Bombshell new evidence uncovers a 2018 US government funded gain-of-function proposal to engineer Coronaviruses at Wuhan Institute and includes a recipe for assembling synthetic SARS viruses
One suspicious data point is that the coronavirus spread in Qom, Iran even before it spread in the Western world (Europe etc). There is practically zero air traffic between Wuhan and Qom.
This leads to the suspicion that the virus was released (not leaked) in the holy city of Qom by the CIA (or NSA). And if that is true, it makes it more likely that the virus was similalry released in Wuhan by the CIA/NSA.
Based on the past experience with other similar viruses, the NSA may have assumed that the virus will not spread globally, and will only hurt the US enemies (Iran and/or China).
Firstly, thank you for the constructive comments and links to articles.
1. There is no effort on my part to be "highly tendentious"
In fact, if you look at my next article, I clearly discuss the DOD's role in gain of function research and their long-standing interest in bat CoVs and mRNA vaccines.
2. The first news article you have posted: that simply states that there was a retrospective COVID diagnosis on the death certificate but doesn't state how the diagnosis was arrived at. PCR testing was not available early on. If the diagnosis was "clinical" (early CDC and WHO criteria didn't require molecular confirmation) that doesn't mean anything
3. The Antibody study you reference is more interesting. There is a lot of antibody cross reactivity among the sarbecovirus family and the author's conclusion that at least some (not all) of these antibodies were from true previous SARS COV-2 is certainly plausible.
I think there is a lot of stuff that we still don't know, and I for one am much less informed than I would like to. But I write everything I do with a very open mind and the hope that someone else reading it will correct my misassumptions.
Have read bits and pieces of this info elsewhere, mainly elaborating military role. But yours is well-structured and most comprehensive. I’m always on the lookout for opportunities to re-post your pieces on X as they are a pleasure to read, I mean particularly style-wise and not only the content.
What do you make of Nick Hudson’s notion that there was no novel deadly virus and it was only a psyops? I lived through the 1st SARS, and was close to the 2nd one when it started. There was definitely some odd viral illness going on both times. Also I knew couple of people in the UK earlier in 2020, before it had really spread worldwide, who said they'd had the worst flu in their lives; both having returned from holiday in Northern Italy and a French ski resort respectively.
As always, thank you for your kind words. Also appreciate you disseminating this far and wide. As regards Nick Hudson, I am unsure what to make of his contention. There is no denying that SARS-CoV-2 exists. Whether it existed way longer than we now, is debatable, especially his contention that it has always been around.
Secondly, there is also no denying that the Wuhan strain was more virulent than the strains currently in circulation.
Thirdly, the presence of the furin cleavage site is pretty unique and is not seen in any other members of this family. This cleavage is important for the virus to bind to the angiotensin converting enzyme receptor and indeed elemental in its pathogenic process. In addition, the fact that DEFUSE proposal specifically alluded to including this feature seems highly noteworthy and the odds that exactly such a pathogen caused a pandemic less than 2 years later is a weird coincidence if one believes Hudson.
Appreciate your detailed response. I have a lot of respect for Hudson and the work he’s been doing. But I don’t see any value now in engaging with him on this. When I mentioned being in the area of SARS1, he said it was not at all clear to him that there was really any outbreak of any sort. Like you, he has a more solid technical and other background than me. But my lived-in experience, which was very different from SARS2, negates such a remark. Likewise a retired US doctor who’d practiced for 40 years recently told me SARS1 carried more severe restrictions than SARS2, which was absolutely untrue. It’s easy to pontificate from a distance. Just as the US MSM omits telling the populace a lot of things, there are also things you would not know unless you’re on the ground and have access to more localised news.
One suspicious data point is that the coronavirus spread in Qom, Iran even before it spread in the Western world (Europe etc). There is practically zero air traffic between Wuhan and Qom.
This leads to the suspicion that the virus was released (not leaked) in the holy city of Qom by the CIA (or NSA). And if that is true, it makes it more likely that the virus was similalry released in Wuhan by the CIA/NSA.
Based on the past experience with other similar viruses, the NSA may have assumed that the virus will not spread globally, and will only hurt the US enemies (Iran and/or China).
Well researched and written, but highly tendentious.
Very few of the 'knowns' are actually known, and most of the coincidences, if they exist, are not as exceptional or unusual as the author makes out.
Two facts, both from the CDC, cast doubt on the 'It Came From China' meme:
1. The first officially recorded Covid death occurred in the USA, before the first Chinese death.
https://tinyurl.com/bddh5vbz
2. In December, 2019, 4-6 million Americans were Covid seropositive.
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1785/6012472
Firstly, thank you for the constructive comments and links to articles.
1. There is no effort on my part to be "highly tendentious"
In fact, if you look at my next article, I clearly discuss the DOD's role in gain of function research and their long-standing interest in bat CoVs and mRNA vaccines.
2. The first news article you have posted: that simply states that there was a retrospective COVID diagnosis on the death certificate but doesn't state how the diagnosis was arrived at. PCR testing was not available early on. If the diagnosis was "clinical" (early CDC and WHO criteria didn't require molecular confirmation) that doesn't mean anything
3. The Antibody study you reference is more interesting. There is a lot of antibody cross reactivity among the sarbecovirus family and the author's conclusion that at least some (not all) of these antibodies were from true previous SARS COV-2 is certainly plausible.
I think there is a lot of stuff that we still don't know, and I for one am much less informed than I would like to. But I write everything I do with a very open mind and the hope that someone else reading it will correct my misassumptions.
Thank you again for your comment.
Interesting article, to be sure. Who is the author? Is it Shiven Chabria?
Yes, it is.
Have read bits and pieces of this info elsewhere, mainly elaborating military role. But yours is well-structured and most comprehensive. I’m always on the lookout for opportunities to re-post your pieces on X as they are a pleasure to read, I mean particularly style-wise and not only the content.
What do you make of Nick Hudson’s notion that there was no novel deadly virus and it was only a psyops? I lived through the 1st SARS, and was close to the 2nd one when it started. There was definitely some odd viral illness going on both times. Also I knew couple of people in the UK earlier in 2020, before it had really spread worldwide, who said they'd had the worst flu in their lives; both having returned from holiday in Northern Italy and a French ski resort respectively.
As always, thank you for your kind words. Also appreciate you disseminating this far and wide. As regards Nick Hudson, I am unsure what to make of his contention. There is no denying that SARS-CoV-2 exists. Whether it existed way longer than we now, is debatable, especially his contention that it has always been around.
Secondly, there is also no denying that the Wuhan strain was more virulent than the strains currently in circulation.
Thirdly, the presence of the furin cleavage site is pretty unique and is not seen in any other members of this family. This cleavage is important for the virus to bind to the angiotensin converting enzyme receptor and indeed elemental in its pathogenic process. In addition, the fact that DEFUSE proposal specifically alluded to including this feature seems highly noteworthy and the odds that exactly such a pathogen caused a pandemic less than 2 years later is a weird coincidence if one believes Hudson.
Appreciate your detailed response. I have a lot of respect for Hudson and the work he’s been doing. But I don’t see any value now in engaging with him on this. When I mentioned being in the area of SARS1, he said it was not at all clear to him that there was really any outbreak of any sort. Like you, he has a more solid technical and other background than me. But my lived-in experience, which was very different from SARS2, negates such a remark. Likewise a retired US doctor who’d practiced for 40 years recently told me SARS1 carried more severe restrictions than SARS2, which was absolutely untrue. It’s easy to pontificate from a distance. Just as the US MSM omits telling the populace a lot of things, there are also things you would not know unless you’re on the ground and have access to more localised news.