Conservative Superstar Candace Owens was suspended from Twitter today for challenging Michigan’s tyrannical Governor Gretchen Whitmer! Candace was locked out of her Twitter account.
Battling the highest number of coronavirus related deaths and infections globally, the US has been found of providing $ 3.7 million grant to the Wuhan-based laboratory carrying out research on virus derived from bat caves.
Here are key findings from the 15-page report compiled by Western governments known as the 'Five Eyes,' according to Australia's Daily Telegraph. Doctors who bravely spoke out about the new virus were detained and condemned.
International Man: Decades of money printing have created enormous distortions in the market. It seems that the coronavirus popped the Everything Bubble. Where do you see the stock market going?
The Coronavirus has completely turned the global economy on its head. It will create the most profound changes to the way we live and our future prospects – we are all beginning to realise that. There is not going to be a V-Shaped recovery. Many lives will be shattered and ruined in its wake.
If you don’t want the planet to fall to the NWO, then yesterday was a good day for you.
New documents were declassified, confirming that the FBI knew Gen. Michael Flynn wasn’t colluding with Russia, so they plotted to “get him to lie.”
These documents substantiate the statements of Jerome Corsi, Roger Stone and George Papadapoulos, who all claimed the FBI had pressured them to bear false witness against Donald Trump, in order to go free.
The tables have now turned and there is every indication that Gen. Flynn will be exonerated. There’s even an outside chance that he will rejoin the Trump Administration.
In an apparent response to this, Q posted many triumphant posts, releasing screenshots of a chat log from a Star Wars video game which, as silly as it sounds, was one of the preferred channels of “secure” communications among the coup-plotters.
John Brennan (“Dooku”) and others discuss putting Michael Flynn “back in the news” and instruct Peter Strzok (“S”) to draw up a memo on Turkey. They discuss upcoming Dirty Tricks campaigns with their media operatives, including New Yorker staff writer, Adam Entous (“AEWP”) and Louise Mensch (“Limey”) and they refer to Camp Eagle, a CIA black site within a Serbian air base, notorious for torture and murder.
JustInformed Talk has this excellent report on the hybrid war in which we all find ourselves and he gives us his informative breakdown of the latest spate of Q drops.
He says, “There is no way to come to any other conclusion than the people who were in positions of power in this government for the last few decades have been selling us out to the highest bidders. They’ve been undermining our security, they’ve been slowly turning this into a police state.”
After WWI, the distinguished British economist Edwin Cannan was asked, somewhat reproachfully, what he did during the terrible war years. He replied: “I protested.
After WWI, the distinguished British economist Edwin Cannan was asked, somewhat reproachfully, what he did during the terrible war years. He replied: “I protested.” The present article is a similar protest against the current lockdown policies put into place in most countries of the Western world to confront the current coronavirus pandemic.
Here in France, where I live and work, President Macron announced on Thursday, March 12, that all schools and universities would be shut down on the following Monday. On that Monday, then, he appeared on TV again and announced that the entire population would be confined starting the very next day. The only exceptions would be “necessary” activities, especially medical services, energy production, security, and food production and distribution. This policy response was apparently coordinated with other European governments. Italy, Germany, and Spain have applied essentially the same measures.
I think that these policies are understandable and well intentioned. Like many other commentators, I also think that they are wrongheaded, harmful, and potentially disastrous. An old French proverb says that the way to hell is plastered with good intentions. Unfortunately, it seems as though the present policies are no exception.
My protest concerns the basic ideas that have motivated these policies. They were clearly enunciated by President Macron in his TV address of March 12. Here he made three claims that I found most intriguing.
The first one was that his government was going to apply drastic measures to “save lives” because the country was “at war” with the COVID-19 virus. He repeatedly used the phrase “we are at war” (nous sommes en guerre) throughout his talk.
Secondly, he insisted right at the very beginning that it was imperative to heed the advice of “the experts.” Monsieur Macron literally said that we all should have to listen to and follow the advice of the people “who know”—meaning who know the problem and who know how best to deal with it.
His third major point was that this emergency situation had revealed how important it was to enjoy a state-run system of public healthcare. How lucky are we to have such a system and to be able to rely on it, now, in the heat of the war against the virus! Unsurprisingly, the president insinuated that this system would be reinforced in the future.
Now, these are not the private ideas of Monsieur Macron. They are shared by all major governments in the EU and by many governments in other parts of the world. They are also shared by all major political parties here in France, as well as by President Macron’s predecessors. Therefore, the purpose of the following remarks is not to criticise the president of this beautiful country, or his government, or any person in particular. The purpose is to criticise the ideas on which the current policy is based.
I do not have any epidemiological knowledge or expertise. But I do have some acquaintance with questions of social organisation, and I am also intimately familiar with scientific research and with the organisation of scientific research. My protest does not concern the medical assessment of the COVID-19 virus and its propagation. It concerns the public policies designed to confront this problem.
As far as I can see, these policies are based on one extraordinary claim and two fundamental errors. I will discuss them in turn.
An Extraordinary Claim
The extraordinary claim is that wartime measures such as confinement and shutdowns of commercial activity are justified by the objective of “saving lives” that are at risk because of the burgeoning coronavirus pandemic.
Over here in Europe, we have heard American presidents use such expressions since the 1960s, as in “the war on poverty” or the “war on drugs” or “the war on terrorism” or more recently “the war on climate change.” Odd language of this sort seemed to be one of America’s many eccentricities. It also did not escape our notice that none of these would-be wars have ever been won. Despite the great sums of money that the US government has spent to fight them, despite the new state institutions that were put in place, and despite the great and growing infringements on the economic and civil liberties of ordinary Americans, the problems themselves never went away. Quite the opposite; they were perpetuated and aggravated.
Most of the European governments have now joined ranks with the Americans and consider that they, too, are at war—with a virus. It is therefore appropriate to insist that this is metaphorical language. A war is a military conflict designed to protect the state—and thus of the very institution that is commonly held to guarantee the lives and liberties of the citizens—against malicious attack from an outside power, usually another state. In a war, the very existence of the state is under attack. Clearly, this is not so in the present case.
Moreover, there can be no war with a virus, simply because a virus does not act. At most, therefore, the word “war” can be used here metaphorically. It then serves as a cover and justification of infringements of the very civil and economic liberties that the state is supposed to protect.
Now, in the traditional conception, the state is supposed to protect and promote the common good. Protecting the lives of the citizens might therefore, arguably, justify massive state interventions. But then the very first question should be: How many lives are at stake? Government epidemiologists, in their most dire estimates—whose factual basis is still not solidly established—have considered that about 10 percent of the infected persons might be in need of hospital care and that a large part of those would die. It was also already known by mid-March that this mortal threat in the great majority of cases concerned very old people, the average COVID-19 victim being around eighty years of age.
The claim that wartime measures, which threaten the economic livelihood of the great majority of the population and also the lives of the poorest and most fragile people of the world economy—a point on which I will say more below—are in order to save the lives of a few, most of whom are close to death anyway, is an extraordinary claim, to say the least.
Without going into any detail, let me just highlight that this contention squarely contradicts the abortion policies that Western governments have applied since the 1970s. There, the reasoning was exactly the other way around. The personal liberty and comfort of the women who wished to abort their children was given priority over the right to lives of these yet unborn children. According to World Health Organization (WHO) figures, each and every year, some 40–50 million babies are aborted worldwide. In 2018 alone, more than 224,000 babies have been aborted in France. However serious the current COVID-19 pandemic may yet become, it will remain a small fraction of these casualties. Not only have governments neglected to “save lives” when it comes to abortions. They have in point of fact condoned and funded the killing of human beings on a massive scale.
They still do so now. Here in France, all hospital services have been run down to free up capacity for the treatment of COVID-19 victims—all except one. Abortion services run unabated and have recently been reinforced by the legal obligation for hospital staff to provide abortions (previously it was possible for individual doctors to refuse this out of personal conviction).
The pretention that drastic policies are justified in order to “save lives” also flies into face of past policy in other areas. In the past, too, it would have been possible to “save lives” by allocating a greater chunk of the government’s budget to state-run hospitals, by further reducing speed limits on highways, by increasing foreign aid to countries on the brink of starvation, by outlawing smoking, etc. To be sure, I do not wish to make a case for such policies. My point is that it has never been the sole or highest goal of government policy to “save lives” or to extend them as much as possible. In fact, such a policy would be utterly absurd and impractical, as I will explain further below.
It is difficult to avoid the impression that the “war to save lives” is a farce. The truth seems to be that the COVID-19 crisis has been used to extend the powers of the state. The government obtains the power to control and paralyse all other human concerns in the name of prolonging the lives of a select few. Never has this principle been admitted in a free country. Few tyrannies have managed to extend their power this far.
The current beneficiaries of these new powers are the elder citizens and a few others. But make no mistake. It is likely that their destinies only serve as a pretext to justify the creation of new and unheard-of powers for the state. Once these new powers are firmly established, there is no reason why the elderly should remain especially dear to those in power. It must be feared that the very opposite will be the case.
Now, in order to avoid any misunderstanding, I do not claim that the present French government seeks to grab power over life-and-death decisions, or dictatorial powers to introduce socialism through the backdoor under the cover of COVID-19. In fact, I cannot imagine that Monsieur Macron and his government are driven by sinister motivations. I think they have the best of all intentions. But the point here is precisely that there is a difference between doing good and wishing to do good.
A Grave Error: Rule by Experts
So far, I have commented on a political issue. But there are also matters of fact. And this brings me to the two aforementioned errors.
The first fundamental error is to hold that is that the experts know and all the rest of us should trust them and do as they tell us.
The truth is that even the most brilliant academics and practitioners have in-depth knowledge only in a very narrow field; that they have no particular expertise when it comes to devising new practical solutions; and that their professional biases are likely to induce them into various errors when it comes to solving large-scale social problems such as the current pandemic. This is patent in my own discipline, economics, but not really different in other academic fields. Let me explain this in some more detail.
The kind of knowledge that can be acquired by scientific research is just a preliminary to action. Research gathers facts and yields partial knowledge of causal connections. Economics tells us, for example, that the size of the money stock is positively related to the level of unit prices. But this is not the whole picture. Other causes come into play as well. Real-world decision-making cannot just rely on facts and other bits of partial knowledge. It must weigh the influence of a multitude of circumstances, not all of which are well known, and not all of which are directly related to the problem at stake. It must come to balanced conclusions, sometimes under rapidly changing circumstances.
In this respect, the typical expert is no expert at all. How many laureates of the Nobel Prize in economics have earned any significant money by investing their savings? How many virologists or epidemiologists have established and operated a privately run clinic or laboratory? I would never trust a colleague who had the folly to volunteer to direct a central planning board. I do not trust an epidemiologist who has the temerity to parade as a COVID-19 czar. I do not believe a government that tells me that it somehow knows “the experts” who know best how to protect and run an entire country.
Furthermore, consider that scientific knowledge is, at best, a state of the art. The precious thing about science is not to be seen in the results, which are hardly ever final. What is crucial is the scientific process, which is a competitive process based on disagreements about the validity and relevance of different research hypotheses. This process is especially important when it comes to new problems—such as a new virus which spreads in unheard-of ways and has unheard-of effects. It is precisely in such circumstances, when the stakes are high, that the impartial confrontation and competitive exploration of different points of view is of paramount importance. Research czars and central planners are here of no use at all. They are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
A government which bets the house on one horse and hands the management of a pandemic over to a single person or institution achieves, at best, only one thing: that all citizens receive the same treatment. But it thereby slows down the very process which leads to the discovery of the best treatments, and which makes these treatments rapidly available to the greatest number of patients.
It is also important to keep in mind that academics—and this includes epidemiologists just as much as economists and lawyers—are typically government employees and that this colours their approach to any practical problem. They are likely to think that serious problems, especially large-scale problems touching most or all citizens, should be solved by state intervention. Many of them are in fact incapable of imagining anything else.
This problem is reinforced through a nefarious selection bias. Indeed, those academics who opt for an administrative or political career, and who make it into the higher ranks of the civil service, cannot fail to be convinced that state action is suitable and necessary to solve the most important problems. Otherwise they would hardly have chosen such careers, and it would also be virtually out of the question that for them to end up in leadership positions. A good example among many others is the current WHO director Tedros Adhanom, who I understand is a former member of a communist organisation. The point is not that a WHO director should have no political opinions or that Dr. Adhanom is an evil or incompetent person. The point is that it is unsurprising that men like him occupy leadership positions in state-run organisations, and that the approach he envisions to deal with a pandemic is likely to be coloured by his personal political preconceptions, not only by medical information and good intentions.
Another Momentous Error: Neglect of Economics
Along with such selection bias comes a peculiar ignorance in regard to the functioning of complex social orders. This brings me to the second fundamental error that vitiates the COVID-19 policies. It consists in thinking that civil and economic liberties are some sort of a consumers’ good—maybe even a luxury good—that can only be allowed and enjoyed in good times. When the going gets tough, the government needs to take over and all others should step back—into confinement if necessary.
This error is typical for people who have spent too much time among politicians and in public administrations. The truth is that civil and economic liberty is the most powerful vehicle to confront virtually any problem. (The notable exception is that liberty does not help to consolidate political power.) And the reverse side of the same truth is that governments typically fail whenever they set out to solve social problems, even very ordinary problems. Think of state-run education or housing projects. I will return to this point further below.
Because of the mechanics of the political process, governments are liable to overreact to any problem that is big enough to make it into the news and to become an issue for voters. Governments will then typically zoom in on this one problem. In their perception, it becomes the most important of all problems that humanity has to solve. If such a government has no clue about economics, it is liable to propose one-plan technical solutions that completely neglect the social and political dimension of what it means to solve a problem. In the present case, the “experts” have blithely proposed to shut down the entire economy because this is what “works.”
Now, I do not contest that shutdowns are effective in slowing down the transmission speed of a pandemic. I have no opinion at all on the most suitable way to deal with pandemics or other problems of virology or medicine. But as an economist I know the crucial importance of the fact that there is never ever only one single goal in human life. There is always a great and diverse array of objectives that each of us pursues. The practical problem for each person is to strike the right balance, most notably to act in the right temporal sequence. Translated to the level of the economy as a whole, the problem is to allocate the right amounts of time and material resources to the different objectives.
For most people, protecting their own lives and the lives of their families has a very high importance. But irrespective of how important this objective is, in practice it cannot be perfectly achieved. To protect my life, I need food. Thus, I need to work. Thus, I need to expose myself to all kinds of risks that are associated with leaving the safe space of my house and encountering nature and other humans. In short, human lives cannot be perfectly protected, even by those who are ready to subordinate everything else to doing so. It is a practical impossibility. When it comes to protecting lives, the only question is: how much am I willing to risk my life and the lives of those who depend on me? And it more than often turns out that by risking much one protects best. What holds true for the eternal life of one’s soul also holds true for the mundane material life down here on earth: “For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it” (Matt 16:25).
Now, most people do not actually cherish the preservation of their lives, or the extension of their life spans, as the single highest goals. Smokers, meat eaters, drinkers prefer a shorter, more joyful life, to a longer life of abstinence. Policemen, soldiers, and many citizens are more than often driven by the love of their country and by a love of justice. They would rather die than live under slavery or tyranny. Priests would risk their lives rather than forsake their commitment. A believer in Christ would rather risk death than apostasy. Sailors risk their own lives to provide for their families. Medical doctors and nurses are willing to risk their lives to help patients with infectious diseases. Rugby players and racecar drivers risk their lives not only for the glory of winning, but also for the excitement and satisfaction that comes with performing well under danger. Many young men and women gladly trade the excitement of dance for the risk of catching COVID-19.
All of these people, in one way or another, make material contributions to the livelihood of all others. Smokers and drinkers ultimately pay for their consumption, not with money (which serves them only as a tool for exchange with others), but with the goods and services that they themselves provide to others. If they could not indulge in their consumption, their motivation to help others would diminish or vanish altogether. If policemen, soldiers, sailors, and nurses did not have a relatively low risk-aversion, their services would be provided only at much higher cost, and possibly not at all.
The preferences and activities of all market participants are interdependent. In the market order, each one helps all others in pursuing their goals, even if these goals may ultimately contradict his own. The meat eater might be a mechanic who repairs the cars of vegetarians, or an accountant who does the bookkeeping for a vegetarian NGO. The soldier also protects pacifists. Among the pacifists may be farmers who grow the food consumed by soldiers, etc.
It is impossible to disentangle all of these connections, and it is not necessary. The point is that in a market economy the factors determining the production of any economic good are not just technical. Through exchange, through the division of labour, all production processes are interrelated. The effectiveness of doctors and nurses and their assistants does not only depend on the people who directly supply them with the materials that they need. Indirectly, it also depends on the activities of all other producers who do not have the slightest thing to do with medical services in hospitals. Even in an emergency situation, it is therefore necessary to respect the needs and priorities of these others. Locking them away, locking them down, far from facilitating the operation of hospitals, will eventually come to haunt the latter as well when supply chains wither and consumer staples start lacking.
Now one might contend that such consequences only obtain in the longer run and that a government confronted with an emergency situation needs to neglect long-run issues and focus on the short-run emergency. This sounds reasonable, which is why governments have appealed to arguments of this sort with great regularity in other areas, most notably to justify expansionary macroeconomic policies, which also trade off the present against the future.
But the reasoning is flawed in the present case. The root of the error is to consider the COVID-19 virus an immediate threat to human lives whereas the lockdown policies are not. But this is not the case. How many people have committed suicide because the lockdown measures have driven them to depression and insanity? How many did not receive life-saving treatments because hospital beds and staff were restricted to COVID-19 victims? How many have become victims at home because of the lockdown-induced aggression of their spouses? How many have lost their jobs, their companies, their wealth, and will be driven to suicide and aggression in the months to come? How many people in the poorest countries of the world economy are now driven to starvation because households and firms in the developed world have cut back demand for their products?
The inevitable conclusion is that, even in the short run, lockdown policies are costing the lives of many people who would not otherwise have died. In the short and in the long run, the current lockdown policy does not serve to “save lives,” but to save the lives of some people at the expense of the lives of others.
Conclusion
The lockdown policies are understandable as a panic reaction of political leaders who want to do the right thing and who have to make decisions with incomplete information. But upon reflection—and certainly in hindsight—they are not good policy. The lockdowns of the past month have not been conducive to the common good. Although they have saved the lives of many people, they have also endangered—and are still endangering—the lives and livelihoods of many others. They have created a new and dangerous political precedent. They have reinforced the political regime uncertainty—to use Robert Higgs’s felicitous phrase—that bears on the choices of individuals, families, communities, and firms in the years to come.
The right thing to do now is to abandon these policies swiftly and entirely. The citizens of free countries are able to protect themselves. They can act individually and collectively. They cannot act well when they are locked down. They will greet any honest and competent advice on what they can and should do, upon which they will proceed responsibly, whether alone or in coordination with others.
The greatest danger right now is in the perpetuation of the ill-conceived lockdowns, most notably under the pretext of “managing the transition” or other spurious justifications. Is it really necessary to walk through the endless list of management failures of government agents? Is it necessary to remind ourselves that people who have no skin in the game are irresponsible in the true sense of the word? These would-be managers should have stayed out of the picture from the very beginning. Instead, so far, they have managed to get everybody else out of the picture. If they are allowed to go on, they might very well turn the present calamity—big as it is—into a true disaster.
The historical precedent that comes to mind is the Great Depression of the 1930s. Then, too, the free world was confronted with a painful recession, when the implosion of the stock market bubble entailed a deflationary meltdown of the financialised economy, along with massive unemployment. This recession, dire as it was, could have remained short, as all the previous recessions in the US and elsewhere had been. Instead it was turned into a multiyear depression, thanks to folly of FDR and his government, who had the pretention of managing the recovery with government spending, nationalisations, and price controls.
It is not too late. It is never too late to recognise an honest error and correct a wrong course of action. Let us hope that President Macron, President Trump, and all other people of goodwill may rapidly come to their senses.
It has been a long time coming and it's finally here. When the ECB first unleashed negative rates across Europe in 2014, banks were loathe to match the central bank's deposit rates for their clients to those charged by the ECB over fears depositors would simply take their money and go elsewhere.
"To be honest with you, all of the death certificates are writing COVID on it, they're writing COVID on all the death certificates," said Michael Lanza of the Staten Island Colonial Funeral Home.
The video:
BREAKING: Funeral Directors in COVID-19 Epicenter Doubt Legitimacy of Deaths Attributed to Pandemic; Fear Numbers are "Padded"
"Whether they had a positive test or didn't, so I think again this is my personal opinion, I think like the mayor and our city – they're looking for federal funding and the more they put COVID on the death certificate, the more money they can ask from the federal funds," Lanza charged.
The numbers just doesn't add up, he said.
"I think it’s political, so, I’m going to turn around and say: 'You know, like, not everybody that we have here that has COVID on the death certificate died of COVID.' Can I prove that? No, but that is my suspicion," he said.
According to O'Keefe, Josephine DiMiceli, president of the DiMiceli and Sons, a Queens-based funeral service, said the sister of a deceased woman "refused to believe that her sister had COVID-19."
An autopsy later proved the woman's suspicions correct, he said.
And Joseph Antioco, the director of Brooklyn’s Schaeffer Funeral Home, told another undercover journalist that if the deceased was not under the care of a private physician, the chances were very good their cause of death was going down as COVID-19.
"Two weeks ago, I had a 40-year-old man that died in his house, okay? They didn’t even go to the house, the guy had no underlying causes, no medical conditions, they released him from the house without even going saying he had COVID-19 because he had a fever," he said.
"How do you know that’s what he had? You don’t. But, now the death certificate showed shows that he had COVID-19," he said.
Antioco said COVID-19 has become the go-to cause of death.
"How many of them are actually COVID-19? Or is the M.E.(Medical Examiner) just putting that because they don’t want to go to the scene?"
That’s the mainstream narrative when it comes to the economic pain we’re feeling right now. But in reality, A did not cause B. B was in the works long before A came along.
In BriefThe Facts:YouTube is now actively banning any content that contradicts anything that the World Health Organization (WHO) with regards to the new coronavirus.Reflect On:Should people have the right to access information openly and freely and decide for themselves what is real and what is fake? Should people be able to examine sources and evidence for themselves and make their own decisions on information?I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, we are now living in a time where a ...
Dr Mikovits joins Gary Franchi on the Next News Network and says that based on her 30+ years of working with Anthony Fauci, it is horrifying to see history repeat itself, as it did in determining the treatment for HIV/AIDS. It’s also disturbing to watch her expressions as she recounts these pivotal moments in her career, which Fauci destroyed. I find her to be a very credible witness but I can clearly see how very deeply she’s been traumatized.
This is particularly so when she describes how Anthony Fauci shut down her work on the highly-infectious XMRV mouse retrovirus, while looking into the cause of Chronic Fatigue- and Gulf War Syndrome. An early polio vaccine had been cultivated on pulverized mouse brains and her studies indicated that XMRV had entered the human virome through the blood supply and through the MMR and Polio vaccines given to American children and the Japanese Encephalitis vaccines given to US military personnel.
This discovery, revealed massive liabilities for the Big Pharma companies and for governments worldwide and it proved to be career-ending for Mikovits. Fauci was the Deep State enforcer who ruthlessly carried this out. She believes – and the data support – that this was “a cover-up, in the attempt to literally bury the evidence of the people who have been injured worldwide by Dr Fauci’s recklessness.”
By “injured”, she’s talking about millions of cases of cancer and AIDs and other Frankenvirus diseases, worldwide.
“Most of our biological therapies today are made using mouse tissue and animal tissue. So, this shows that in fact, for almost forty years, as we’ve mixed animal and human tissue – it’s called xenotransplantation – we’ve directly injected it in the blood and created many, many viruses that come from animals that would otherwise not have been introduced into humans naturally. That is, they can’t infect human cells.
“This is a huge liability…The cover-up of a hundred million people with contagious, cancer-causing virus…Look at our exploding cancer figures. Look at our exploding autism, chronic fatigue syndrome, AIDS-like diseases, autoimmune diseases. These are all from from viruses that are acquired not naturally but through biological therapies and this has been perpetrated by our government, knowingly by Tony Fauci since that first explosion of HIV.”
Mikovits believes that for the harm they caused with their handling of HIV, alone, “Tony Fauci…Robert Redfield, and Deborah Birx…should have been literally criminally charged for for killing millions and everyone knew it at that time and it was covered up.”
Her past trauma is made that much worse for her as she watches the entire world currently being subjected to Fauci’s psychopathic behavior.
“What I see is literally, history repeating itself. Where, throughout the ’80s, he continued to direct therapies and the funding of therapies for which he held patents and stood to gain clinically, when clearly, all research showed that those weren’t the appropriate therapies…
“My…award-winning PhD thesis showed, in fact, another target would be the appropriate therapeutic target and I was part of the team that developed Peptide T [discovered in 1986 by Dr Candace Pert]…simple immune therapy, safe.
“That therapy never made it to people. [Fauci] prevented that, while he directed the therapy the wrong way, leading to the deaths of millions.
“And I see the same scenario playing itself out, now, where he says, ‘Oh, it’s anecdotal. Oh, hydroxychloroquine or Plaquenil, anecdotal evidence!’
“Anecdotal evidence means storytelling. It’s not storytelling! The WHO calls Plaquenil and hydroxychloroquine an essential medicine for all health. 70 years of data in its use. Same thing for Interferon Type 1. Interferon’s very low dose, very effective at preventing the spread, even the jumping of viruses from species and that therapy has been prevented from getting to the people.
“So, now in 2020, we use pre-exposure prophylaxis around the world for HIV…and Tony Fauci is deliberately misrepresenting that and leading to the spread of this virus throughout the world.”
To her, the COVID-19 numbers coming out show, “The numbers of deaths from CV to less than .1% to .3% and those studies are clear… a natural herd immunity has been established from the natural infection and that everyone should go back to work now…
“It’s very clear that the treatment of ventilators and the lack of oxygen has been what has been killing people – not a virus.
“That a single agent is causative for a disease is not true and that perpetrating that – what I call fraud – in order to push an agenda to drive towards a strategy of therapy, when…safe, effective therapies that are sanctioned by the World Health Organization, now for more than 70 years aren’t taking place is what I believe is destroying human health and will have a lasting effect for many years.”
As for the origins of the novel coronavirus that has caused the global shutdown, she says, “In those original studies that were published in 2015, Tony Fauci, the NIAID, Ian Lipkin through the new Centers for Discovery and Diagnostics actually funded the cell line strains that that were used to grow the virus.
“And that cell line strain came directly from Fort Detrick and USAMRIID (US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases). So an unintended release, maybe but USAMRIID was shut down in 2019 for safety concerns.
“That it came from a laboratory is clear and I think not only the Wuhan Biosafety Level 4 but the Biosafety Level 4 at Fort Detrick, USAMRIID…where I worked for 22 years and directly in that laboratory, I did research on Ebola.
“It’s clear that these two labs colluded under the direction of Tony Fauci, when it was, in fact illegal in this country to do those studies…
Dr Mikovits’ book, Plague of Corruption released 2 weeks ago has already sold out of its first printing. She says it’s about “Propaganda masquerading as science, it tells how I was jailed, how I was threatened, how the threats were carried through, literally at every level; the corruption in the courts, how the media is driving these pandemics and how these pandemics have been driven.
“Bobby Kennedy jr. writes a fabulous forward, where he talks about – he literally walks through history how we’ve been lied to as a public about environmental toxins and about these programs, which have have literally caused the development, the explosion of chronic diseases at the hands of Dr Fauci and Dr Redfield, Dr Birx. You know, the entire corrupt Old Boys Network that has been in power since at least 1980, for my entire career…
“At the end of the book is a fabulous ending. It shows how we have proven them wrong, how we were able to, how we refuse the order to throw away the data, to autoclave, to burn all of the samples from the infected people from our research, from 2011 and ’12 and how we secured those data and gave them to the FBI a full five years ago – and that’s been covered up to the DOJ, to the Attorney General’s office; how I had a lawsuit that implicates every one of these people for five years, held under seal…meaning, nobody could talk about it while the government decided if…they could give me whistleblower status.
“The minute this book came in press, that case was dropped with prejudice, which means I made it all up to promote a book. We have the evidence, we have the evidence secured, we have the receipt from the FBI for the terabyte hard drive that proves everything I’ve been saying over the course of the last twenty to thirty years.
Host, Gary Franchi says, “Dr. Judy it’s been a pleasure having you on. The last thing I wanna drive home here is ask you the question: Should Dr Fauci be indicted?”
She answers, “Absolutely.”
***
TRANSCRIPT
Gary Franchi: Mikovits is a cellular and molecular biologist with over 30 years of scientific experience. She directed programs on HIV, cancer, epigenetics and neuro-immune disease, with a focus on development of novel drug and diagnostic technologies she holds a PhD in biochemistry and molecular biology from George Washington University and she was a postdoctoral scholar at the laboratory of genomic diversity National Cancer Institute and over the past 26 years, she has published 51 scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals.
Mikovits has also been a target of Dr Anthony Fauci – not once but twice – however, the tables have recently turned and the sights are now on Fauci, as his motives and miscalculations could be exposed on the global stage. We hope to do that today, as we investigate just how many bodies lie in the wake of his rise to the top of the National Institute of Health.
Dr Judy, welcome to the show…now…you have accused Dr. Fauci of bullying, intimidation, having a reckless disregard for the health and safety of Americans. Explain to our viewers, who are not familiar about your education and background and some of the groundbreaking work you were responsible for in the ’80s and how you first became a target of Dr Fauci.
Dr Mikovits: Well, my work in the ’80s started when I came from University of Virginia with a degree in Biochemistry, went straight to the National Cancer Institute in Frederick, Maryland to develop immune therapy.
It was the immune therapy known as Interferon Alpha. It was actually a curative therapy for some leukemias; that I extended that work. I joined the Biological Response Modifiers program under the leadership of Dr Frank Rucsetti’s lab. We confirmed the isolation of HIV from saliva and blood that Dr Luc Montagnier – Nobel Laureate, Luc Montagnier – had done earlier that year.
Our paper was impressed at the time was Confidential Impressed. Dr Fauci called the laboratory, I’m a 25 year old lab technician. He called the laboratory, I answered the phone explained that Dr Ruscetti was out of town and would address his concerns when he got back. Dr. Fauci demanded a copy of the paper, which was Confidential – that’s unethical. I refused to give it to him.
He threatened to fire me for insubordination. I didn’t budge. He bullied Dr Ruscetti when he came back to town, to give him the paper, which his crony, Dr Gallo then copied…
He delayed the publication of the confirmation, resulting in the delay of the diagnostics tests and the delay of the immune therapies that could have been used right then to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS…that resulted in millions of deaths.
Gary Franchi: Oh, my goodness, so Fauci, you believe was directly responsible for the spread of AIDS around the world.
Dr Mikovits: Absolutely.
Gary Franchi: And so now, he’s the director of the National Institute of Health and knowing this, as we see him every single day on these pandemic press conferences with President Trump, what do you see when he goes to that podium?
Dr Mikovits: He’s the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID). Francis Collins is director of NIH. But [NIAID] is the most powerful Institute in the NIH.
So, what I see is literally, history repeating itself. Where, throughout the ’80s, he continued to direct therapies and the funding of therapies for which he held patents and stood to gain clinically, when clearly all research showed that those weren’t the appropriate therapies.
Our research – my PhD thesis, award-winning thesis – showed, in fact, another target would be the appropriate therapeutic target and I was part of the team that developed Peptide T [discovered in 1986 by Dr Candace Pert]…simple immune therapy, safe.
That therapy never made it to people. He prevented that, while he directed the therapy the wrong way, leading to the deaths of millions.
And I see the same scenario playing itself out, now, where he says, ‘Oh, it’s anecdotal, oh hydroxychloroquine or Plaquenil, anecdotal evidence!’ Anecdotal evidence means storytelling. It’s not storytelling!
The WHO calls Plaquenil and hydroxychloroquine an essential medicine for all health. 70 years of data in its use. Same thing for Interferon Type 1. Interferon’s very low dose, very effective at preventing the spread, even the jumping of viruses from species and and that therapy has been prevented from getting to the people.
So, now in 2020, we use pre-exposure prophylaxis around the world for HIV…and Tony Fauci is deliberately misrepresenting that and leading to the spread of this virus throughout the world.
Gary Franchi: Now, I want to I want to talk about your encounter with Fauci in 2006 but you know right now we’re in the middle of this this global pandemic, people are terrified, people are losing jobs. I believe the number is 26 million people, probably more, now who are out of work in the United States.
Social distancing has been applied, different states are now requiring masks in public. That being said, this is all based off of initial numbers; these reactions from our governments, state and federal, are based these reactions, are based on numbers that were initially stating that upwards of two million people would die.
When you saw those numbers come out initially and now we’re seeing there they’re walking those numbers back to sixty, to eighty thousand, which is a huge leap a huge leap backwards, what are your thoughts on the government reaction to those initial numbers and where we are right now?
Dr Mikovits: Well, I’m extremely disappointed in the government’s reaction to those numbers, because it clearly shows that this virus has been in the population a lot longer than we knew; that actual natural herd immunities, that is, the development of antibodies that can and have been shown to be neutralizing to prevent further threats of spread and in fact people are not getting nearly as sick and many are asymptomatic, meaning they’re completely well and those people should be working.
And that reduces the numbers of deaths from CV to less than .1% to .3% and those studies are clear… a natural herd immunity has been established from the natural infection and that everyone should go back to work now…
What we’re doing, by keeping people at home and the immune stressed and the illness and things that result from wearing masks – immune compromised cannot wear masks, they need oxygen. You need oxygen. It’s very clear that the treatment of ventilators and the lack of oxygen has been what has been killing people – not a virus.
So, that a single agent is causative for a disease is not true and that perpetrating that, what I call fraud, in order to push an agenda to drive towards a strategy of therapy, when pre-exposure and safe, effective therapies that are sanctioned by the World Health Organization, now for more than 70 years aren’t taking place, is what I believe is destroying human health and will have a lasting effect for many years.
Gary Franchi: Well, hopefully we can get through this thing soon and people can get back to work and we can start to return to normal again. Of course, even Dr Fauci at the podium says that we’re never going to return to normal. I think president Trump thinks otherwise and we all have to be optimistic, here. But let’s take a trip back to 2006, right now: your second encounter with Dr Fauci. What, exactly happened there?
Dr Mikovits: Well, in 2006, I founded and…directed the first neuro-immune institute, based on a Systems Biology approach. We were funded to the tune of $5 million by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and the DoD – the Department of Defense – to look into causations of things like Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Gulf War Syndrome.
And our research showed not only a disease signature but in only five short years, we isolated a new family of mouse cancer-causing and neuro-immune disease-causing viruses that clearly, from…the time of our publication in Science in 2009 to 2011 entered the human virome from contaminated blood supply and contaminated vaccines, from the practice of mixing animal and human tissues in the vaccines and directly injecting these viruses.
They developed to infect, from our control data, almost 50 million people in 2011 and that contaminated blood supply also was in London, England…our collaborators. [It was] a worldwide problem.
So, Dr Fauci stopped our studies, forced the confiscation of my computers and my data from my office and literally directed…the removal of all my grants…and fraudulently commissioned studies by Dr. Ian Lipkin to…make XMRVs – that’s the name of the virus – go away; to say they weren’t a threat…when in a multicenter study that was published in October of 2012, Dr Fauci for that study literally put a fugitive from justice at NIH and said I was not allowed to enter NIH or even fly over airspace, when my name as a co-author was on the study.
And it was said that we could not replicate our own data and that paper was fraud we’re the last line of the abstract in the paper, published in 2012 by Ian Lipkin said there was no evidence of the viral infection, when in fact, our data showed clearly in Table 3, 6% in patients and controls.
When we would have found an association with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, as the last cohort came into the study, Dr Fauci stopped the study, insisted that money stop being wasted and used statistics to make the clear association of these mouse cancer-causing and neuro-immune disease-causing viruses go away.
He awarded Ian Lipkin a $34 million grant within months of the end of the study and the publication of the study, which was clear fraud by Dr Fauci, Dr Varmus and Dr Lipkin and he knowingly did this.
And that grant was to open the Centers for Discovery and Diagnostics and some of the money was used to fund the the North Carolina lab, under Dr. [Ralph] Baric, for the studies on how the epigenetics would – literally, our work in the retroviruses and HIV – the epigenetics of the CVs and and how their relationship to the disease, the disease signature is clearly overlapping with what we found in the mouse viruses.
And again, this I believe – and the data support, significant data support – that this is a cover-up, in the attempt to literally bury the evidence of the people who have been injured worldwide by Dr Fauci’s recklessness.
Gary Franchi: This is fascinating and terrifying at the same time and I understand, now you actually spent time in jail until charges were eventually dropped. What were the circumstances surrounding those charges and what was that experience like for you and what ended up happening?
Dr Mikovits: I was arrested…I was fired on September 29th when I gave a talk at on September 22nd in Ottawa, Canada.
Gary Franchi: What year was this?
Dr Mikovits: 2011. So, in 2011 September 29th, I was told prior to that time that I was to cover-up that the blood supply of the United States was heavily contaminated, which I first reported March 29th of 2011, in which the studies across the summer, with what was called the Blood Working Group with the National Institute of Heart, Lung and Blood, under the direction of Simone Glenn, a paper was rushed to press called, “A Failure to Confirm,” as if it was an Association Study, so that it would appear in the journal, Science directly before the annual Chronic Fatigue Syndrome international meeting on September 22nd.
That journal came out, publishing that diagnostic tests were actually “false positive” and there was no virus and those were the data I was told to present, that in fact, there were no viruses. The blood supply was not contaminated.
When I resisted and showed that clearly, our data were right and true…I was fired immediately, my lab shut down to all of my employees on September 29th, the day before the end of the fiscal year.
Then, for the next six weeks, I was followed and [there was ] an attempt to bully [me] into reporting something else and I did not – this was on November 18th – my house was raided without a warrant. Officers said I was a Fugitive from Justice and the Ventura County Police [said] that I had committed a crime and that they had no warrant. And the crime was supposedly that I removed my laboratory notebooks from the lab. My house was searched, my friend’s house was searched. There were no notebooks.
I was arrested that day without any charges. No charges were filed. I was held for five days without bail, with a bail-hold. All I had to do was sign the piece of paper, which was essentially a confession that said I was wrong and I would spend the rest of my life doing “honest research”, while I was held in jail, the journal Science, who we had convinced that our data were right and true, except for this sequence of the virus that it wasn’t the synthetic virus clone, that it was natural variants of many strains, that was the only thing wrong – we proved the problems with the biological testing and why we couldn’t have a reproducible test in the blood supply, because there were so many strains – and while I was held in jail our papers were retracted and these papers this this paper on the blood supply that was pure fraud listed as “Failure to Confirm” was published at that time.
Gary Franchi: For our viewers sake, the the virus that you’re speaking about, is not CV it’s something else? It’s HIV –
Dr Mikovits: It’s not HIV. It’s a new family of HIV-like viruses. Of AIDS-developing viruses, both AIDS and AIDS-associated cancer. So it’s not HIV but it definitely causes acquired immune deficiencies, including the development of cancers from opportunistic infections.
Gary Franchi: Now, you’ve you spent your education, you spent your career looking for ways to help people through medicine. Why have you been such a target? Why are they doing this? What is their motive?
Dr Mikovits: Well, we’re talking about a zoonosis, that is the jumping of species, adding many, many strains, from mouse viruses into by into humans – the human virome by way of biological materials.
And most of our biological therapies today are made using mouse tissue and animal tissue. So, this shows that in fact, for almost forty years, as we’ve mixed animal and human tissue – it’s called xenotransplantation – we’ve directly injected it in the blood and created many, many viruses that come from animals that would otherwise not have been introduced into humans naturally.
That is, they can’t infect human cells. So this is a huge liability for every level of every government, worldwide. The cover-up of a hundred million people with contagious, cancer-causing virus. Contagious – and anyway, look at our exploding cancer figures. Look at our exploding autism, chronic fatigue syndrome, AIDS-like diseases, autoimmune diseases. These are all from from viruses that are acquired not naturally but through biological therapies and this has been perpetrated by our government, knowingly by Tony Fauci since that first explosion of HIV.
Nobody’s saying the virus doesn’t exist and wasn’t isolated from the very sickest of people. But how did it get around the world? It’s very clear that the kinds of things that are being done now to promote…patents and things that Tony Fauci and others hold are driving these pandemics, with the idea to [control our] rights and our freedom to strengthen our immune systems, rather than be injected with environmental toxins…it’s destroyed multiple generations. We’re no longer able to procreate and propagate our families. It’s the end of many of our families.
Gary Franchi: Now, looking at the the media and and when I just recently did a report and it was a montage that MSNBC had created and was all these individuals in the media, talking heads absolutely showering Fauci with praise. Now, it’s one thing for him to go up to the podium every day and speak with with the authority that he’s been given by the Federal Government but when you see the media heaping praise on him – even some going as far as to say – someone told me he was going to be a nominated for “Sexiest Man of the Year”!
I mean, just some of those ridiculous things I’ve ever heard of. What’s her reaction to that?
Dr Mikovits: Well, I’m actually saddened by that…that our media can’t look at sinful data. I mean in really…the end of investigative journalism. It’s so clear, there years and years of where, these decisions made by Tony Fauci, made by Robert Redfield, and Deborah Birx, as we worked on programs, as they worked on programs in HIV, which literally, at the time, they should have been literally criminally charged for for killing millions and and everyone knew it at that time and it was covered up.
So, to hear these things and have them stand there – and have no investigative or few investigative journalists come out and say, “Wait a minute. That’s not how we remember it.” So that we are whitewashing and and removing all of history from our memories and we don’t remember when, because of their actions HIV spread through the military, through the first responders through the lab workers and doctors and nurses.
Why? How can nobody remember how the susceptible populations, the gays, the IV drug users, the prostitutes, how culturally, we spun something into their behavior. And now, the behavior is simply wanting your own bodily freedom and that of your children. So, now, if we don’t wear a mask – which I will never wear – it will kill me, I have a congenital lung disease, which is why my voice sounds like this…
That people can actually believe healthy people spread disease and push an agenda of injections that would clearly kill millions of people – and those are the very people they’ve injured over the last forty years and already decimated whole populations.
Gary Franchi: Now, I want to take a look at what NBC reported here, in regards to the Chinese CV. “NBC News reports the US intelligence community is examining whether it caused the global pandemic because it emerged accidentally from a Chinese research lab.” What is your take?
Dr Mikovits: It’s very clear that this wasn’t a natural evolution of a CV. Anytime you go by way of a laboratory, it’s not natural evolution and in fact, in those original studies that were published in 2015, Tony Fauci, the NIAID, Ian Lipkin through the new Centers for Discovery and – that’s also NIAID money – and Diagnostics actually funded the cell line strains that that were used to grow the virus and that cell line strain came directly from Fort Detrick and USAMRIID (U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases).
So an unintended release, maybe but USAMRIID was shut down in 2019 for safety concerns. It says right in the paper, where the cell line that was used to grow and propagate and spread these CVs around the world because they ship them to the laboratories. That’s how research works. That it came from a laboratory is clear and I think not only the Wuhan Biosafety Level 4 but the Biosafety Level 4 at Fort Detrick, USAMRIID of infectious disease right there, at Fort Detrick where I worked for 22 years and directly in that laboratory, I did research on Ebola.
It’s clear that these two labs colluded under the direction of Tony Fauci, when it was, in fact illegal in this country to do those studies…
Gary Franchi: So, you’re speaking of the moratorium that was placed on coronavirus research that was then transferred to the Wuhan lab and at the tune of $3.7 million is that we were speaking about?
Dr Mikovits: Correct and additional funds that weren’t listed in that $3.7 million.
Gary Franchi: So do you believe that what Fauci did there was, in fact a criminal act, because he was trying to get around the moratorium of that research?
Dr Mikovits: Yes, I do. Just as he’s done…for instance, cannabis research – the US government holds the patent and yet it’s illegal to do the work here and he funds study studies around the world to do that with taxpayers’ money.
Gary Franchi: Unbelievable. Unbelievable and he’s up at the podium every day, telling President Trump exactly what he should be doing.
Do you believe the President is more or less – I believe he is – but do you believe he’s at a rock and a hard place, here because he’s getting information from Birx and Fauci but then he has to make these decisions on whether he’s going to sacrifice the economy or go with them on their on the numbers that have since proved wrong.
Dr Mikovits: Yeah, I absolutely believe he’s between a rock and a hard place but I think, since the proof is clearly out there, that people aren’t sick, that this isn’t the threat, there’s several studies, doctors, as you know talking about what’s actually killing people, so I believe he has enough data and…he would have the people’s support to end this right now and put everybody back to work.
There will be no threat in the Fall from a re-emergence – unless that vaccine is given…the antibody from the vaccine actually promotes the disease. So the natural antibodies that have been generated clearly demonstrated natural herd immunity, is what President Trump could stand on and and nobody, anywhere would deny those data and it would prove out that we are not at risk and we could restore our economy today, tomorrow. It should have happened last week.
Gary Franchi: Well, with all the research we’ve been seeing in the publication of antibody studies out of Stanford, the University of Southern California, as well as New York. There’s clearly more evidence and more data that’s becoming available that is going to I believe help these people in in positions of authority to make the right decisions and we hope they do and I hope that they can reopen this economy.
I want to talk about your book, Plague of Corruption. It sold out immediately after its release date, just two weeks ago and it’s currently available only as a kindle e-book on Amazon (we’re going to include a link in the description). Tell our viewers what to briefly expect.
Dr Mikovits: This book is about the plague of corruption that we’re experiencing right now. It’s propaganda masquerading as science, it tells how I was jailed, how I was threatened, how the threats were carried through, literally at every level, the corruption in the courts, how the media is driving these pandemics and how these pandemics have been driven.
Bobby Kennedy jr. writes a fabulous forward, where he talks about – he literally walks through history how we’ve been lied to as a public about environmental toxins and about these programs, which have have literally caused the development, the explosion of chronic diseases at the hand of doctors Fauci and Dr Redfield, Dr Birx. You know, the entire corrupt Old Boys Network that has been in power since at least 1980, for my entire career.
So, that’s what it walks through. At the end of the book is a fabulous ending. It shows how we have proven them wrong, how we were able to, how we refuse the order to throw away the data, to autoclave, to burn all of the samples from the infected people from our research, from 2011 and ’12 and how we secure those data and gave them to the FBI a full five years ago and that’s been covered up to the DOJ to the Attorney General’s office, how I had a lawsuit that implicates every one of these people for five years, held under seal…meaning, nobody could talk about it while the government decided if…they could give me whistleblower status.
The minute this book came in press, that case was dropped with prejudice, which means I made it all up to promote a book. We have the evidence, we have the evidence secured, we have the receipt from the FBI for the terabyte hard drive that proves everything I’m saying over the course of the last twenty to thirty years.
Gary Franchi: Dr. Judy it’s been a pleasure having you on. The last thing I wanna drive home here is ask you the question: Should Dr Fauci be indicted?
A US government analysis leaked to the Washington Times concludes that the Wuhan Institute of Virology or the Chinese CDC is the "most likely" source of the COVID-19 pandemic which has killed over 200,000 people worldwide in roughly four months.
Nobody knows how many people died as a result of the UK/US Coalition of Death led destruction of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and, by proxy, Syria and Yemen. Nobody even knows how many people western forces themselves killed directly. That is a huge number, but still under 10% of the total.
ORIGINAL LINK US Government Report Concludes Wuhan Lab 'Most Likely Source' Of COVID-19 Outbreak
Update (0855ET): Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Fox News on Wednesday that the US knows that the pandemic began in Wuhan, but that China still refuses to disclose information about their facilities and is engaging in 'classic communist disinformation.'
He added that the CCP must be held accountable.
* * *
A US government analysis leaked to the Washington Times concludes that the Wuhan Institute of Virology or the Chinese CDC is the "most likely" source of the COVID-19pandemic which has killed over 200,000 people worldwide in roughly four months.
The document, compiled from open sources and not a finished product, says there is no smoking gun to blame the virus on either the Wuhan Institute of Virology or the Wuhan branch of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, both located in the city where the first outbreaks were reported. -Washington Times
And while we may not have a smoking gun proving that COVID-19 escaped from the Wuhan lab, "there is circumstantial evidence to suggest such may be the case," according to the report.
Also, it's perhaps the world's easiest game of connect-the-dots;
Stored away and forgotten until January this year, the sample from the horseshoe bat contains the virus that causes Covid-19. -WSJ
Peng Zhou, WIV's head of Bat Virus Infection and Immunization, was researching "the molecular mechanism that allows Ebola and SARS-associated coronaviruses to lie dormant for a long time without causing diseases," while a press release from his lab was titled "How bats carry viruses without getting sick."
Zhou's colleague, Shi Zhengli, has been involved in bioengineering bat coronaviruses - co-authoring a controversial 2015 paperwhich described the creation of a new virus by combining a coronavirus found in Chinese horseshoe bats with another that causes human-like severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in mice.
In 2015, Nature magazine expressed concern over Zhengli's experiments with bat coronavirus. The same year, the US government suspended funding to the labdue to their concern over risks of experimenting with bat coronavirus.
What's more, while the Wuhan Institute of Virology is located around 20 miles from the wet market where roughly 40% of the original outbreaks occurred, China's CDC is located roughly 900 feet away as the bat flies.
Again, this doesn't take Matlock to solve.
"All other possible places of the virus’s origin have been proven to be highly unlikely," the government document concludes - a copy of which was obtained by the Times.
Chinese authorities have said the origin of the virus is unknown but initially stated that it came from animals at a “wet market” in Wuhan where exotic meat is butchered and sold. They said the virus may have jumped from bats to animals sold at the market last year and then infected humans.
U.S. officials have grown increasingly skeptical of that version of events. President Trump confirmed this month that “a lot of people” are investigating the origin. Army Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said U.S. intelligence agencies are investing whether the virus escaped from a lab or was the result of a naturally occurring outbreak. -Washington Times
"The most logical place to investigate the virus origin has been completely sealed off from outside inquiry by the CCP," the document reads, referring to the Chinese Communist Party - which has taken 'draconian' steps to control information regarding the virus since January.
"A gag order to both places was issued on Jan. 1, 2020, and a major general from the PLA who is China’s top military microbiologist essentially took over the [Wuhan Institute of Virology] since mid-January."
A medical doctor named Wu Xiaohua has launched an online campaign to expose the work of Shi Zhengli - who Wu claims used lab animals to test the virus which could infect humans. One of those animals, suggests Wu, may have been the origin of the pandemic.
Wu also suggested that animals from the WIV weren't properly disposed of, and in some cases were sold as pets. According to the report, lab workers reportedly boiled and ate used laboratory eggs.
"Wu’s charges of WIV management negligence are specific and have not been convincingly rebutted by WIV," claims Wu.
Shi, meanwhile, said "I promise with my life that the virus has nothing to do with the lab," in response to the accusations.
Patient Zero?
Another piece of evidence contained in the government memo is the disappearance of WIV lab worker Huang Yanling, who some suspect is "patient zero."
"Huang worked at WIV but she is the only WIV employee whose biography, profile and picture have been deleted by WIV on its website, fueling speculation of foul play," reads the report.
The institute, meanwhile, claims that Huang is healthy and left the institute to work in another province.
That said, "Huang herself has never appeared in public and she has since disappeared," according to the report - which notes that China's internet has been abuzz with speculation as to her whereabouts.
Amid the controversy, China has imposed restrictions on all publications regarding the origins of COVID-19, while many have claimed the virus couldn't have come from the lab.
Yuan Zhiming, director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, stated publicly this month that “there is no way this virus came from us.”
Edward Holmes, an evolutionary virologist at the University of Sydney in Australia, said there is no evidence that the virus that causes COVID-19 in humans “originated in a laboratory in Wuhan, China.”
He said the bat virus kept at the Wuhan Institute of Virology was sampled from a different province and that the genome sequence divergence between that virus, RaTG13, and SARS-CoV-2 “is equivalent to an average of 50 years (and at least 20 years) of evolutionary change.”
“Hence, SARS-CoV-2 was not derived from RaTG13,” he wrote in a piece for the Science Media Center. -Washington Times
The Times also notes that several academic papers have concluded that no evidence exists that the virus was manufactured in a lab, however the question of whether it was a natural virus which may have escaped is still the subject of heated debate.
China, meanwhile, is blaming the United States - and has suggested that the US Army or the CIA developed the virus and covertly released it in China. Chinese research fellow Shi Yi of the Institute of Microbiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, said that it's too early to make a judgement on the allegations.
The remarks came amid circulating reports alleging that the Fort Detrick laboratory, which handles high-level disease-causing materials such as Ebola, in Fredrick, Maryland, may be the origin of the deadly novel coronavirus, which has infected more than 2.6 million Americans with nearly 20,000 deaths as of 4:30 pm Thursday.
The lab was ordered to shut down in July 2019, reportedly for multiple causes, including failure to follow local procedures and a lack of periodic recertification training for workers in the biocontainment laboratories.
Some other posts on social media platforms also alleged that a US armed diplomatic driver and cyclist who was in Wuhan in October 2019 for the cycling competition in the Military World Games, could be patient zero for COVID-19 in Wuhan. -Global Times (state-owned)
Meanwhile, China has threatened Australia with severe economic consequences if they continue to investigate the origins of the pandemic.
On Monday, Chinese Ambassador Cheng Jingye told Sky News that while China's response may not have been "perfect," Australia's inquiry was "dangerous," and could lead to Chinese consumers avoiding Chinese exports and travel.
So what is being done by the Australia side?" asked Cheng. "The proposition is a kind of teaming up with those forces in Washington and to launch a kind of political campaign against China."
"The Chinese public is frustrated, dismayed and disappointed with what Australia is doing now," said Cheng. "I think in the long term… if the mood is going from bad to worse, people would think ‘Why should we go to such a country that is not so friendly to China?’ The tourists may have second thoughts."
Perhaps it's because, according to the Daily Telegraph, "the Five Eyes intelligence agencies of Australia, Canada, NZ, UK and US, are understood to be looking closely at the work of a senior scientist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Peng Zhou," spent three years working at the Australian Animal Health Laboratory between 2011 and 2014, where he was sent by China to complete his doctorate.
During this time, Zhou arranged for wild-caught bats to be transported alive by air from Queensland to the Australian Animal Health Laboratory in Victoria where they were euthanised for dissection and studied for deadly viruses.
His work was funded jointly by the CSIRO and the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
It examined bat immunology and the role of interferons and how “bats are rich reservoirs for emerging viruses, including many that are highly pathogenic to humans and other mammals” and “many of which cause significant morbidity and mortality in humans and other mammals.” -Daily Telegraph
Western intelligence is also looking into Shi Zhengli, who also spent time in Australia as a visiting scientist from February 22 to May 21, 2016 - where she "used faecal samples of horseshoe bats to identify that they were the natural host for SARS-like coronaviruses," according to the Telegraph report.
Dr Andrew Kaufman delves deeply into what is called Koch’s Postulates, which, since the 1980s, has been the gold standard used to scientifically determine if an illness is caused by a specific pathogen. This may not be an exciting topic but, if you want to know if the coronavirus really is the cause of the illnesses and deaths attributed to it, you must understand Koch’s Postulates. Dr. Kaufman walks us through each of them and examines the official lab reports that claim to have met their requirements. You will see the proof for yourself that not even one of the four postulates were satisfied. Let’s be clear on this. That means there is zero scientific support for the claim that coronavirus is the cause of ANY illnesses or deaths, and that all of them could be caused by other strains of other viruses, including seasonal flu.
The economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic continues to have devastating consequences for the vast majority of the population in the United States. The new month begins on Friday, which means that rents and mortgages will come due for tens of millions of workers who have no income to pay for them.
More than 20 million people have filed for unemployment benefits over the past five weeks. In March, less than 30 percent of those who filed received any benefits. Millions more are ineligible for any assistance.
Millions of people have yet to receive anything, including the $1,200 federal cash stimulus, and are desperately attempting to stave off destitution. Food banks are overwhelmed by demand and are running out of staple goods. According to the Economic Policy Institute, more than nine million people who lost their jobs have also lost their health insurance through April 11, with millions more in the weeks that have followed.
There are, however, two realities, two Americas. While the economic destitution of workers is being used in an effort to drive them back to work over widespread opposition, the corporate and financial oligarchy has seen its fortunes increase.
Gigantic corporations, many of which have massive cash hoards, are laying off employees while continuing to pay executives. Entertainment giant Disney recently came under public scrutiny over the fact that it has furloughed more than 100,000 workers while maintaining its executive compensation program. But this is the general rule.
US billionaires, since mid-March, have increased their wealth by $282 billion. The collective fortune of these 614 individuals, which totals $3.2 trillion, has been buoyed by the continued rise of share values on Wall Street, which increased sharply again on Monday.
A headline in the German newsweekly Der Spiegel yesterday captured the economic situation: “The death toll in the US is rising—so are the markets.” Noting that while businesses remain shut down and joblessness exceeds by far anything seen in American history, Der Spiegel writes: “So if the fundamental economic data actually offer so little incentive to buy, what is behind the rally? The solution to the riddle has three letters: Fed.”
The Fed—that is, the US Federal Reserve—has made clear that it will do everything in its power to support Wall Street. As a consequence, the markets keep going up. “If you wanted to bet on price losses,” Der Spiegel remarks, “you would have to bet against an institution whose funds are practically infinite.”
Beginning in March, as the Trump administration and the media were downplaying the danger posed by the coronavirus pandemic, the Federal Reserve began funneling money into the markets—first by reducing interest rates to zero, then by initiating a raft of programs to buy up assets from banks and corporations, providing them with cash to purchase stocks.
The activity of the Federal Reserve was endorsed unanimously by the US Congress in late March, when it passed the “CARES Act,” which allocated $454 billion to finance up to $4 trillion in asset purchases. Every single senator voted for the CARES Act, including the erstwhile “democratic socialist” from Vermont, Bernie Sanders.
The Fed is spending something on the order of $80 billion every day. The central bank’s balance sheet is expected to increase to as much as $11 trillion, from less than $4 trillion last year and less than $1 trillion before 2008. This would bring the overall value of assets held by the Fed to nearly half the entire annual economic output of the United States.
One should call things by their right names. Terms such as “asset purchases” and “quantitative easing” tend to obscure what is happening. This is plunder, thievery, robbery on an unprecedented scale. Since stock ownership is overwhelmingly concentrated among the rich, it is the rich who are benefiting.
The Great Wall Street Heist of 2020 has been aided and abetted at every stage by the Democratic and Republican parties. The various institutions of the state, including the mainstream media, have exposed themselves as nothing more than the paid hirelings of Wall Street, to put the matter delicately. Others might have more expressive terms.
After the 2008 crisis, the Bush and Obama administrations orchestrated the bailout of Wall Street, buying up all the bad debts, particularly in mortgage-backed securities, that had been used as vehicles for an orgy of speculation. As a result, social inequality increased to record levels. Corporate cash hoards rose to $2 trillion. Some $4 trillion was funneled into stock buybacks.
Far from being forced to pay for the economic consequences of the pandemic, the banks and corporations have simply been bailed out again, this time on a far larger scale. Once again, the crisis is being utilized as an opportunity to restructure class relations in the interests of the rich.
Everything turned over to Wall Street will be paid, in one form or another, by the working class–through austerity, the further destruction of social programs and intensified exploitation. Hence the relentless campaign to return everyone back to work, risking a new wave of the pandemic and the deaths of countless thousands of people.
Such measures, we are told, are necessary to “save the economy.” But “the economy,” like the “American people,” is an abstraction. “The economy” that has been “saved” is the economy of the rich, capitalism. Every measure taken has been based on protecting the interests of the oligarchy at the expense of society. Every policy has been guided by class interests.
A socialist response, that is, one based on the interests of the working class, is of an entirely different character. Trillions must be allocated, not to bail out Wall Street, but to implement an emergency program to build up health care infrastructure and provide protective equipment to all essential workers.
The loans and other mechanisms through which the income of workers is earmarked for payments to the banks must be immediately forgiven. Student debt ($1.5 trillion), car loans ($1.3 trillion) and credit card debt ($1.08 trillion) could all be wiped out with the money that has been turned over to Wall Street, with trillions still left over.
All workers must continue to receive their full income for the duration of the pandemic. The highest quality health care must be available to all, free of charge and on a completely equal basis.
There must, moreover, be real assistance to small businesses. The so-called Paycheck Protection Program passed by Congress, ostensibly to aid small businesses, has turned out to be another massive swindle for large corporations, including restaurant chains, hotel conglomerates and hedge funds.
Such actions and other emergency measures to secure the interests of the working class, in the United States and internationally, could not and cannot be secured within the framework of the existing state institutions.
The entire response to the pandemic—from the initial downplaying of the threat to the failure to organize any significant response, the massive handout to Wall Street and the present campaign to force workers back to work even as the pandemic rages—is proof of the Marxist theory of the state. The state is not a neutral body. The financial oligarchy rules. It is their state. The politicians are their politicians. The media is their media.
The Socialist Equality Party insists that the interests of the working class cannot be secured without a frontal assault on the capitalist system. The wealth of the financial oligarchs must be seized. Their stranglehold over the social and economic system must be broken through the transformation of the gigantic banks and corporations into publicly-owned utilities.
The logistics, food production, health care, energy, manufacturing and other basic industries must be restructured to meet social needs, under the democratic control of the working class. The massive bailouts of Wall Street must be reversed, with the social resources redirected to securing the financial well-being and health of the working class.
Such policies cannot be realized within the existing political system. They raise the necessity for the revolutionary mobilization of the working class to take political power in its own hands through the establishment of a workers’ government—that is, a government of the workers, by the workers and for the workers—that will implement the socialist policies required to save mankind from disaster.
Tyler Durden Fri, 05/01/2020 - 02:00
Tyler Durden Wed, 04/29/2020 - 11:25
