coronaviruses. Here is a video of him talking in DECEMBER 2019 about how ‘good’ the viruses are for altering in a lab:

Daszak notes that “coronaviruses are pretty good… you can manipulate them in the lab pretty easily… the spiked proteins drive a lot about what happens. You can get the sequence you can build the protein, we work with Ralph Baric at UNC to do this, insert into the backbone of another virus and do some work in a lab.”

No wonder then that Daszak as lead investigator for the WHO investigation  determined within 3 hours of visiting the Wuhan lab in February 2021 that there was ‘nothing to see here’?

Recently released emails now document that Daszak thanked Dr Fauci for dismissing the lab leak theory before any scientific research had been done on the possibility.

Daszak was later employed as an ‘expert fact checker’ by Facebook when it was monitoring and removing ‘misinformation’ about the origins of COVID on its platform, much of which was credible scientific research. Facebook has since reversed the policy of banning any posts containing information suggesting COVID-19 was “man-made”.

Daszak’s Twitter profile is basically one long ‘it came from bats not a lab’ thread, much to the annoyance of some other scientists:

Why does this guy keep getting put in charge of investigations, task forces and ‘fact checking’, when it’s abundantly clear that he has the biggest motive to dismiss the lab leak notion?

As microbiologist Professor Richard Ebright has noted, “Daszak was the contractor who funded the laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology that potentially was the source of the virus with subcontracts from $200million [£142million] from the US Department of State and $7million [£5million] from the US National Institutes of Health and he was a collaborator and co-author on research projects at the laboratory.”

Daszak has already lied about the type of research that was being conducted at the Wuhan lab, claiming, after the outbreak happened, that he didn’t know if it was gain of function or not. His own previous statements, and the Fauci emails prove he knew full well what was going on in the lab.

In addition, as reported by The Daily Mail and other outlets, Daszak “orchestrated a ‘bullying’ campaign and coerced top scientists into signing off on a letter to The Lancet aimed at removing blame for Covid-19 from the Wuhan lab he was funding with US money.”

Daszak used his influence to get the journal to publish the letter, which stated that to even suggest the lab leak theory had any credibility was equal to spreading “fear, rumours, and prejudice.”

It effetely shut down discussion among the scientific ‘consensus’ of the lab leak potential for a whole year until intelligence findings brought the matter back to the attention of the mainstream media.

WHO scientific advisor Jamie Metzl described Daszak’s letter as “scientific propaganda and a form of thuggery and intimidation.”

“By labelling anyone with different views a conspiracy theorist, the Lancet letter was the worst form of bullying in full contravention of the scientific method,” Metzl added.

The letter further stated that “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin,” and even had the audacity to state that “We declare no competing interests.”

Indeed, Daszak had made sure that the letter would be devoid of any link to EcoHealth, and even considered leaving his own name off it, emails released via the Freedom of Information Act have revealed.

To make matters worse, the other members of The Lancet’s task force are practically all minions of Daszak, some of whom helped him draft the letter that unequivocally stated the lab leak theory was dangerous, and others who either worked with him on ‘fact checking’ for Facebook, or were cited as sources during that activity.

Taking all this into account, it is obvious what the outcome of The Lancet’s inquiry will be, and it should not and cannot be used as credible evidence against the lab leak theory.

June 4, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | | Leave a comment

The Finders: CIA Ties to Child Sex Cult Obscured as Coverage Goes from Sensationalism to Silence

By Elizabeth Vos | MintPress News | June 3, 2021

WASHINGTON — In February 1987, an anonymous phone tip was called into the Tallahassee police department reporting that six children were dirty, hungry, and acting like animals in the custody of two well-dressed men in a Tallahassee, Florida park. That phone call would kick off the Finders scandal: a series of events and multiple investigations even more bizarre than the initial report.

The trail would ultimately lead to allegations of a cult involved in ritual abuse, an international child-trafficking ring, evidence of child abuse confirmed and later denied, and ties with the CIA, which was alleged to have interfered in the case. No one was ever prosecuted in the wake of the initial 1987 investigation or a 1993 inquiry into the allegations of CIA involvement: official denials were maintained, and authorities stated that no evidence of criminal activity was ever found. However, documents that have emerged over time beg significant questions as to the validity of the official narrative.

In contrast with other historical human trafficking rings covered in the independent press, including those I have previously discussed, the Finders scandal presents as something of a phantom. This is in consequence of the lack of adult victims who have come forward, an absence of hard evidence viewable to the public, and an absence of extensive trials or convictions. Further impeding the willingness of most journalists to cover such a story were claims of ritualistic abuse that were hyped by corporate media at the time of the incident, as well as allegations of a CIA-led coverup that were less widely recognized by the legacy press.

The story is further complicated by the fact that it takes place in three basic stages: the initial 1987 investigation spread across multiple states and law enforcement agencies; a subsequent 1993 inquiry into allegations of a CIA coverup and interference in the 1987 investigation; and the emergence of Customs Service documents detailing new aspects of initial searches of Finders properties which was followed by the publication of hundreds of documents from both investigations to the FBI vault in 2019.

By initially sensationalizing the issue via the framing of the Finders as a satanic cult, the media profited from immediate shock value while permitting this very sensationalism to become the premise for dismissing other aspects of the story and Finders ties to the CIA to remain unexplored.

The 1987 Investigation

On February 4, 1987, two men dressed in suits and ties in the company of six bug-bitten, dirty, hungry children were arrested in Tallahassee, Florida, on charges of child abuse after a concerned citizen called local police. Initially, Tallahassee police were concerned that the children might have been kidnapped and were being trafficked across state lines. The U.S. Customs Service, the Washington Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), and the FBI became involved in the attempt to identify the two men based on suspicions of interstate criminal activity including the possibility of child pornography.

The story exploded on a national scale after investigators linked the pair, identified as Douglas Ammerman and Michael Houlihan (also referred to as Michael Holwell), with a Washington D.C.-based group known as the Finders, which authorities publicly referred to as a “cult.” Initially, Tallahassee police reported that at least two of the children showed signs of sexual abuse.

Houlihan and Ammerman first told police that they were transporting the children to a school for brilliant children in Mexico. However, this explanation as to the purpose of the children’s trip would change significantly, with Finders members later stating that the group were on an adventure in Florida. The Finders group was found to have multiple properties in Washington, D.C. and a farm in rural Madison County, Virginia. It also became clear that the Finders were highly skilled with early computer technology, which would become a major aspect of the case as it unfolded.

Doug Ammerman and Michael Holwell sit in Leon County Court during a bond hearing related to charges of child abuse. Credit | Tallahassee Democrat

News reports across the country headlined allegations of ritual abuse for approximately six days after the initial arrests, before a tidal shift by both the media and authorities began on February 10. The New York Times reported on that day:

Local police officials announced here today that six children found last week in Florida had apparently not been kidnapped and that there was no evidence to show that the secretive group that has been raising them is a cult involved in child abuse. The statement from the Metropolitan Police Department conflicted with accounts from the police in Tallahassee, Fla., where the children were found, unwashed and hungry, last week. Officials there said this morning that at least two of the children had signs of sexual abuse.

As described by the Times and the Chicago Tribune, the children were placed in police protective custody after threats were received at the shelters where they had originally been housed. Eventually, the mothers of the children were reported to have been Finders members and the children were said to be transported by Houlihan and Ammerman with the full consent of their parents. Hence, suspicions of kidnapping and trafficking rapidly lost credibility, though issues of abuse remained. The original strong allegations of sexual abuse of at least two of the six children were eventually contradicted by Florida authorities.

In March 1987, Houlihan and Ammerman were released with charges dropped for lack of evidence, and all of the children were eventually returned to their mothers. The official and media consensus was that the entire issue was a miscommunication blown out of proportion, and that the Finders were simply a 1960’s-esque “alternative lifestyle community” with unusual education methods.

The 1993 inquiry into an Intelligence Community coverup

U.S. Customs Special Agent Ramon J. Martinez claimed in a memorandum that during his participation in the searches of two of the Finder’s properties in Washington he witnessed evidence of the Finders’ intent to traffic children and other potentially criminal acts. Martinez wrote that he was unable to review the evidence collected at the locations after multiple attempts to do so, and that he was eventually told by a third party at the MPD precinct that the Finders group had come under the protection of the CIA, which had interfered with the investigation by deeming the issue an “internal matter,” and had the case files labeled “Secret,” with no further action to be taken or evidence available for review. Clearly, Martinez’s account detailing what he witnessed presents a strong counter-narrative to the official story.

A man named Skip Clements allegedly communicated the U.S. Customs documents and other records to then-Florida Rep. Tom Lewis (R) and North Carolina Rep. Charlie Rose (D). Stemming in part from their protests, as well as the prospect of CBS’s 48 Hours producing a segment on the Finders story (which never aired), the Department of Justice announced it would investigate allegations of CIA interference in the 1987 investigation in late 1993. The previously mentioned congressmen claimed publicly that the Finders may have benefited from protection of the U.S. government agencies, with U.S.News & World Report writing in December 1993, (as the DOJ investigation was getting underway), that Lewis had asked:

Could our own government have something to do with this Finders organization and [have] turned their backs on these children? That’s what the evidence points to…. I can tell you that we’ve got a lot of people scrambling, and that wouldn’t be happening if there was nothing here.”

The DOJ’s investigation resulted in a verdict of no evidence of CIA interference and no evidence of criminal activity on the part of the Finders, and it represented the official and legal end of the story.

The 2019 publication of FBI Vault documents

Eventually, Customs documents including Ramon Martinez’s memo made their way onto the internet. The exact method by which this occurred remains murky, with the best copy of the documents being hosted by the website of now-deceased Ted Gunderson, who served as an FBI special agent in charge and head of the Los Angeles FBI.

I contacted Martinez in 2017 and confirmed that he authored the document and that it is genuine, but to date, he has otherwise refused to go on record to comment on the matter with me. Martinez has had limited communication with some other independent journalists, including Derrick Broze of the Conscious Resistance, who produced a documentary on the Finders case in 2019. I also described aspects of the Martinez memo and the Finders case as part of a report on alleged intelligence-tied child abuse scandals penned in August 2019 in the wake of Jeffrey Epstein’s death and renewed public interest in the overall subject matter.

Just months after Epstein’s death, in October 2019, the FBI began releasing hundreds of Finders investigation documents to their Vault. The publication sparked a storm of attention, but virtually no corporate press coverage aside from a piece by Vice, which framed any interest in the subject as a conspiracy theory.


Mainstream media outlets have been quick to dismiss CIA ties to The Finder’s as little more than conspiracy

On their face, the contents of the FBI Vault documents appear to contradict the allegations made by former Special Agent Martinez: they include statements from multiple officers involved in the investigation from various agencies to the effect that they experienced no overt interference in their work from the CIA. Yet, when one looks closely, the documents also corroborate significant aspects of Martinez’s allegations and substantiate questions regarding the Finders’ links with intelligence.

There is the admission that Isabelle Pettie, the wife of Finders leader Marion Pettie, worked for the CIA during the Cold-War era (Pettie also admitted that his son worked for the CIA-linked, Iran Contra-era Air America), and that it was her visas to North Korea, North Vietnam, Russia and elsewhere that had been approved by the State Department. Key documents from the MPD investigation are labeled secret, just as Martinez had claimed, which is bizarre on its face if we are to believe that the Finders were simply an odd “alternative living” commune.

These and other corroborating details add credibility to Martinez’s claims regarding having witnessed other documents that indicated international child trafficking, as well as his assertion that he was told that the case had been deemed a “CIA internal matter.”

The FBI’s Vault publication includes records from the preliminary Tallahassee police department investigation, the MPD investigation, heavily redacted records from the U.S. Customs Service, documents from the Washington Metro Field Office (WMFO) of the FBI, and other agencies, as well as the correspondence and documentation of the 1993 inquiry, mostly from the WMFO to FBI Headquarters. The documents are scattered throughout the three published sections in no coherent order, and are interspersed with news reports from the time ranging from the initial arrests and the child custody issue to the 1993 inquiry into CIA connections with and protection of the group.

Bizarrely, a map relating to the McMartin Preschool scandal is also included in the publication for no known reason, since at this time the cases are completely unrelated aside from both having contained allegations of satanic abuse. Regardless of the intent behind the document’s inclusion, it serves to further associate the Finders with the so-called “moral panic” scandals of the era, which I would argue distracts from the issue of intelligence ties to the case.

A map of the McMartin Preschool inexplicably included in the FBI’s Vault release

A fresh look

Before moving further into analysis of the available evidence, it’s important to recognize a number of problems we face in understanding the information published in the FBI’s Vault. First, a multitude of large, often critically placed redactions plague the documents, the most important of which are not labeled with privacy exemptions but are instead labeled “S,” presumably meaning that the information is classified as secret.

Another problem involves the fact that information requested by some agencies — especially during the 1993 preliminary inquiry into a CIA coverup — was not provided to the relevant investigating agencies. Then there is the phenomenon of information disappearing outright, including vanishing evidence and instances of records never having been kept, resulting in conflicting accounts of the existence of critical pieces of evidence.

This series will challenge both the sensationalism and the silence of establishment media surrounding the Finders narrative by examining the allegations made by the U.S. Customs documents in view of the FBI’s more recent Vault publications, which shed fresh light on the connections between the Finders and the U.S. intelligence apparatus.

Elizabeth Vos is an independent journalist and MintPress News Contributor. Her work has appeared in many media outlets including Consortium News, where she co-hosts the CNLive! webcast.

June 4, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular | , , , | 3 Comments

Report on Turkey smuggling weapons to Al-Qaeda in Syria shows why Russia’s desire to halt ‘aid’ was right

By Eva Bartlett | RT | June 4, 2021

New allegations that aid trucks to Syria from Turkey carried weapons for terrorists have surfaced. But it’s unlikely to convince those in the West to change their tune that Russia was wrong to want border crossings closed.

In July 2020, there were those who self-righteously railed at Russia for allegedly denying humanitarian aid to Syrians. They screamed that in calling for crossings to be closed, Russia was attempting to starve and choke civilians in need of assistance.

The Russian mission to the UN, however, maintains that ample aid is delivered from within Syria, via various agencies, including the UN. It argues that delivering aid from outside of Syria is no longer necessary, since most of the country has returned to peace and security. I haven’t come across a Russian representative who has stated so, but wonder if another reason Russia wanted cross-border ‘aid’ from Turkey halted was because it knew weapons were being smuggled to terrorists in Syria?

On May 30, Sedat Peker, a Turkish mobster and former ally to Turkish President Recep Erdogan, published a new video in a series he has been releasing on criminal activities among Erdogan’s inner circle. In this latest video, Peker spoke of the weapons and vehicles sent to Al-Qaeda in Syria, and that the contractor behind these shipments was a company called SADAT, run by Erdogan’s former chief military advisor.

“Our trucks went under the name of Sedat Peker Aid Convoy. We knew other trucks that went on my behalf carried weapons. This was organized by a team within SADAT. No registration, no paperwork applied to these shipments that crossed directly [to Syria],” said Peker.

The revelations should not come as a surprise. In January 2013, the late journalist Serena Shim, as I wrote, exposed how terrorists and arms were smuggled into Syria from Turkey, noting World Food Organization trucks were being used. In October 2014, Shim was killed in a car accident, shortly after telling Press TV she feared for her life and that Turkish intelligence had accused her of being a spy. Her family, and inquiring journalists, believed it was down to Turkish foul play, noting the official story of Shim’s death changing. The US government didn’t investigate the suspicious death of one of its citizens in Turkey.

As Shim reported, if WFO trucks were at one point used to smuggle arms into Syria, can you blame Russia or Syria if they are indeed sceptical of supposed ‘aid’ entering from Turkey?

But whenever the issue of aid crossing into Syria is brought up at the UN Security Council, the narrative is usually to ‘blame Russia’. Hysterical headlines aside, is it really likely that Russia, with the world’s eyes on its every move, is actually trying to starve civilians in Syria? It is Russia, remember, that has demined vast areas of Syria formerly occupied by terrorist factions in order for local people to be able to return to their areas. It is also Russia that delivered aid to Raqqa, the city completely flattened by the US and allies in the pretext of fighting terrorism.

Syria’s cross-border mechanism (CBM) began in 2014, when – due to the presence of terrorist groups – aid couldn’t be delivered from within the country. The Security Council established the CBM, with four crossings into Syria: two from Turkey, one from Iraq, the last from Jordan. In December 2019, all except the Bab al-Hawa crossing from Turkey were closed down, with aid being coordinated via Damascus.

But as Russian representatives at the UN pointed out in a statement in July 2020, by then the situation had changed, with most of Syria back under the control of the government. Sending aid to those who need it can be done from within the country. Western media suggested that Syria would use the closure of crossings to starve its civilians, but the reality is that Damascus has consistently cooperated in sending aid, while the US has in the past stymied aid delivery.

Russia’s statement also noted, “The UN still has no presence in Idlib de-escalation zone which is controlled by international terrorists and fighters. It’s not a secret that the terrorist groups control certain areas of the de-escalation zone and use the UN humanitarian aid as a tool to exert pressure on [the] civil population and openly make profit from such deliveries.”

But amid a round of finger pointing, the West and allies continued to criticise Russia for wanting to end the CBM. In response, the Russian Federation’s representative to the UN Security Council wondered whether the UN’s OCHA (Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs) could go to Idlib to see if terrorists occupying that region were respecting the Declaration of Commitment some had signed regarding aid deliveries.

This was a valid point, given that in areas previously occupied by terrorists, most civilians never saw the ample aid sent in by Syria and agencies. Terrorist groups controlled and hoarded the aid, from east Aleppo to Madaya to al-Waer, to eastern Ghouta. So it was by no means a stretch of the imagination to assume the same might play out in Idlib, particularly since the terrorists included factions from the aforementioned regions, who were bussed to Idlib as the cities and towns finally returned to peace.

The Russian statement also addressed frenzied Western claims that the other closed crossings were the only means to send aid to civilians in the north-east of Syria. It read, “In total, since the beginning of 2020 when ‘Al Yarubiyah’ was closed, more humanitarian aid has been delivered to the north-east of Syria than in previous years.”

Still the narrative continued, though, and in March 2021, the dictator of Human Rights Watch, Ken Roth, tweeted about “Putin starving Syria”, resurrecting the cries over the unnecessary, and closed, crossings. But his claim prompted an angry response from some.

So who is actually starving civilians in Syria? Aside from terrorists hoarding food and denying it to the local people, there are more significant reasons for their preventable suffering. And these are the West’s sanctions against them, particularly the June 2020 Caesar Act.

Last year, James Jeffrey, the then US Special Representative for Syria Engagement, was quoted as saying the latest sanctions would contribute to the fall of the Syrian pound. What a wonderful way to “protect” Syrians. In US parlance, “protect” means “starve.”

As I walk around Damascus, I ask about the cost of food, and whether people can afford to feed their families. Most say their salaries aren’t sufficient: food prices have skyrocketed, salaries have not. Most describe adopting a more vegetarian diet – chicken and meats are too expensive to have more than once a month, or at all.

Furthermore, there is the US occupation forces’ thieving or destroying of Syrian resources. On that, Dr. Bashar Ja’afari, in his former post as Syria’s permanent representative to the UN, in June 2020, said, “When the United States daily steals 200,000 barrels of oil from the Syrian oil fields, 400,000 tons of cotton, 5,000,000 sheep and sets fire to thousands of hectares of wheat fields, and deliberately weakens the value of the Syrian pound, and when it imposes coercive economic measures aiming to choke the Syrian people and occupying parts of the Syrian lands, and when the US representative expresses her concern over the deteriorating situation of the Syrian citizen’s living conditions the logical question will be are not these acts the symptoms of political schizophrenia?”

But as usual the US and its allies blame Russia and Syria for the suffering in Syria, whitewashing their own very long litany of crimes there.

Although the smuggling of weapons and terrorists via Turkey has been openly known for years, it’s rather amusing that it takes a petty mobster, and not Western media or leadership, to draw new attention to it. No, as terrorists use those weapons to fight the Syrian government (and rival terrorist factions, and civilians), the West is only concerned about blaming Russia and Syria. Ten years of lies and war against the people of Syria just aren’t enough for America and its allies.

Eva Bartlett is a Canadian independent journalist and activist. She has spent years on the ground covering conflict zones in the Middle East, especially in Syria and Palestine (where she lived for nearly four years).

June 4, 2021 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Most Americans believe COVID came from Wuhan Lab; a quarter believe it was ‘released on purpose’

Only 13% are still buying that ‘it came naturally from bats’

By Steve Watson | Summit News | June 4, 2021

Most Americans believe that the coronavirus pandemic originated in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, with almost a quarter saying they believe it was released on purpose, according to a YouGov poll.

A total of 58% of Americans agree that its is ‘definitely or probably true’ that the virus came out of the Wuhan lab.

The number represents a nine percent increase on findings from a year ago.

Even 43% of Democrats believe the virus came out of the lab.

Only 13% are still buying the ‘it mutated naturally from bats’ claim.

Indeed, YouGov notes “When it comes to the more specific circumstances of the virus’ emergence, 24% think it was created in a laboratory and was released on purpose, 18% think it was lab-created and escaped by accident, while a further 12% think it was a naturally occurring disease that was being examined in a laboratory but was released by accident.”

This is despite a massive co-ordinated attempt by the establishment media and big-tech to censor and dismiss the lab leak idea as a crazy ‘conspiracy theory’.

June 4, 2021 Posted by | Aletho News | , | 7 Comments

Why Is There Such Reluctance to Discuss Natural Immunity?

By Jon Sanders | AIER | June 4, 2021

If you’re among those of us who aren’t tribally invested in Covid politics but would like good information about when life will resume as normal, chances are you’re interested in herd immunity. You’re likely not interested in having to rely on the Internet Archive for good information on herd immunity. Alas, it’s become a go-to place for retrieving, as it were, previously published information on herd immunity that became inconvenient post-vaccine and then virtually Memory-Holed.

Over the past 15 months, the litany of Experts’ True Facts and Science regarding various aspects of SARS-CoV-2 has changed more often than the starting lineup of a bad minor league ball club. Covid-19 is spread by droplets, especially from asymptomatic people, until one day it was airborne all along and people who weren’t sick in all likelihood weren’t even sick. Stay at home, you’re safer indoors, even stay away from parks and beaches; well, actually, outdoors is the place to be. Masks don’t work against viruses and are actually unhealthy to wear if you’re not sick, then suddenly they did work and without one you might as well be shooting people. Everyone knows and PolitiFact verified that the virus couldn’t have been created in the prominent infectious disease lab doing gain-of-function research on coronaviruses in bats coincidentally at Covid Ground Zero until, one day, PolitiFact had to retract the entire “Pants on Fire!” article. And so forth.

Unfortunately, information about herd immunity has also not been immune to this kind of meddling. Until recent months, people readily understood that active immunity came about either by natural immunity or vaccine-induced immunity. Natural immunity comes from battling and defeating an actual infection, then having your immune system primed for the rest of your life to fight it off if it ever shows up again. This immunity is achieved at a sometimes very high personal price.

Vaccine-induced immunity is to prime your immune system with a weaker, non-threatening form of the invading infection, so that it’s ready to fight off the real thing should you ever encounter it, and without your having first to risk severe illness or death.

Those interested in herd immunity in itself likely don’t have a moral or political preference for one form of immunity to the exclusion of the other. Immunity is immunity, regardless of whether a particular person has it naturally or by a vaccine. All immunity contributes to herd immunity.

Others, however, are much less circumspect. They seem to have forgotten the ultimate goal of the public campaign for people to receive vaccination against Covid-19. It’s not to be vaccinated; it’s to have immunity. People with natural immunity — i.e., people whose immune systems have faced Covid-19 and won — don’t need a vaccine.

They do, however, need to be considered in any good-faith discussion of herd immunity. There are two prongs to herd immunity, as we used to all know, and those with natural immunity are the prong that’s being ignored. It’s not just mere oversight, however. Fostering such ignorance can lead to several bad outcomes:

  • People with natural immunity could be kept from employment, education, travel, normal commerce, and who knows what other things if they don’t submit to a vaccine they don’t need in order to fulfill a head count that confuses a means with the end
  • The nation could already be at herd immunity while governors and health bureaucrats continue to exert extreme emergency powers, harming people’s liberties and livelihoods
  • People already terrified of Covid — including especially those who’ve already had it — would continue to live in fear, avoiding human interaction and worrying beyond all reason
  • People could come to distrust even sound advice from experts about important matters, as they witness and grow to expect how what “the experts” counsel diverges from what they know to be wise counsel while it conforms to and amplifies the temporary needs of the political class

Those of us wanting good information certainly don’t want any of those outcomes. But others seem perfectly fine to risk them. They include not only elected officials, members of the media, political talking heads, self-important bureaucrats, and their wide-eyed acolytes harassing shoppers, but strangely also highly prominent health organizations.

For example, late last year Jeffrey Tucker showed that the World Health Organization (WHO) suddenly, and “for reasons unknown,” changed its definition of “herd immunity.” Using screenshots from a cached version on the Internet Archive, Tucker showed how the WHO altered its definition in such a way as to erase completely the role of natural immunity. Before, the WHO rightly said it “happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection.” The WHO’s change stated that it happens “if a threshold of vaccination is reached.” Not long after Tucker’s piece appeared, the WHO restored natural immunity to its definition.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), seemingly apropos of nothing, on May 19 issued a “safety communication” to warn that FDA-authorized SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests “should not be used to evaluate immunity or protection from COVID-19 at any time.” The FDA’s concern appears to be that taking an antibody test too soon after receiving a vaccination may fail to show vaccine-induced antibodies, but why preclude its use for “identifying people with an adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2 from a recent or prior infection?” Especially after stating outright that “Antibody tests can play an important role in identifying individuals who may have been exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and may have developed an adaptive immune response.”

Then there is the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director, Dr. Anthony Fauci, that ubiquitous font of fatuous guidance. He had told people that herd immunity would be at 60 to 70 percent immunity, and then he started publicly cinching those numbers up: 75 percent, 80 percent, 85 percent, even 90 percent (as if Covid-19 were as infectious as measles). He is quoted in the New York Times admitting to doing so deliberately to affect people’s behavior:

“When polls said only about half of all Americans would take a vaccine, I was saying herd immunity would take 70 to 75 percent,” Dr. Fauci said. “Then, when newer surveys said 60 percent or more would take it, I thought, ‘I can nudge this up a bit,’ so I went to 80, 85.

Now — or better put, as of this writing — Fauci has taken to arguing herd immunity is a “mystical elusive number,” a distracting “endgame,” and therefore not worth considering. Only vaccinations are worth counting. As he put it recently, “We don’t want to get too hung up on reaching this endgame of herd immunity because every day that you put 2 million to 3 million vaccinations into people [it] makes society be more and more protected.”

While composing an article about natural immunity and herd immunity for my home state of North Carolina, I happened to notice that the Mayo Clinic had removed a compelling factoid about natural immunity. It’s something I had quoted in an earlier discussion of the matter and wanted to revisit it.

Here’s what the Mayo Clinic once wanted people to know in its page on “Herd Immunity and COVID-19” with respect to natural immunity: “[T]hose who survived the 1918 flu (influenza) pandemic were later immune to infection with the H1N1 flu, a subtype of influenza A.” The Mayo Clinic pointed out that H1N1 was during the 2009-10 flu season, which would be 92 years later. That finding attested to just how powerful and long-lived natural immunity could be.

natural infection definition

As can be seen from the Internet Archive, however, sometime after April 14 the Mayo Clinic removed that compelling historical aside:

updated natural infection definition

The Mayo Clinic also reoriented its page to feature vaccination over “the natural infection method” (method? ) and added a section on “the outlook for achieving herd immunity in the U.S.” This new section stated that “it’s not clear if or when the U.S. will achieve herd immunity” but encouraged people nonetheless that “the FDA-authorized COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective at protecting against severe illness requiring hospitalization and death … allowing people to better be able to live with the virus.”

Why, from people who know better, is there so much interest in downplaying or erasing natural immunity?

Is it because it’s hard to quantify how many people have natural immunity? Is it out of a mix of good intentions and worry, that discussing natural immunity would somehow discourage (“nudge,” in Fauci’s term) people from getting vaccines who otherwise would? Is it simple oversight, being so focused on vaccinations that they just plain forgot about natural immunity? Or is something else at work?

Whatever the reason, it’s keeping Americans in the dark about how many people have active immunity from Covid-19. It’s keeping people needlessly fearful and suspicious of each other. It’s empowering executive overreach. Worst of all, it’s tempting people to consider government and business restrictions on the unvaccinated, regardless of their actual immunity.

Jon Sanders is an economist and the senior fellow of regulatory studies and research editor at the John Locke Foundation in Raleigh, North Carolina.

June 4, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | 1 Comment

Data sets, fraud, and the future

By Jon Rappoport | No More Fake News | June 4, 2021

Right off the bat, here is a scene from the near-future: AI takes a look at John Jones’ medical records, does instant collating, and comes up with a disease diagnosis.

Jones’ doctor’s office contacts Jones. Via Zoom, the doctor’s AI assistant slaps on a diagnosis, and an hour later, two bottles of medical drugs arrive at Jones’ door.

One problem: the data set assembled by AI is preposterous. Jones’ so-called symptoms don’t add up to a disease. Only in another data set, held by the CDC, do the symptoms require a disease-label.

There was a saying at the dawn of the Internet: garbage in, garbage out. But that was never the case. The predominant theme was always: garbage in, garbage eaten and digested and deployed.

The public is being treated to an awesome amount of propaganda, indicating that faster and more comprehensive handling of data means progress.

“We can profile this, we can predict that, we can discover what groups believe and don’t believe, we can organize efficient approaches to public safety, we can control traffic patterns, we can diagnose mental disorders, we can present customized ads to individuals, we can make cash completely electronic, etc.”

As if slicker manipulation of larger and larger data sets is, in some sense, “more accurate.”

Rube/yokel response: “Well, that’s good. Remove the human factor. AI is neutral. Data are analyzed objectively. Follow the science.”

When in fact, this manipulating and coordinating and organizing is an attractive cover for: bias based on the obsession to control populations.

Example: The psychiatric data set contains 300 labeled mental disorders. Clusters of behavioral symptoms are listed for each disorder. There are no lab tests. All the disorders are fakes. John Jones’ life has been profiled 16 ways from Sunday. He is diagnosed with mental disorder X-165 and prescribed a toxic drug that actually enhances the “symptoms” used to make the diagnosis—on top of which, he suffers brain damage. He’s now under control.

But the op is clean, bright and shiny, no human input. AI does it all. What yokel would object?

AI contacts Jones by Zoom: “Mr. Jones, we’ve carefully analyzed over a billion records of employment in the country. Yours was one of them. For the greater good—of which you’re a contributing member—your job has been deleted. However, we’ve found a somewhat comparable position in Duluth. You and your family will be moving there in two weeks.”

Wow. AI analyzed a billion records. Digested their import, mixed and matched a few hundred thousand other data sets labeled “greater good,” and came up with a solution. No Democrats, no Republicans, just engineers. Planners. Humanitarian AI.

Example: “We’re evacuating the area. A new coronavirus has been isolated. The danger of spread must be curtailed. Details to follow in the next hour. Prepare. All is well.”

Formidable early warning. Except, no new virus was isolated.

Example: “The planetary AI grid is modulating energy use in Germany and France. For the next 48 days, users will experience three brownouts per day. Schedule to follow. Brownouts in Tanzania and Argentina have been lifted.”

Three billion data sets were analyzed to arrive at those conclusions. The AI analysis took 58 minutes. Next month, the analysis will take 41 minutes.

The New York Times : “Earth climate-change programs 30% faster, Microsoft reports.”

MIT: “No human brain could calculate energy-use needs.”

A thousand new Fauci’s appear on the scene to explain to the public the wonders of data analysis, AI, and greater good.

A series of doddering Bidens and hammerhead Merkels are replaced by publicists fronting for AI engineers.

Data sets and AI are a million-layer cake sitting on top of, and concealing, false and sociopathic premises.

That’s the 21st century cover story.

There will be many types of blowback. For example, data warriors will arise; they’ll corrupt data sets, making them patently ridiculous, and disrupt the AI logic.

And in response, the System will keep developing new layers of AI control; replacing as many humans (potential rebels) as possible.

This article supplies context for my work exposing virus-isolation. “New viruses” are data constructs, cobbled together by AI programs from historical libraries of old gene-sequences. Those sequences, in turn, are nothing more than hypothetical strings of data, once upon a time assumed (without evidence) to describe other viruses.

Data sets, fraud, AI. Pillars of modern civilization.

“But… but AI has uses that are beneficial…”

Indeed. If that weren’t the case, the whole effort to establish AI technocratic tyranny would be exposed in two weeks.

June 4, 2021 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

The real conspirators who lied about Covid’s origin, funded fraudulent trials of therapeutics, and controlled the Covid pandemic are the top public health leaders

By Meryl Nass, MD | June 3, 2021

In very early 2020 there was a lot of chatter about where the virus, later named SARS-CoV-2, actually came from.  In an excellent, detailed article for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, former NY Times science writer Nicholas Wade describes how two short pieces published in The Lancet and Nature Medicine in Feb-March 2020 determined how this chatter would be channeled.

These two extraordinarily influential pieces, each simply titled as a “Correspondence,” were parroted by the mainstream media for a year. Each was plainly intended to shut down any discussion of a possible lab origin.

I happened to read both Correspondences in March 2020 and it was immediately apparent to me that each was designed as a propaganda tool. Neither had anything to do with science. In fact, the Andersen Correspondence butchered the science. Each had an unusual concatenation of authors.

I was so intrigued by these articles that I kept searching the net to understand them, and discovered that Francis Collins, the NIH Director, had blogged on March 26 about the Nature Medicine Correspondence, suggesting it should put an end to conspiracy theories about lab origin.

I further found the letter from the 3 heads of the US National Academy of Science, Engineering and Medicine, which had been referred to by the Lancet Correspondence authors. But it had not yet been published when the Lancet correspondence was written, suggesting again some hidden connection (or mutual effort) involving the author(s) of the National Academies letter and the Lancet Correspondence author(s).

I wondered why 5 otherwise credible scientists would sign their names to the Nature Medicine Correspondence, when the arguments made in the paper were nonsensical. I concluded that they had been put up to it by a ‘hidden hand,’ and when I was interviewed for the film that became Plandemic 2: Indoctornation I said so. (The film has been banned and shadowbanned, as have many of my writings, so it is impossible to find using google or a standard search engine. Here it is on Bitchute, using the Ecosia search engine.)

Months ago, in another email drop obtained by US Right to Know, we learned that Peter Daszac, CEO of the nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, was the primary but hidden author of the Lancet Correspondence. He was also the primary beneficiary, since his organization had been used as the pass through to send money from the NIAID to the Wuhan coronavirus lab. (Some might consider this method of giving out grants as a fancy way of money laundering.) Daszac, like Fauci, earned over $400,000/year. He was also a member of the WHO Covid origins investigative team, and had been selected as the head of the Lancet Covid origins investigative team. But the Lancet-sponsored investigation looks like it is now dead in the water. The WHO and the Lancet thus seem to be co-conspirators, choosing the fox (Daszac) to guard the henhouse (the natural origin theory of Covid).

Today, I was sent a link to a specific one of Fauci’s emails, and the mystery of why 5 well known scientists coauthored drivel, which the venerable Nature Medicine journal published, and which was then used as the foundation supporting the claim of Covid’s natural origin, was solved. Here’s the email.

The first author of the Nature Medicine paper thanks 3 incredibly important people for their “advice and leadership” regarding the paper. All 3 are MD researchers, and they dole out more money for medical research than anyone else in the world, perhaps excepting Bill Gates. Fauci runs the NIAID; Collins is the NIH Director (nominally Fauci’s boss) and Sir Jeremy Farrar is the director of the Wellcome Trust.  Jeremy also signed the Lancet letter. And he is the Chair of the World Health Organization R&D Blueprint Scientific Advisory Group, which put him in the driver’s seat of the WHO’s Solidarity trial, in which 1000 unwitting subjects were overdosed with hydroxychloroquine in order to sink the use of the drug for Covid. Jeremy had worked in Vietnam, where there was lots of malaria, and he had also been involved with SARS-1 there. He additionally was central in setting up the UK Recovery trial, where 1600 subjects were overdosed with hydroxychloroquine. I think he had some idea of the proper dose of the chloroquine drugs from his experience in Vietnam. But even if he didn’t, Farrar, Fauci and Collins would have learned about such overdoses after Brazil told the world about how they mistakenly overdosed patients in a trial of chloroquine for Covid, published in the JAMA in mid April 2020. Thirty-nine percent of the subjects in Brazil who were given high doses of chloroquine died, average age 50.

Yet the Solidarity and Recovery hydroxychloroquine trials continued into June, stopping only after their extreme doses were exposed.

Fauci made sure to control the treatment guidelines for Covid that came out of the NIAID, advising against both chloroquine drugs and ivermectin. Fauci’s NIAID also cancelled the first large-scale trial of hydroxychlorquine treatment in early disease, after only 20 of the expected 2,000 subjects were enrolled.

What does all this mean?

  1. There was a conspiracy between the five authors of the Nature Medicine paper and the heads of the NIH, NIAID and Wellcome Trust to cover up the lab origin of Covid.
  2. There was a conspiracy involving Peter Daszac, Tony Fauci and others to push the natural origin theory.

(See other emails in the recent drop.)

  1. There was a conspiracy involving Daszac to write the Lancet letter and hide its provenance, to push the natural origin theory and paint any other ideas as conspiracy theory. Collin’s blog post is another piece of this story.
  2. Farrar was intimately involved in both large HCQ overdose trials (in which about 500 subjects total died).
  3. Farrar, Fauci and Collins withheld research funds that could have supported quality trials of the use of chloroquines and ivermectin and other repurposed drugs that might have turned around the pandemic.
  4. Are the 4 individuals named here intimately involved in the creation of the pandemic, as well as the prolongation and improper treatments used during the pandemic?

Below are my two early posts on this subject from March and April 2020, and a snippet from the Lancet Correspondence, with a list of signatories.

I don’t want to take credit improperly. Dan Sirotkin noticed the Nature Medicine article before I did, and wrote lucidly about it. I did not see his writing until much later.

Thursday, March 26, 2020

There are many ways the novel coronavirus may have come about/ Nass

Nature Medicine ran a 3 page article that claimed to explain why the novel coronavirus is not a lab construct. USA Today wrote a summary piece explaining it:

“If someone were seeking to engineer a new coronavirus as a pathogen, they would have constructed it from the backbone of a virus known to cause illness,” the report said. “But the scientists found that the SARS-CoV-2 backbone differed substantially from those of already known coronaviruses and mostly resembled related viruses found in bats and pangolins.”—USAT

Yet it turns out to be a specious argument, relying on the fact that the novel coronavirus backbone sequence was not already known in the open virology literature.

  1. While starting from a known RNA sequence is one easy way to create a pathogen, it is certainly not necessary to do so.
  2. Nor is it likely that biodefense/biowarfare programs share knowledge of all their creations. They never have before.
  3. a) Finally, it is relatively easy to detect the human hand when a chimera of known virulence factors is strung together.
  4. b) But because plausible deniability is a critical component of a bioweapons attack, I doubt that a chimera using known sequences is the path that would have been followed by a modern biowarrior.

I will briefly mention some of the old techniques for creating bioweapons, none of which require that a known, published RNA backbone would be required to build a novel, virulent coronavirus:

  1.  China has unique bats. So do other countries. Unique bats likely harbor unique viruses. Bits of these viruses can be strung together, while no outside parties are aware that these particular RNA threads exist in nature.
  1.  You take an already virulent RNA virus, subject it to high rates of mutation via chemical or radiological exposure, and test the viruses that survive for the acquisition of new virulence characteristics.
  1.  You simply passage the virus through tens, hundreds or thousands of lab animals or cell cultures and test the results for acquisition of new virulence characteristics.
  1. You mix different viruses together with different virulence characteristics, allow them to grow together, and seek recombinants that have obtained the desired new mix of virulence factors.

All these possibilities result in viruses that are hard to pin on lab production. I dare the Nature Medicine scientists to dismiss these scenarios.

Still, I doubt that any national program would deliberately release this coronavirus onto the people of the earth, because it is so hard to control.

Historically, bio-weaponeers have required their creations to be controlled at all costs. In one well-documented example of biowarfare, unleashing African swine fever on a Caribbean island was associated with no spread beyond the island. In another, anthrax spores were used because they stay put– their use did not cause anthrax cases beyond the borders of Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe).

So why do we have a coronavirus epidemic now?

An accidental biowarfare laboratory release is the best current hypothesis, in my opinion. Such accidental releases have been documented for many decades, throughout the world. But I could certainly be wrong.

Update April 29: Newsweek has been delving into “gain of function” (which means increasing the virulence of a pathogen) coronavirus research in Wuhan, China which might have contributed to the formation of SARS-CoV-2… and the interesting fact (which I posted about here) that the US government provided financial support for this research. Newsweek’s pieces were posted April 27, and 29. My other pieces questioning the origin of SARS-CoV-2 are here and here.

Thursday, April 2, 2020

Why are some of the US’ top scientists making a specious argument about the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2?

  1.  I know about biological warfare/biodefense. I am the first person in the world (according to publicly available literature) to have analyzed an epidemic and demonstrated that the epidemic was due to biological warfare. (1992 study of the 1978-1980 Rhodesian anthrax outbreak, published in Medicine and Global Survival, aka Physicians for Social Responsibility Quarterly (name changed), hosted by International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War).

https://www.ippnw.org/pdf/mgs/psr-2-4-nass.pdf

  1.  Prior to genetic engineering techniques being developed (1973) and widely used (since late 1970s), more ‘primitive’ means of causing mutations, with the intention of developing biological weapons, were employed. Such methods were used by the Japanese beginning in the 1930s, by the US beginning in the 1940s, and by a number of other countries. They resulted in biological weapons that were tested, well-described, and in some cases, used. Such methods were also used subsequent to the 1970s.
  1.  These methods can result in biowarfare agents that lack the identifiable signature of a microbial agent constructed in a lab from known RNA or DNA sequences.  In fact, it would be desirable to produce such agents, since it would be difficult to prove they were deliberately constructed in a lab. Here are just a few possibilities for how one might create new, virulent mutants:
  1. a)  exposing microorganisms to chemical or radiological agents that cause high mutation rates and selecting for desired characteristics
  2. b)  passaging virus through a number of lab animals or tissue cultures
  3. c)  mixing viruses together and seeking recombinants with a new mix of virulence factors
  1.  Top scientists circled their wagons to protest against “conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin,”in a statement published in the LancetMarch 7. (It was published earlier online.) Their reported aim was to “stand with” public health professionals and scientists in China. Many who signed the statement have worked in biodefense. Signers include Rita Colwell, former director of the National Science Foundation, and James Hughes, former director of CDC’s National Center for Infectious Diseases and former assistant Surgeon General.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30418-9/fulltext

Science magazine wrote an article in support of these scientists, which included the following:

The authors of The Lancet statement note that scientists from several countries who have studied SARS-CoV-2 “overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife,” just like many other viruses that have recently emerged in humans. “Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus,” the statement says.

Five additional scientists soon provided the “scientific evidence” to back up the natural origin claim. These 5 scientists have been affiliated with signers of the statement above, they too have worked in biodefense, and their article was published in Nature Medicine (in the print version) on March 17, 2020.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9

These scientists  set up a straw man to knock down:  they claimed that had the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2 is the official name of the virus) been created in a lab: “if genetic manipulation had been performed,” then a known coronavirus backbone would have been used. But because no known backbone forms part of SARS-CoV-2, “the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus.”

As USA Today summarized this:

“If someone were seeking to engineer a new coronavirus as a pathogen, they would have constructed it from the backbone of a virus known to cause illness,” the report said. “But the scientists found that the SARS-CoV-2 backbone differed substantially from those of already known coronaviruses and mostly resembled related viruses found in bats and pangolins.”

Their work was then discussed by Francis Collins, the current director of the NIH.

https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2020/03/26/genomic-research-points-to-natural-origin-of-covid-19/

Dr. Collins says,

Some folks are even making outrageous claims that the new coronavirus causing the pandemic was engineered in a lab and deliberately released to make people sick. A new study debunks such claims by providing scientific evidence that this novel coronavirus arose naturally…

this study leaves little room to refute a natural origin for COVID-19… 

Finally, next time you come across something about COVID-19 online that disturbs or puzzles you, I suggest going to FEMA’s new Coronavirus Rumor Control web site…”

I know that the groups of scientists who wrote these pieces in the Lancet and Nature Medicine, as well as NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins, know that you don’t need genetic engineering methods to create a bioweapon. Like me, they are old, they recall a world before genetic engineering, they know the history of biowarfare, and they know the score. Why then are they participating in this charade?

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30418-9/fulltext

Statement in support of the scientists, public health professionals, and medical professionals of China combatting COVID-19

published online February 19, 2020

CORRESPONDENCE| VOLUME 395, ISSUE 10226, E42-E43, MARCH 07, 2020

… The rapid, open, and transparent sharing of data on this outbreak is now being threatened by rumours and misinformation around its origins. We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin. Scientists from multiple countries have published and analysed genomes of the causative agent, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2),

and they overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

,

as have so many other emerging pathogens.

,

This is further supported by a letter from the presidents of the US National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine

and by the scientific communities they represent. Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus.

June 4, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

ICAN OBTAINS OVER 3,000 PAGES OF TONY FAUCI’S EMAILS

ICAN | June 3, 2021

Last year, ICAN made FOIA requests to NIH for documents regarding COVID-19, including two requests for Anthony Fauci’s emails. ICAN has received nearly 3,000 emails sent by Fauci from early February 2020 through May 2020. Read what Fauci was saying privately about masks, therapeutics, vaccines, ventilators, and many other COVID-19 topics.

On April 10, 2020 and May 5, 2020, respectively, ICAN submitted the following two FOIA requests:

· All emails sent by Anthony Fauci between November 1, 2019 and the present that include the term Moderna or mRNA-1273 in any portion of the email.

· All emails sent by Anthony Fauci between November 1, 2019 and the present that include the terms SARS-CoV, COVID, COVID-19, or coronavirus in any portion of the email.

When NIH failed to respond to those requests, ICAN brought a lawsuit against the agency on June 29, 2020. In response, NIH agreed to produce Fauci’s emails on a rolling basis. To date, we have received 2,957 pages of Fauci’s sent emails dated between early February 2020 through May 2020 and will continue to receive email productions on a rolling basis.

Read Fauci’s emails here and a few highlights from these emails are outlined below:

  • February 5-6, 2020 (000239) – Fauci asked to recommend names for WHO group with the broad mission to “look at the origins and evolution of 2019n-CoV.” Fauci responds by seeking to reframe the mission in a manner that would only look for natural and not lab made origin.
  • February 7, 2020 (000189) – Fauci sent an internal NIAID communication reflecting that it was unlikely that the SARS-CoV-2 virus originated in a wet market.
  • February 16, 2020 (000447) – Fauci tells CBS reporter that if the mortality turns out to be 0.2% to 0.4%, then SARS-CoV-2 should be treated like a severe seasonal flu. But when the case fatality rate was later revised to between 0.2% and 0.4% by the CDC, Fauci continued to act as if the virus was something far more dangerous.
  • February 17, 2020 (000422) – Fauci receives communication from a Chinese citizen that is part of an international student program in the United States stating that, based on his contacts back in Wuhan, including correspondence from a nurse working in a Wuhan hospital, there is far more spread of the virus and far more deaths than China is admitting.
  • February 21, 2020 (000300) – Fauci asks a Deputy Director at NIAID to “Please handle” an email received by a group of doctors and scientists, including a virologist, that opined that “we think there is a possibility that the virus was released from a lab in wuhan (sic).”
  • February 23, 2020 (000257) – Fauci states “Transmission is definitely by respiratory droplet” and that “Children have very low rate of infection.”
  • February 22, 2020 (000274-277) – Fauci confirms that “The vast majority of people outside of China do not need to wear a mask. A mask is more appropriate for someone who is infected than for people trying to protect against infection.”
  • February 27, 2020 (000649) – Fauci tells Morgan Fairchild to tell her followers to be ready for “social distancing, teleworking, temporary closure of schools, etc.”
  • February 28, 2020 (001054) – Fauci, while uncertain what animal may have served as the intermediary jump from bats to humans for SARS-CoV-2, keeps repeating the narrative that it was a jump from bats through some natural non-lab means that was the origin of the virus.
  • February 28, 2020 (001059) – Fauci giving personal update to Mark Zuckerberg regarding developing a COVID-19 vaccine including telling Zuckerberg that “We may need help with resources” and that if there is a delay in the development timeline he just told Zuckerberg about, “I will contact you.”
  • March 1, 2020 (000922) – CBS’s Chief Medical Correspondent, seeking to please Fauci, emails Fauci a link to his segment which he appears to repeat what Fauci has told him, including that face masks “may give some partial protection by catching droplets containing virus but the virus is so tiny the virus can go right through it or around it” and describing the origin of the virus as “jumping from animals to people.” Fauci responds with “Outstanding!!” apparently pleased that CBS pushed Fauci’s narrative that the virus was a natural jump from bats to humans.
  • March 1, 2020 (000937) – Despite media reports, Fauci makes it crystal clear he was not being muzzled by the White House.
  • March 16, 2020 (001554) – Fauci is asked “Given the relative safety of all but the elderly and those whose immune systems are compromised, and that they are far fewer than the rest of the population, why not quarantine only them?” and responds by stating “Stay tuned.”
  • March 17, 2020 (001537) – The next day, it does not appear Fauci intends to change his tune of pushing everyone, even healthy people with low risk of the virus, to give up all civil liberties and remain prisoners in their home, as reflecting in an email exchange between Fauci and Mark Zuckerberg, in which they share mobile numbers and plan to coordinate efforts to get people to comply with Fauci’s messaging, including social distancing for everyone, but the details of their plan are not included in the email exchange.
  • March 31, 2020 (001816) – Fauci receives a summary from his agency of the studies regarding how effective masks are to preventing the virus and the conclusion is as follows: “Bottom line: generally there were not differences in ILI/URI/or flu rates when masks were used.”
  • April 2, 2020 (001778) – Fauci and Bill Gates have phone call where they agreed to a “collaborative” and “synergistic approach to COVID-19 on the part of NIAID/NIH, BARDS and the BMGF (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation).” It is concerning that one private person, Bill Gates, and his organization, BMGF, can exert that much behind-the-scenes influence on decisions that will impact the civil rights of all Americans during the pandemic.
  • April 8, 2020 (002351-2352) – Fauci, rejects most requests for calls, but accepts without any questions a request to arrange a call with the CEO of a Lilly, a major pharmaceutical company.
  • April 11, 2020 (002263-2264) – While Fauci claimed to have little time for anything else, Fauci confirmed the continued filming of “a film that will celebrate the importance of your [Fauci’s] life, science and public health” including filming during his “drive to NIH … once or twice a week,” “capture your working/appropriate conversations,” and “work on the Task Force.”
  • April 12, 2020 (002229) – Fauci writes “Many tests that have been used thus far are not accurate and ARE MISLEADING.”
  • April 16, 2020 (002142) – Fauci advises that even in the health care setting the mask policy should remain “voluntary.”
  • April 20, 2020 (002548-2549) – A Washington Post reporter contacts Katie Miller at NIAID for copies of article that Fauci stated are proof that the virus originated by natural means rather than being developed in a lab. Instead of letting Katie Miller or someone on his staff respond, Fauci, who stated he gets 1,000 or 2,000 emails per day and only has time to respond to a tiny number of these emails, personally responds to the Washington Post reporter (who did not even write to Fauci) with the copies of the studies.
  • April 22, 2020 (002471-2472) – The National Academy of Science representative confirming to Dr. Francis Collins, head of NIH, that “WHO, Gates Foundation and European Commission have been leading and planning” the “global coordinating effort to accelerate vaccines, diagnostics and therapeutics” and that “there will be an announcement on the global structure with will [sic] involve Gates, WHO etc.” and Fauci explains in an email that “we have Gates reps on our ACTIV (Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines) working groups.” Why is an unelected individual with his own private interests getting this incredible level of influence over decisions that will affect the freedoms and liberties of everyday Americans?
  • April 27, 2020 (002910) – Fauci appears to dismiss potential live saving treatment.  Fauci receives a report from the Chief, Section of Viral Pathogenesis at NIAID, Dr. Paolo Lussa, that “they treated a first group of five patients with potent anti-aggregant therapy (Tirofiban/Aggrastat) and apparently in all of them the p02 started to rise within less than 2 hours, they got off the ventilator and went on to full recovery.” In response to this incredible news, Fauci merely writes “Thanks, Paolo.” Apart from pushing Remdesivir, made by Gilead, a company with which Fauci has deep and long-standing connections, Fauci’s response to Dr. Lussa accords with his otherwise singular focus on developing and pushing a vaccine.
  • May 1, 2020 (002838) – While pushing one narrative regarding ventilators publicly, Fauci writes in a private email that “You are correct in that there is a more recent tendency to use ventilators only as a very last resort since oxygenation rather than ventilation appears to be key to recovery.”

June 4, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

Top British scientists linked to Covid lab ‘cover-up’

By Neville Hodgkinson | The Conservative Woman | June 4, 2021

Two of the scientists leading Britain’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic have been implicated in an alleged cover-up of the virus’s origins.

Sir Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust, and Sir Patrick Vallance, formerly president of research and development at the pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and chief scientific adviser to the Government since March 2018, both feature in the ‘Fauci files’, an explosive batch of emails released this week under freedom-of-information legislation in America.

The Wellcome Trust is an immensely wealthy foundation which distributes £1billion annually for global health research. It was formed in 1936 after the death of Sir Henry Wellcome, who founded the company that went on to become GlaxoSmithKline. Farrar also has a position on the UK’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) and is on the board of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, which gave $1billion to Covid-19 vaccine development.

Vallance, who chairs the Government’s expert advisory panel on vaccines, was revealed by the Telegraph last year to have a £600,000 shareholding in GSK, prompting claims of a conflict of interest. He had already cashed in more than £5million worth of shares he received from the company during his tenure there.

Dr Anthony Fauci has for the past 40 years led the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and has been the most public face of the US handling of the crisis.

Despite clashes with President Trump, he is a hero to many, and the emails are being interpreted by some of his supporters in the media as evidence of the huge pressures he faced.

But Tucker Carlson, a Fox News television host and political commentator who has called for a criminal investigation of Fauci’s behaviour, says the emails show that from the beginning, Fauci was worried the public might conclude Covid had originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

‘Why would Tony Fauci be so concerned that Americans would conclude that? Possibly because Tony Fauci knew perfectly well that he had funded gain-of-function experiments at that very same laboratory. The emails prove that Fauci lied about this under oath.’

The first email Carlson showed viewers was dated January 31, 2020 – the day the World Health Organisation declared that Covid represented a global health emergency.

It was sent to Fauci late that evening by immunologist Kristian Anderson, of the Scripps Research Institute in California, considered the most influential in the world for its role in scientific advances.  It was copied to only one other person – Jeremy Farrar.

Anderson warned that the virus had features which might make it look as if it could have come from a laboratory (as the British vaccines expert Angus Dalgliesh has been trying to tell us for more than a year).

His email said: ‘The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (less than 0.1 per cent) so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) look engineered.’

The next day, Fauci wrote back: ‘Thanks, Kristian.  Talk soon on the call.’

He then sent an urgent email to his deputy, Hugh Auchincloss, marked IMPORTANT. It read: ‘Hugh – it is essential that we speak this AM. Keep your cell phone on . . . Read this paper as well as the email that I will forward to you now. You will have tasks today that must be done.’ The paper was described in the email as: ‘Baric, Shi et al – Nature Medicine – SARS gain of function’.

The article concerned, published in November 2015, was written by Ralph Baric, an immunologist based in the US, and long-term recipient of funds from Fauci’s institute.

It acknowledged Zhengli-Li Shi, of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as having provided genetic sequences from Chinese bats which were used to construct a chimera virus – a genetically engineered, laboratory creation which the researchers then showed capable of infecting and damaging human tissue.

The paper concluded: ‘On the basis of these findings, scientific review panels may deem similar studies building chimeric viruses based on circulating strains too risky to pursue . . . Together, these data and restrictions represent a crossroads of GOF (gain of function) research concerns: the potential to prepare for and mitigate future outbreaks must be weighed against the risk of creating more dangerous pathogens.’

Carlson commented: ‘We do know that starting early last year, a lot of people at the National Institutes of Health were worried that Covid had not occurred naturally. They were concerned that it had instead been manipulated in a laboratory in China. And yet they seemed determined to hide those facts from the public. Why?

‘On the afternoon of February 1 last year, Fauci held a conference call with several top virologists. Most of the details of that call remain hidden from public view – they have been redacted. We know the call was related to a document entitled “Coronavirus sequence comparison”.

‘Jeremy Farrar, a British physician who runs a major research non-profit, reminded everyone on the call that what they said was top secret.’

An email about the teleconference was sent by Farrar that same afternoon to Fauci and Patrick Vallance, with cc to six others including Paul Schreier, chief operating officer at Wellcome; German virologist Christian Drosten; Dutch virologist Marion Koopmans, and Kristian Anderson.

It carried the warning: ‘Information and discussion is shared in total confidence and not to be shared until agreement on next steps.’

In other emails Farrar, who has publicly promoted the theory that the virus evolved naturally, passed on an article from the website ZeroHedge suggesting the virus might have been created as a bioweapon.

Carlson commented: ‘We now know that is a more plausible explanation than the one we believed at first and were told by the media, which is that the coronavirus came from a pangolin. And yet for the crime of saying that out loud, ZeroHedge was banned from social media platforms. Until recently you were not allowed to suggest that Covid might be man-made. Why couldn’t you suggest that? The factcheckers wouldn’t allow it. Why wouldn’t they?  Because Tony Fauci assured the tech monopolies that the coronavirus could not have been man-made. And so the tech monopolies shut down the topic.’

Carlson then replayed a clip from a White House press conference dated April 17, 2020 in which Fauci declared: ‘A group of highly qualified evolutionary biologists looked at the sequences there, and the sequences in bats as they evolve, and the mutation that it took to get to the point where it is now is totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human.’

Two days later, British scientist Peter Daszak, one of those whom Fauci had funded to conduct the experiments in Wuhan, wrote to thank him for his help in ‘stating that the scientific evidence supports a natural origin for Covid-19 from a bat-to-human spillover, not a lab release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology’.

Daszak, president of the EcoHealth alliance, which has received tens of millions of US taxpayers’ dollars for investigating coronaviruses, is a leading member of a World Health Organisation team whose investigation of the pandemic’s origins was widely regarded as a whitewash when published on March 30. He heads a Lancet committee with the same remit.

British intelligence is now said to be working alongside American counterparts, after President Biden last week ordered an investigation into the lab leak theory, with results to be reported back to him within 90 days.

Will we at last hear a glimmer of truth in all this? Or will the British public as well as nations globally continue to be misled by scientists too embarrassed to own up to their part in the Covid fiasco?

You can see the Tucker Carlson broadcast here.

June 4, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Video | | Leave a comment

Twitter suspends vaccine skeptic group after it obtained another 3,000 pages of Fauci emails in FOIA request

RT | June 4, 2021

A vaccine skeptics group was temporarily locked out of its Twitter account after claiming that it acquired thousands of new emails from White House Covid-19 adviser Anthony Fauci, with the site labeling the post “disinformation.”

The Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) took to Twitter on Thursday to announce the upcoming release of 3,000 pages of Fauci emails it said it obtained in a Freedom of Information request, after media outlets published a massive trove of the health adviser’s correspondence earlier this week.

“The Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) is dropping 3,000 new pages of FOIA’d Fauci emails TODAY, providing further insight into Anthony Fauci’s actions on Covid, vaccine safety and more,” the group said in the now-deleted post, which was preserved in a screenshot shared by conservative activist Michelle Malkin.

The screencap shows that Twitter deleted the post for breaking its policy on “spreading misleading and potentially harmful information related to Covid-19,” though the platform did not specify what aspect of the tweet was false or deceptive.

While Twitter’s Covid-19 disinformation policy states that it will remove content that makes “a claim of fact, expressed in definitive terms” that is “demonstrably false or misleading,” the ICAN post does not appear to meet that standard, making no factual assertions beyond claiming to have the emails. Twitter, which did not respond to RT’s request for comment, has given no indication about whether it contacted ICAN to determine if it really possessed the emails as claimed.

Asked about the authenticity of the alleged 3,000 pages of messages by a Twitter user on Thursday evening, ICAN creative director Patrick Layton said the emails were “requested and produced through the Freedom of Information Act,” and that ICAN’s “legal team is compiling them” for release. Neither Layton nor ICAN itself has revealed any other details about the purported new trove, which remained unpublished at the time of writing.

On its website, ICAN says its main goal is to disseminate “scientifically researched health information” to the public to allow them to make their own informed medical decisions. However, the group has also come under fire for spreading disinformation [sic] on vaccines, identified as a “key anti-vaxxer organization” in a recent report from the Center for Countering Digital Hate.

Obtained by Buzzfeed and the Washington Post, the previous Fauci email dump was published on Tuesday, prompting criticism of the Covid-19 czar from Republican lawmakers, some demanding his firing.

On Thursday, Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) said one email exchange suggested Fauci may have lied when he claimed his agency – the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases – never funded controversial ‘gain-of-function’ research at a lab in Wuhan, China – the city where Covid-19 was first detected.

In the emails in question, Fauci asked his top deputy, Hugh Auchincloss, to review a 2015 study that discussed gain-of-function work at the Wuhan lab. Auchincloss later replied that the study was conducted prior to a US government ban on funding for gain-of-function research, and that another staffer would “determine if we have any distant ties to this work abroad.” It is unclear whether the deputy ever followed up after that message.

“The emails paint a disturbing picture, a disturbing picture of Dr. Fauci, from the very beginning, worrying that he had been funding gain-of-function research,” Paul said in an interview with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham. “He knows it to this day, but hasn’t admitted it.”

Gain-of-function work aims to increase the virulence and lethality of viruses so that scientists can better understand them, but has been deemed risky by some experts, who say the suped-up pathogens could accidentally escape into the world.

Later on Thursday, GOP representatives Steve Scalise (Louisiana) and James Comer (Kentucky) also penned a letter to two Democratic committee heads demanding that Fauci be called to testify before Congress about the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic, saying the emails make the request “even more urgent.”

June 4, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment