John R. Houk, Blog Editor
© April 7, 2022
Dr. Joseph Mercola posted this interesting title on his
website 4/7/22: “Evidence of Pandemic and Bioweapon Cover-Ups.”
The title was enough of a hook for me to see if Dr. Mercola found the bioweapon
fire making all the bioweapon smoke one has been reading and Russia has been
blowing.
UNFORTUNATELY, Dr. Mercola has pieced together more smoke.
GRANTED, it is some solid dark smoke enhancing more involvement of the U.S. in
bioweapon research in Ukraine.
YET for me, the most damning connect the dots suggests
bioweapons research is going on by a powerful many that includes the USA, the
CCP of China, Russia and the Corporatist-Fascist-Marxist Globalists perpetrating
their One-World Government agenda under the cryptic direction of World Economic
Forum (WEF) Elitists. Which should stimulate EVERY citizen of a sovereign nation
to wonder if their cultural heritage is about to be erased.
As an American I have a tremendous affinity to the Life,
Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness instituted by our Founding Fathers. I seem
to see the Founders’ American Principles dissipating as elusive vapor through
historical distortions, unconstitutional Judicial fiat, Dem-Marxist Executive
Orders, Medical Tyranny, Patriotic Pride redefined as domestic terrorism, and
let’s be frank – RIGGED
ELECTIONS! (You can buy the documentary “Rigged: The
Zuckerberg Funded Plot to Defeat Donald Trump” for digital download or DVD -
HERE)
Unless one has a paid subscription to Dr. Mercola’s very
important researched posting, one has a 48-hour window to read for free. Below
is Dr. Mercola’s post on the corrupt biolabs with tentacles to nefarious
bioweapons. The bioweapons implications are still more smoke than fire.
JRH 4/7/22
I need your generosity. PLEASE
GIVE to overcome research expenses:
Please
Support SlantRight 2.0
Big Tech Censorship is pervasive – Share voluminously on
all social media platforms!
*******************************
Evidence of Pandemic and Bioweapon Cover-Ups
Metabiota
Pandemic-Bioweapon Cover-Ups
Analysis by Dr. Joseph
Mercola
April 7, 2022
Mercola.com
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Ø As
evidence of a potential bioweapons cover-up has started emerging, a company
called Metabiota is gaining prominence
Ø Metabiota’s
mission is to make the world more resilient to epidemics by providing “data,
analytics, advice and training to prepare for global health threats and
mitigate their impacts.” Its founder is a World Economic Forum Young Global
Leader graduate
Ø Metabiota
investors include In-Q-Tel, a CIA venture capital firm that specializes in
high-tech investments that support or benefit the intelligence capacity of U.S.
intelligence agencies, Hunter Biden’s investment fund, Rosemont Seneca and the
U.S. Department of Defense’s Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), which contracted
Metabiota to run operations in U.S.-connected labs in Ukraine
Ø In
addition to having close ties to the WEF and its Great Reset agenda, Nathan
Wolfe, the founder of Metabiota, has also served on the EcoHealth Alliance’s
editorial board since 2004. In 2017, he co-wrote a study on coronaviruses in
bats together with EcoHealth president Peter Daszak, Ph.D. EcoHealth worked
closely with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China, where SARS-CoV-2
is suspected of having originated
Ø Metabiota’s
Global Partnerships are led by Andrew C. Weber, former assistant secretary of
defense for Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Defense, who created the DTRA
As evidence of a potential bioweapons cover-up has started
emerging, a company called Metabiota is gaining prominence. The links between
Metabiota and several key players in the COVID pandemic and/or the Ukraine labs
story are manifold, so there’s no really simple way to unravel it in a logical
sequence. That said, let’s start with what Metabiota does and the connections
of its founder, and expand from there.
Metabiota’s Mission
Metabiota’s mission is to make the world more resilient to
epidemics by providing “data, analytics, advice and training to prepare for
global health threats and mitigate their impacts.”1
Through data analysis, they help “decision makers across
government and industry” to estimate and mitigate pandemic risks. But they also
claim to support “sustainable development,” which seems to have little to do
with pandemic risk management.
That term, “sustainable development,” is one promoted by
Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum (WEF). It’s part and parcel
of Schwab’s plan for a global Great Reset and transhumanist revolution (aka,
the Fourth Industrial Revolution).
It’s not surprising, then, to find out that the founder of
Metabiota, Nathan Wolfe, not only has close ties to the WEF, but is also a
rising star there. He’s a WEF Young Global Leader graduate and was awarded the
WEF’s Technology Pioneer award in 2021.
Metabiota and the Search for Pandemic Viruses
Metabiota was a core partner of a United States Agency for
International Development’s (USAID) Pandemic Threat Program called PREDICT,
which sought to identify viruses with pandemic potential.
Contractors funded through this program have included the
EcoHealth Alliance, headed by Peter Daszak. The PREDICT program, directed by
Dennis Carroll, appears to have served as a proof of concept for the Global
Virome Project that Carroll founded.
According to a recent investigation by U.S. Right to Know
(USRTK),2 Carroll appears to have diverted government funds
from the PREDICT program while he was still running it, to fund this personal
side project, which was set up with the intention to collect, identify and
catalogue 1 million viruses from wildlife in an effort to predict which ones
might cause a human epidemic.
Metabiota’s Funding
Metabiota receives funding from several interconnected
organizations and agencies, including:3
• Pilot Growth Management,
cofounded by Neil Callahan. Callahan is also a cofounder of Rosemont Seneca
Technology Partners, and he sits on Metabiota’s board of advisers
• The Global Virome Project, which
reportedly paid (or was planning to pay) Metabiota $341,000 to conduct a
cost-benefit analysis4
• In-Q-Tel, a CIA venture capital
firm that specializes in high-tech investments that support or benefit the
intelligence capacity of U.S. intelligence agencies
• The U.S. Department of Defense’s
Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA).5 Specifically, in 2014, DTRA
awarded Metabiota $18.4 million in federal contracts for scientific and
technical consulting services to the DTRA’s labs in Ukraine and Georgia6
By outsourcing work to private
companies, DTRA is able to circumvent Congressional oversight. Russia is now
accusing the U.S. of funding secret and illegal bioweapons research in these
Ukraine labs, and claims this was the real reason behind its invasion
• Rosemont Seneca,7 an
investment fund co-managed by Hunter Biden.8 If Russia’s
accusations turn out to be true, this tie may prove deeply problematic for the
White House, as this means the Biden family was more or less directly involved
in the funding of that research
Wolfe has also received more than $20 million in research
grants from Google, the NIH and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, just
to name a few, and was a friend of now-deceased Jeffrey Epstein. In his 2012
book, “The Viral Storm,” Wolfe thanked friends for their support, including
Epstein and Boris Nikolic. Nikolic, a biotech venture capitalist, was named
“back-up executor” in Epstein’s will.9
Epstein, who besides being a convicted pedophile and accused
child sex trafficker, had a robust interest in eugenics. It’s now well-known
that he dreamed of creating a “superhuman” race of his own by impregnating
dozens of women at a time at his New Mexico ranch.10 Epstein
also managed to secure meetings with Bill Gates,11 whose family
history is also marked by an interest in eugenics and population control.
Metabiota’s Founder Tied to Suspect in COVID Pandemic
In addition to having close ties to the WEF and its Great
Reset agenda, Wolfe, the founder of Metabiota, has also served on the EcoHealth
Alliance’s editorial board since 2004. In 2017, he even co-wrote a study on
coronaviruses in bats together with EcoHealth Alliance president, Peter Daszak.
As you may recall, EcoHealth Alliance, a nonprofit organization
focused on pandemic prevention, worked closely with the Wuhan Institute of
Virology (WIV) in China, where SARS-CoV-2 is suspected of having originated.12
Daszak — who received funding for coronavirus research from
the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), led by Dr.
Anthony Fauci, and the U.S. State Department13 — subcontracted
some of that work to Shi Zheng-li at the WIV. He was also the coauthor on
research projects at the WIV.
Once rumors of SARS-CoV-2 being man-made first began, Daszak
played a central role in the plot to obscure the lab origin by crafting a
scientific statement condemning such inquiries as “conspiracy theory.”14,15 This
manufactured “consensus” was then relied on by the media to counter anyone
presenting theories and evidence to the contrary.
This, despite the fact that he, in 2015, warned that a
global pandemic might occur from a laboratory incident — and that “the risks
were greater with the sort of virus manipulation research being carried out in
Wuhan”!16
In 2021, two investigations into the origins of the COVID
pandemic were opened, one by the World Health Organization17 and
another by The Lancet,18 and Daszak somehow managed to end up
on both of these committees, despite having openly and repeatedly dismissed the
possibility of the pandemic being the result of a lab leak.19
Editor’s note: The WHO reference has been scrubbed from both
the agency’s website and internet archives, but several news stories like this
one from NPR,20 published after the investigation was launched,
are still live and accessible.
Interestingly, one of EcoHealth Alliance’s policy advisers
is a former Fort Detrick commander named David Franz. Fort Detrick is the
principal U.S. government-run “biodefense” facility, although Franz himself has
publicly admitted that “in biology ... everything is dual use — the people, the
facilities and the equipment.”21
Metabiota and the DTRA
In late May 2016, Metabiota hired Andrew C. Weber,22 a
member of the Council on Foreign Relations, to head up its Global Partnerships.23 Between
2009 and 2014, Weber served as assistant secretary of defense for Nuclear,
Chemical and Biological Defense under then-president Obama.
Weber is credited with creating the Defense Threat Reduction
Agency (DTRA) — a combat support agency within the U.S. DoD, specializing in
countering weapons of mass destruction, including biological weapons24,25 —
and as mentioned earlier, the DTRA has reportedly funded Metabiota to operate
U.S.-funded biological research labs in Ukraine.
The DTRA has also issued a number of grants to the EcoHealth
Alliance, totaling at least $37.5 million,26,27 including a
2017 grant for $6.5 million to “understand the risk of bat-borne zoonotic
disease emergence in Western Asia.”28
According to a December 2020 report by The Defender,29 EcoHealth
Alliance had tried to hide most of the Pentagon funding that it had received
between 2013 and 2020, most of which came from the DTRA.
Metabiota’s Bungled Ebola Response
In 2016, CBS News published a scathing critique of
Metabiota’s response to the 2014 Ebola epidemic in West Africa.30 Metabiota
had been hired by the WHO and the local government of Sierra Leone to monitor
the spread of the epidemic, but according to an investigation by The Associated
Press, “some of the company's actions made an already chaotic situation worse.”
In a July 17, 2014, email obtained by AP, Dr. Eric
Bertherat, medical officer at the WHO’s Department of Epidemic and Pandemic
Alert and Response, complained about misdiagnoses and “total confusion” at the
small laboratory Metabiota shared with Tulane University in Kenema, Sierra
Leone.
According to Bertherat, there was "no tracking of the
samples" and "absolutely no control on what is being done."
"This is a situation that WHO can no longer endorse," he wrote.
Similarly, Sylvia Blyden, special executive assistant to the president of
Sierra Leone, told AP Metabiota's response was a disaster:31
"’They messed up the entire
region,’ she said. She called Metabiota's attempt to claim credit for its Ebola
work ‘an insult for the memories of thousands of Africans who have died.’"
U.S. health official Austin Demby, who evaluated Metabiota’s
and Tulane’s lab work at the request of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention and the government of Sierra Leone, was also critical.
In one email, Demby noted used needles were left out and
there was no ultraviolet light for decontamination. The space was also too
small to safely process blood samples. "The cross-contamination potential
is huge and quite frankly unacceptable," he wrote.
Anja Wolz, an emergency coordinator with Doctors Without
Borders, told AP she witnessed Metabiota workers entering homes of suspected
Ebola patients without protective gear, and leaving high-risk areas without
performing any kind of decontamination procedure. She also accused Metabiota of
miscalculating the severity of the outbreak, while insisting that they had the
situation under control when clearly, they didn’t.
Tulane microbiology professor Bob Garry was also critical of
Metabiota’s choice to have Dr. Jean-Paul Gonzalez run the operation, as
Gonzalez, in 1994, had accidentally gotten infected with a rare hemorrhagic
fever while working in a Yale University lab.
He failed to notify anyone about the exposure for more than
a week, a delay that put more than 100 other people at risk. Gonzalez was
ordered to take a remedial safety course, but according to Garry, such
carelessness was a red flag, and he didn’t think Gonzalez was the right man to
teach Sierra Leoneans about Ebola.
"Do you really want the person who infected himself
with hemorrhagic fever going around explaining to people how to be safe?"
Garry asked in an email to a Metabiota media representative. Wolfe defended his
company, saying there was no evidence they’d done anything wrong. Some of the
problems he blamed on misunderstandings, and others on commercial rivalry.
Lab Accident ‘Most Likely,’ yet Least Probed Cause of
COVID
In a March 28, 2022, report,32 U.S. Right to
Know (USRTK) revealed the contents of a 2020 State Department memo33 obtained
by the group. USRTK writes:34
“‘Origin of the outbreak: The
Wuhan labs remained the most likely but least probed,’ reads the topline. The
memo is written as a BLUF — ‘bottom line up front’ — a style of communication
used in the military. The identity of the author or authors is unknown ...
‘BLUF: There is no direct,
smoking gun evidence to prove that a leak from Wuhan labs caused the pandemic,
but there is circumstantial evidence to suggest such is the case,’ the memo
reads. Apparently drafted in spring 2020, the memo details circumstantial
evidence for the ‘lab leak’ theory — the idea that COVID-19 originated at one
of the labs in Wuhan, China, the pandemic’s epicenter.
The memo raises concerns about
the ‘massive amount’ of research on novel coronaviruses apparently conducted at
the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the nearby Wuhan Center for Disease Control
lab ...The memo also flags biosafety lapses at both labs, calling the Wuhan
Institute of Virology’s ‘management of deadly viruses and virus-carrying lab
animals … appallingly poor and negligent.’
The memo provides an
extraordinary window into behind-the-scenes concerns about a lab accident among
U.S. foreign policy leaders, even as this line of inquiry was deemed a
conspiracy theory by international virologists, some of whom had undisclosed
conflicts of interest.
The memo also calls into
question these virologists’ impartiality. Shi Zhengli, a Wuhan Institute of
Virology coronavirus researcher nicknamed the ‘Bat Woman,’ has forged
wide-reaching international collaborations, including with prestigious Western
virologists, the memo notes.
‘Suspicion lingers that Shi
holds an important and powerful position in the field in China and has
extensive cooperation with many [international] virologists who might be doing
her a favor,’ it reads ...
The memo laments that ‘the most
logical place to investigate the virus origin has been completely sealed off
from inquiry by the [Chinese Communist Party]’ ... The memo even suggests that
other hypotheses may have served as a distraction from a probe of the city’s
extensive research on novel coronaviruses. ‘All other theories are likely to be
a decoy to prevent an inquiry [into] the WCDC and WIV,’ it states ...
The memo cites a 2015 paper35 coauthored
by Shi titled ‘A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows
potential for human emergence’ that described creating a ‘chimera,’ or
engineered virus, with the spike protein of a coronavirus from a Chinese
horseshoe bat.
Editors at Nature Medicine added
a note in March 2020 cautioning that the article was ‘being used as the basis
for unverified theories that the novel coronavirus causing COVID-19 was
engineered’ ... But the memo shows that the State Department indeed considered
the paper relevant to the pandemic’s origins.”
NIH Retracted Gene Sequence at WIV Researcher’s Request
While we’ve yet to obtain bulletproof evidence that
SARS-CoV-2 was developed as a bioweapon, there’s plenty of circumstantial
evidence that points in that direction. Disturbingly, as time goes on, more and
more of this circumstantial evidence seems to highlight the United States’
involvement. If one proverbial finger is pointing at China, four others are
pointing back at us.
This is profoundly bad news, but it really ought to
strengthen our resolve to get to the bottom of it. None of us are safe until
the mad scientists responsible for this pandemic are brought to justice. It
doesn’t matter who they are. In all likelihood, we’ll find that blame cannot be
pinned on a single nation. At bare minimum, the U.S. and China appear to be
covering for each other.
As just one example, there are the deletions of information
that have occurred both at the National Institutes of Health and the WIV,
either at the other’s request, or as what appears to be a favor.
As reported by Just the News,36 NIH deleted
a genetic sequencing submission of SARS-CoV-2 from its Sequence Read Archive
(SRA) at the request of a researcher at the WIV. Emails37 obtained
via FOIA request to the NIH by Empower Oversight show a WIV researcher who had
submitted two genetic sequences to the SRA, one in March 2020, and a second in
June 2020, asked to have the last one retracted.
NIH initially stated that it would be better to edit or
replace the submission rather than retracting it, but the researcher insisted
it be removed, which they did. To be fair, the NIH also states it has retracted
at least eight SRA submissions in total, most from American researchers, at
their request. However, emails also show the NIH directed reporters on how to
provide more favorable and less sensationalized coverage of the deletion of the
Chinese sequence. Just the News writes:38
“[Empower Oversight] says one of
the most disconcerting elements of the emails is evidence showing the NIH has refused
to participate in a transparent process to examine data on the deleted
sequences.
‘Most importantly, why has NIH
refused to examine archival copies of deleted sequences in an open scientific
process to determine whether any of that information might be able to shed
light on the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic?’ the group asked.
However, that argument was
dismissed by NIH official Steve Sherry. Although sequences are never fully
deleted, according to the agency, Sherry told a researcher who asked for
transparency, ‘As you know, when data sets are withdrawn from the database,
that status does not permit use for further analyses.’"
WIV Deleted Mentions of US Collaborators
The WIV has also deleted information in what appears to be
an effort to shield the NIH. Shortly after Fauci testified in a Senate hearing
in March 2021,39 the WIV quietly deleted all mentions of its
collaboration with Fauci’s NIAID, the NIH and other American research partners
from its website. As reported May 15, 2021, by The National Pulse:40
“March 21st, 2021, the lab’s website listed six
U.S.-based research partners: University of Alabama, University of North Texas,
EcoHealth Alliance, Harvard University, the National Institutes of Health
(NIH), the United States, and the National Wildlife Federation.41
One day later, the page was
revised to contain just two research partners — EcoHealth Alliance and the
University of Alabama.42 By
March 23rd, EcoHealth Alliance
was the sole partner remaining.43
EcoHealth Alliance is run by
long-standing Chinese Communist Party-partner Dr. Peter Daszak, who National
Pulse Editor-in-Chief Raheem Kassam has repeatedly claimed will be the first
‘fall guy’ of the Wuhan lab debacle …
Beyond establishing a working
relationship between the NIH and the Wuhan Institute of Virology, now-deleted
posts44 from the site also detail studies bearing the hallmarks
of gain-of-function research conducted with the Wuhan-based lab.”
Indeed, a now-deleted WIV web page titled “Will SARS Come
Back?” stated that:45
“Prof. Zhengli Shi and Xingyi Ge from WIV, in cooperation
with researchers from University of North Carolina, Harvard Medical School,
Bellinzona Institute of Microbiology … examine the disease potential of a
SARS-like virus, SHC014-CoV, which is currently circulating in Chinese
horseshoe bat populations.
Using the SARS-CoV reverse
genetics system, the scientists generated and characterized a chimeric virus
expressing the spike of bat coronavirus SHC014 in a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV
backbone.
The results indicate that group
2b viruses encoding the SHC014 spike in a wild-type backbone can efficiently
use multiple orthologs of the SARS receptor human angiotensin converting enzyme
II (ACE2), replicate efficiently in primary human airway cells and achieve in
vitro titers equivalent to epidemic strains of SARS-CoV.
Evaluation of available
SARS-based immune-therapeutic and prophylactic modalities revealed poor
efficacy; both monoclonal antibody and vaccine approaches failed to neutralize
and protect from infection with CoVs using the novel spike protein.
On the basis of these findings,
they synthetically re-derived an infectious full-length SHC014 recombinant
virus and demonstrate robust viral replication both in vitro and in
vivo …”
The WIV’s deletions of American research partners from its
website (with the exception of EcoHealth Alliance), and its deletion of the
article discussing genetic research on the SARS virus only served to strengthen
suspicions of a cover-up. At the time, the most surprising thing about it was
that they were covering up American involvement and not just their own.
Are We the Bad Guys?
Alas, as noted by Maajid Nawaz,46 a former
Islamist revolutionary who became an anti-extremism activist, if it turns out
that the U.S. did in fact engage in illegal bioweapons development in Ukraine,
it might just turn out that we’re the bad guys here. He writes, in part:47
“On the 24th February 2022, the
very day of Russia’s invasion, some of us were already worried about the
prospect of biological weapons laboratories existing in Ukraine ...
The existence of bio-weapons
labs on Ukraine’s border with Russia has since been confirmed by both Russia
and the US (I say both because the Ukrainian government is essentially serving
as a US proxy). The only remaining question is around what we were doing in those
laboratories.
It is no longer in doubt that we
funded bio-weapons research in the Wuhan lab in China, from where it is now
believed that COVID most likely leaked from. So were we doing the same in
Ukraine too? Russia has certainly made the allegation ...
The official representative of
the Russian Ministry of Defense, Major General Igor Konashenkov stated48 ‘In
the course of a special military operation, the facts of an emergency cleansing
by the Kiev regime of traces of a military biological program being implemented
in Ukraine, funded by the US Department of Defense, were uncovered.’
With this, he released this
document drop49 alleging ... that these papers
substantiated their case. If Russia’s allegations hold up, the US and her proxy
Ukrainian regime would be in violation of the first article of the UN
Convention on the Prohibition of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin
Weapons.50
Russia’s announcement appears to
have forced America’s hand to admit that such bio labs do indeed exist. US
Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland framed this admission by stating that
these labs were for defensive research only.
Under Secretary Nuland however
continued to make the case that such labs would be dangerous if they fell into
Russian hands, without apparently noticing the contradiction inherent in her
position that such labs are only dangerous because they can be weaponized ...
Matching Russian precision
strikes to a map of bio lab locations inside Ukraine certainly does suggest
that Putin’s ‘special military operation’ appears to be targeting some of these
dangerous labs.”
Russian
Missile Strikes in Ukraine
U.S.
Biolabs in Ukraine
Indeed, Nawaz highlights a 2021 Ukrainian petition51,52 to
president Zelensky, asking for a) the immediate closure of “American
bio-laboratories in the territory of Ukraine,” b) an investigation into the
activities of those labs, and c) an investigation into potential Ukrainian
participation in the creation of SARS-CoV-2.
In other words, at least some Ukrainians, by 2021, were
wondering whether the U.S. labs in their country might have been involved in
the creation of this pandemic.
Denouncements Ring Hollow
Not surprisingly, the U.S. State Department took a hard
line, denouncing all allegations with the statement that “The United States
does not have chemical and biological weapons labs in Ukraine.”53 In
another statement,54 the State Department “clarified” that the
labs were for “biodefense,” not biological weapons, thus semantically cleansing
their criminal activities.
The problem with that is that there’s no hard line between
biodefense and bioweapons research. As admitted by EcoHealth Alliance’s policy
advisor and former Fort Detrick commander David Franz, it’s all “dual use — the
people, the facilities and the equipment.”55 Biodefense implies
biowarfare, as it involves the creation of more dangerous pathogens for the alleged
purpose of finding treatments against them.
Bioweapons expert Francis Boyle, who drafted the Biological
Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, has also pointed out that most BSL-4 labs
are dual use: “They first develop the offensive biological warfare agent and
then they develop the supposed vaccine.”56 And then,
there’s the weapons proliferation agreement57 between the U.S.
and Ukraine, signed at the end of August 2005.
U.S.-Ukraine
Anti-Bioweapon Agreement
Incidentally, former President Barrack Obama spearheaded the
project to construct these Ukrainian labs back in 2005, when he was still a
senator and, curiously, the online announcement of his involvement in this
project has also been deleted from the web.58
According to this agreement, the U.S. Department of Defense
will assist the Ministry of Health in Ukraine, at no cost, to prevent
“proliferation of technology, pathogens and expertise” found in a number of
Ukraine labs, that “could be used in the development of biological weapons.”
The Burning Question of Intent
So, the agreement itself clarifies that they’re working on
pathogens that COULD be used as biological weapons, and Nuland’s stated
concerns back this up. The only question remaining then is one of intention.
What’s the intended use of these pathogens? Defense? Or offense? And is there
really a difference?
As noted by Nawaz, the U.S. clinging to the defense of
“biodefense” and anti-bioweapons proliferation is “the equivalent of denying
that Einstein’s discovery of splitting the atom to generate energy is not also
something that could be used to make nuclear weapons. After the COVID outbreak,
the notion that bio labs can be weaponized should simply be presumed as a
rule.”
“Was ensuring that a ‘next
pandemic’ doesn’t occur by taking out these bio labs, what Putin had in mind by
his phrase ‘special military operation’? ~ Maajid Nawaz”
Also, consider the network of players reviewed earlier. The
Ukrainian-American collaboration to study pathogens capable of weaponization is
run by the DTRA, which funds Metabiota, which is run by a WEF leader with close
personal ties to the one person — Daszak — suspected of being a key player in
the creation of SARS-CoV-2, a go-between of the NIH and the WIV, and a central
force in the cover-up of the lab leak theory.
Interestingly, Metabiota is also financially backed by
Hunter Biden’s investment company, and let’s not forget that young Biden also
collected a six-figure salary from a Ukrainian gas company for doing literally
nothing, other than supplying his “powerful name.”59
Circumstantial or not, it just doesn’t look good. And, by
now, it should be crystal clear that any lab doing defensive work is equally
capable of churning out offensive weapons. Debating that point is just silly,
as it all boils down to semantics.
According to Bulgarian journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhieva,
Metabiota is a key player in the Ukrainian labs. David Horowitz, a political
writer, has noted that Metabiota is “a company that tracks the trajectory of
outbreaks and sells pandemic insurance, but also seems to have its hand in the
actual labs that ... might be the source of some of these outbreaks.”60
In other words, could it be that Metabiota has been
producing biological agents under diplomatic cover and then selling pandemic
insurance and pandemic trackers to “help countries get ahead of what they are
putting out”?61
Nawaz asks, “was ensuring that a ‘next pandemic’ doesn’t
occur by taking out these bio labs, what Putin had in mind by his phrase
‘special military operation’?”62 At this point, it seems a
valid question.
My latest book, “The
Truth About COVID-19,” is an instant bestseller. After thousands of
reviews it has a nearly perfect 5-star rating, so grab
your copy today before it’s too late!
Sources and References
1 Metabiota.com
2 USRTK March 16, 2022
3, 5, 9 The Daily Expose March 20, 2022
4 Disinformation Chronicle Substack March 22, 2022
6, 60 Medicalexperiments.news March 31, 2022
7 Rosemont Seneca Investments
8 Rosemont Seneca Team
10 New York Times July 31, 2019
11 New York Times October 12, 2019
12, 16 Daily Mail January 9, 2021
13 Independent Science News March 24, 2021
14 USRTK November 18, 2020
15 GM
Watch November 19, 2020
17 WHO.int Origins of the SARS-CoV-2 Virus
18 The Lancet October 10, 2020; 396(10257): 1102-1124
19 GM
Watch September 23, 2020
20 NPR. WHO Launches a New Group to Study the Origins of the
Coronavirus. October 13, 2021
21, 29, 55 The Defender December 18, 2020
22 D60.darpa.mil
Andrew Weber bio
23 Twitter Alexis Baden-Mayer March 28, 2022
24 DTRA.mil
25 History of DTRA 1998-2008
26 Daily Caller June 7, 2021
27 USA Spending Project Grant to EcoHealth August 2019
28 USA Spending Project Grant to EcoHealth October 2017
30, 31 CBS News March 7, 2016
32, 34 USRTK March 28, 2022
33 State Department Memo
35 Nature Medicine
2015; 21: 1508-1513
36, 38 Just the News March 29, 2022
37 FOIA emails from the NIH
39 MSNBC March 19, 2021
40 National Pulse May 15, 2021
41 Web Archive WIV research partners March 21, 2021
42 Web Archive WIV research partners March 22, 2021
43 Web Archive WIV research partners March 23, 2021
44, 45 Web Archive WIV Will SARS Come Back? December 4, 2015
46, 47, 53, 59, 61, 62 Maajid
Nawaz Substack March 14, 2022
48 CDN Substack
49 Exposing the Darkness Substack March 6, 2022
50 UN
Convention on the Prohibition of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons
51 National File March 11, 2022
52 Petition
on Ukraine’s government website
54 WSWS.org
March 11, 2022
56 Mercola
interview with Francis Boyle published March 8, 2020
57 Agreement Between the United States and Ukraine August 29, 2005
58 Web Archive Bioprepwatch.com June 18, 2010
© 1997-2022 Dr. Joseph Mercola. All Rights
Reserved.
Disclaimer: The
entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola,
unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the
respective author, who retains copyright as marked. The information on this
website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified
health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended
as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of
Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own
health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a
qualified health care professional. If you are pregnant, nursing, taking
medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional
before using products based on this content.
If you want to use an article on
your site please click here. This
content may be copied in full, with copyright, contact, creation and information
intact, without specific permission, when used only in a not-for-profit format.
If any other use is desired, permission in writing from Dr. Mercola is
required.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
