Expect more main points, and more controversies, about the origins of COVID-19 in China as a House committee continues its investigation. While many in the administration in early 2020 without delay began pushing the narrative that the coronavirus originated in nature, several scientists and the U. S. State Department have not been able to push the narrative that the coronavirus originated in nature. The U. S. government had serious doubts and pointed to the wealth of circumstantial evidence that the virus came from a Chinese laboratory.
At the first hearing on the issue of origins, Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, announced that he wasn’t just inviting Drs. Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci of the National Institutes of Health to testify on the issue but also key bodies of workers from other federal agencies, the U. S. State Department added.
The key question for Congress and the nation: Does COVID-19 have an herbal or laboratory origin?There is a war of words between scientists; And among U. S. intelligence agencies there is no consensus.
But human intelligence at the beginning of the outbreak in Wuhan, China, may still provide important clues to solving the mystery. That’s why State Department testimony is so important.
The mainstream media largely ignored an intriguing fact. In April 2020, when Fauci and Collins were busy denying the validity of the lab leak theory after “inducing” NIH-funded scientists to write a March 2020 paper to debunk the imaginable origins of the COVID-19 Lab, one or more State Department officials investigating the matter concluded that the pandemic likely originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.
According to new evidence recently released by the subcommittee’s Republican staff, in February 2020, some prominent virologists first believed the novel coronavirus originated in a lab. However, within days they abandoned their initial assessment and accepted the concept of an herbal (animal) origin of COVID-19, and then temporarily wrote a paper for Nature Medicine, a leading peer-reviewed journal, to debunk the notion that the virus was a “laboratory construct. “
His paper, “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,” was published on March 17, 2020 and has one of the most influential articles in the professional literature, reinforcing the mainstream media narrative that COVID-19 had a “natural” origin. . Formation
Even so, there is evidence of doubt among the authors. Commenting on a draft article on February 11, 2020, W. Ian Lipkin of Columbia University, one of the authors, told a colleague:
It is well-reasoned and provides a credible argument against genetic engineering. It does not offer the option of premature release after adaptation through variety in culture at Wuhan Institute. Given the breadth of CoV bat studies being conducted there and the site of the first human cases, we have a nightmare of circumstantial evidence to evaluate.
Regardless, the State Department took this “nightmare” of circumstantial evidence seriously. According to a remarkable April 2020 State Department memo, “There is no direct, irrefutable evidence that a leak in the Wuhan lab caused the pandemic, however, there is circumstantial evidence to suggest that it did. “
The author(s) of the ministry’s five-page memorandum(s) stated that:
In April 2020, amid the largest foreign medical emergency since the 1918 flu pandemic, NIH and State Department officials communicated with each other and shared data and assessments. Based on Collins and Fauci’s available email traffic, they weren’t. Congress find out why.
Subsequently, on January 15, 2021, the State Department released a sheet that supplemented its initial assessment last year. Regarding the first cases of COVID-19 in China, the State Department reported:
The U. S. government The U. S. Department of Health and Prevention has an explanation for why several WIV researchers became ill in the fall of 2019, before the first known case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with Covid-19 and non-unusual seasonal illnesses. This raises questions about the credibility of lead researcher Shi Zhengli WIV. la’s public claim that there was “no” infection among WIV staff and academics with SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-related viruses.
While the U. S. National Intelligence Council. Unsure of the origin of the pandemic, hopefully declaring, “We believe the virus was not a biological weapon. “However, in January 2021, the State Department memo noted: “Secrecy and non-disclosure are standard practice in Beijing. For many years, the United States has publicly expressed its fear about China’s paintings on biological weapons, which Beijing has not demonstrably documented or eliminated, despite its transparent obligations under the Biological Weapons Act. Convention.
Specifically in relation to the Wuhan laboratory, the State Department memo states: “Although WIV presents itself as a civilian institution, the United States has decided that WIV collaborated on secret publications and projects with the Chinese military. WIV has engaged in classified research, adding laboratory animal experiments, on behalf of the Chinese military since at least 2017. “
Despite the maximum productive efforts of senior NIH officials and their media allies, the lab leak theory is no longer a debunked “conspiracy” theory. In 2021, British allied intelligence decided that the laboratory leak theory was “feasible. “And today, analysts at the Department of Energy and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have decided, with varying degrees of confidence, that the maximum maximum of COVID-19 likely originated in a lab. This evidence aligns with recent congressional testimony through former CDC Director Robert Redfield. .
Breaking with the dominant media discourse, independent hounds have come to the same conclusion. The most productive initial summary of circumstantial evidence presented through Nicholas Wade, a former New York Times science reporter, who concluded in 2021 that the virus is genetically engineered in the Wuhan lab:
It is documented that researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were conducting gain-of-function experiments designed for coronaviruses to infect humanized human cells and mice. This is precisely the kind of experiment from which a SARS2-like virus could have emerged. the researchers were not vaccinated against the viruses under study and were operating under the minimum protective conditions of a BSL2 laboratory. Therefore, the leakage of a virus would not be surprising. Across China, the pandemic broke out at the gates of Wuhan. The virus has already adapted well to humans, as would be expected from a virus grown in humanized mice.
Given Communist China’s refusal to cooperate with foreign fitness authorities, solving the mystery of COVID-19’s origins will likely be up to intelligence agencies. that the origins of COVID-19 had an “intelligence problem” and that British intelligence deserves to “induce” Chinese defectors to discover the truth.
Members of the House Special Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic have rendered a valuable public service. By summoning the right State Department staff, they can shed light on the source of the most damaging and fatal pandemic in more than a century.
Do you have an opinion on this article? To ring the doorbell, please email letters@DailySignal. com and we will consider posting your edited comments in our normal “We hear you” feature. call and locality and/or state.
Don’t have time to read the Washington Post or the New York Times?So get The Morning Bell, a morning edition of the day’s most vital political news, conservative observation, and original reporting from a team committed to following the truth, no matter where. Leads.
Have you ever felt that the only difference between the New York Times and the Washington Post was the name?We do. Try the morning bell and receive the maximum vital news and the observation of the day from a team committed to reality in formats that respect your time. . . and your intelligence.