The Wuhan Flu Conspiracy By James Reed

I keep saying that it is a conspiracy, a Wuhan flu conspiracy:

“November 5, 2020, U.S. Right to Know (USRTK), an investigative public health nonprofit group, filed a lawsuit1 against the National Institutes of Health after the agency failed to respond to its July 10, 2020, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

The USRTK’s lawsuit sought access to nonexempt records of gain-of-function experiments relating to the COVID-19 pandemic from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention, as well as the EcoHealth Alliance, which partnered with and funded the Wuhan Institute.

In a November 18, 2020, article, USRTK reports that emails obtained prove EcoHealth Alliance employees were behind the plot to obscure the lab origin of SARS-CoV-2 by issuing a scientific statement condemning such inquiries as “conspiracy theory”:

“Emails obtained by U.S. Right to Know show that a statement5 in The Lancet authored by 27 prominent public health scientists condemning ‘conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin’ was organized by employees of EcoHealth Alliance, a non-profit group that has received millions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer funding to genetically manipulate coronaviruses with scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

The emails obtained via public records requests show that EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak drafted the Lancet statement, and that he intended it to ‘not be identifiable as coming from any one organization or person’ but rather to be seen as ‘simply a letter from leading scientists.’ Daszak wrote that he wanted ‘to avoid the appearance of a political statement.’

The scientists’ letter appeared in The Lancet on February 18, just one week after the World Health Organization announced that the disease caused by the novel coronavirus would be named COVID-19.

The 27 authors ‘strongly condemn[ed] conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin,’ and reported that scientists from multiple countries ‘overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife.’

The letter included no scientific references to refute a lab-origin theory of the virus. One scientist, Linda Saif, asked via email whether it would be useful ‘to add just one or 2 statements in support of why nCOV is not a lab generated virus and is naturally occuring? Seems critical to scientifically refute such claims!’ Daszak responded, ‘I think we should probably stick to a broad statement.’”

USRTK points out that several of the authors of that Lancet statement also have direct ties to the EcoHealth Alliance that were not disclosed as conflicts of interest.

“Rita Colwell and James Hughes are members of the Board of Directors of EcoHealth Alliance, William Karesh is the group’s Executive Vice President for Health and Policy, and Hume Field is Science and Policy Advisor,” USRTK writes.

Daszak Leads Lancet Investigation Into SARS-CoV-2 Origin

This bombshell finding is all the more important in light of the fact that Daszak is now leading The Lancet’s COVID-19 Commission charged with getting to the bottom of SARS-CoV-2’s origin.

The nomination was suspect from the start, for no other reason than EcoHealth Alliance has received numerous grants from the National Institutes of Health for coronavirus research that was then subcontracted to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Daszak had also gone on the record stating he’s convinced that the virus is natural in origin. With that, his conflicts of interest were already crystal clear, but the finding that he orchestrated The Lancet statement condemning “conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin” means The Lancet Commission’s investigation is little more than a cover-up operation.

If they want to maintain any semblance of credibility going forward, Daszak would need to be replaced with someone less tainted by conflicts and personal gain potential. Five other members of The Lancet Commission also signed the February 18, 2020, statement in The Lancet, which puts their credibility in question as well.

Daszak has every reason to make sure SARS-CoV-2 ends up being declared natural, because if it turns out to be a lab-creation, his livelihood is at stake. It would be naïve to believe that safeguarding the continuation of dangerous gain-of-function research wouldn’t be a powerful motivator to preserve the zoonotic origin narrative.”

So why is China so sensitive about an investigation into the origin of the Wuhan flu? I mean what do they have to hide, except for everything? As noted in a different context, about the harsh trade punishment of Australia by China, in The Australian Financial Review, December 17, 2020, p. 39, Australia is “a perfect example for Beijing to demonstrate to other fence-sitters that they will have to make a choice.” In other words, China is doing this because it can, and no-one, they think can stop them in good James Bond villain style.

“Fear surrounds the true motives behind China's plan to build a $204 million fishery complex in an area of Papua New Guinea which has no commercial fisheries.

The Fujian Zhonghong Fishery Company, which is controlled by the Chinese government, recently inked a  memorandum of understanding with the Papua New Guinean government.

The deal will see the building of a fishery complex at Daru, just 200km from Australia, which has prompted Leichhardt MP Warren Entsch to question the true motives of the Chinese government. 

Experts warned the Chinese government could have secret plans to turn it into a naval base right on Australia's doorstep, amid rising tensions between the two nations. 

'Why would a $200 million fishing complex go into an area where there is no commercial fishery?,' Mr Entsch told the Daily Telegraph.

'I worry that it is less about fishing and more about other intentions.'

Former PNG government adviser Jeffrey Wall said $204 million is an obscene amount of money to spend in a community not renowned for its commercial fish stocks.

'We should be absolutely alarmed not only because it is strategically located close to Australia, but there is potential for conflict in the Torres Strait,' he told the ABC. 

'In my view, what they (China) are going to do, first of all, is build a very large wharf. 

'So when you build a very large wharf, what do you build? Somewhere where naval vessels can land.'” 

Well, how bright can you get, we Australians actually worked it out, before the nuclear missiles were taken to the military base, a la Cuban missile crisis. If Australia was to have a long-term future, other than being a short-term receptacle for migrants, nuclear weapons should have been developed in the 1950s in cooperation with the British, so that now, a string of sites would lie along the northern coast. But no, we chose populate or perish, or rather, populate and perish, the way of the migrant.




No comments made yet. Be the first to submit a comment
Already Registered? Login Here
Friday, 05 March 2021
If you'd like to register, please fill in the username, password and name fields.

By accepting you will be accessing a service provided by a third-party external to