- Spitfire List - https://spitfirelist.com -

Supplement to FTR #1111: Is Coronavirus A “Biological Warfare Psy-Op?”

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash dri­ve that can be obtained HERE [1]. The new dri­ve is a 32-giga­byte dri­ve that is cur­rent as of the pro­grams and arti­cles post­ed by the fall of 2019. The new dri­ve (avail­able for a tax-deductible con­tri­bu­tion of $65.00 or more.)

WFMU-FM is pod­cast­ing For The Record–You can sub­scribe to the pod­cast HERE [2].

You can sub­scribe to e‑mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE [3].

You can sub­scribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE [3].

Please con­sid­er sup­port­ing THE WORK DAVE EMORY DOES [4].

COMMENT: In FTR #1111 [5], we cov­ered dis­turb­ing evi­dence that the coro­n­avirus out­break in Chi­na is a “bio­log­i­cal war­fare psy-op,” part of the desta­bi­liza­tion of Chi­na. When we record­ed the pro­gram, arti­cles were com­ing in as the broad­cast was being pre­pared.

In our haste we neglect­ed to include a very impor­tant sec­tion of a post by Joseph Mer­co­la. Oth­er key fea­tures of the post are in FTR #1111 [6]:

Dr. Mer­co­la not­ed that: ” . . . . As men­tioned, a num­ber of reports raise ques­tions about the source of the 2019-nCoV [The Chi­nese coronavirus–D.E.]. For starters, a 2014 NPR arti­cle32 was rather prophet­ic. It dis­cuss­es the Octo­ber 2014 U.S. mora­to­ri­um on exper­i­ments on coro­n­avirus­es like SARS and MERS, as well as influen­za virus, that might make the virus­es more path­o­gen­ic and/or easy to spread among humans. The ban came on the heels of  ‘high-pro­file lab mishaps’ at the CDC and ‘extreme­ly con­tro­ver­sial flu exper­i­ments’ in which the bird flu virus was engi­neered to become more lethal and con­ta­gious between fer­rets. The goal was to see if it could mutate and become more lethal and con­ta­gious between humans, caus­ing future pan­demics. . . . How­ev­er, for the past decade there have been red flags raised in the sci­en­tif­ic com­mu­ni­ty about biose­cu­ri­ty breach­es in high con­tain­ment bio­log­i­cal labs in the U.S. . . . The fed­er­al mora­to­ri­um on lethal virus exper­i­ments in the U.S. was lift­ed at the end of Decem­ber 2017,38 even though researchers announced in 2015 they had cre­at­ed a lab-cre­at­ed hybrid coro­n­avirus sim­i­lar to that of SARS that was capa­ble of infect­ing both human air­way cells and mice. . . .

” . . . . Equal­ly curi­ous is the fact that Johns Hop­kins Cen­ter for Health Secu­ri­ty, the World Eco­nom­ic Forum and the Bill and Melin­da Gates Foun­da­tion spon­sored a nov­el coro­n­avirus pan­dem­ic pre­pared­ness exer­cise Octo­ber 18, 2019, in New York called ‘Event 201.‘46 The sim­u­la­tion pre­dict­ed a glob­al death toll of 65 mil­lion peo­ple with­in a span of 18 months.47 As report­ed by Forbes Decem­ber 12, 2019:48

‘The experts ran through a care­ful­ly designed, detailed sim­u­la­tion of a new (fic­tion­al) viral ill­ness called CAPS or coro­n­avirus acute pul­monary syn­drome. This was mod­eled after pre­vi­ous epi­demics like SARS and MERS.’ 

Sounds exact­ly like NCIP, does­n’t it? Yet the new coro­n­avirus respon­si­ble for NCIP had not yet been iden­ti­fied at the time of the sim­u­la­tion, and the first case was­n’t report­ed until two months lat­er. 

Forbes also refers to the fic­tion­al pan­dem­ic as ‘Dis­ease X’ — the same des­ig­na­tion used by The Tele­graph in its Jan­u­ary 24, 2020, video report, “Could This Coro­n­avirus be Dis­ease X?“49 which sug­gests that media out­lets were briefed and there was coor­di­na­tion ahead of time with regard to use of cer­tain key­words and catch­phras­es in news reports and opin­ion arti­cles. 

Johns Hop­kins Uni­ver­si­ty (JHU) is the biggest recip­i­ent of research grants from fed­er­al agen­cies, includ­ing the Nation­al Insti­tutes of Health, Nation­al Sci­ence Foun­da­tion and Depart­ment of Defense and has received mil­lions of dol­lars in research grants from the Gates Foun­da­tion.50 In 2016, Johns Hop­kins spent more than $2 bil­lion on research projects, lead­ing all U.S. uni­ver­si­ties in research spend­ing for the 38th year in a row.51

If research fund­ed by fed­er­al agen­cies, such as the DOD or HHS is clas­si­fied as being per­formed ‘in the inter­est of nation­al secu­ri­ty,’ it is exempt from Free­dom of Infor­ma­tion Act (FOIA) requests.52

Research con­duct­ed under the Bio­med­ical Advanced Research and Devel­op­ment Author­i­ty (BARDA) is com­plete­ly shield­ed from FOIA requests by the pub­lic.53 Addi­tion­al­ly, agen­cies may deny FOIA requests and with­hold infor­ma­tion if gov­ern­ment offi­cials con­clude that shield­ing it from pub­lic view ‘pro­tects trade secrets and com­mer­cial or finan­cial infor­ma­tion which could harm the com­pet­i­tive pos­ture or busi­ness inter­ests of a com­pa­ny.’ . . . .”

  “Nov­el Coronavirus–The Lat­est Pan­dem­ic Scare” by Dr. Joseph Mer­co­la; Mer­co­la [7]; 2/4/2020. [7]

. . . . Mora­to­ri­um on SARS/MERS Exper­i­ments Lift­ed in 2017

As men­tioned, a num­ber of reports raise ques­tions about the source of the 2019-nCoV [The Chi­nese coronavirus–D.E.]. For starters, a 2014 NPR arti­cle32 was rather prophet­ic. It dis­cuss­es the Octo­ber 2014 U.S. mora­to­ri­um on exper­i­ments on coro­n­avirus­es like SARS and MERS, as well as influen­za virus, that might make the virus­es more path­o­gen­ic and/or easy to spread among humans.

The ban came on the heels of “high-pro­file lab mishaps” at the CDC and “extreme­ly con­tro­ver­sial flu exper­i­ments” in which the bird flu virus was engi­neered to become more lethal and con­ta­gious between fer­rets. The goal was to see if it could mutate and become more lethal and con­ta­gious between humans, caus­ing future pan­demics.

How­ev­er, for the past decade there have been red flags raised in the sci­en­tif­ic com­mu­ni­ty about biose­cu­ri­ty breach­es in high con­tain­ment bio­log­i­cal labs in the U.S. and glob­al­ly.33 There were legit­i­mate fears that a lab-cre­at­ed super­flu pathogen might escape the con­fines of biose­cu­ri­ty labs where researchers are con­duct­ing exper­i­ments. It’s a rea­son­able fear, cer­tain­ly, con­sid­er­ing that there have been many safe­ty breach­es at bio­labs in the U.S. and oth­er coun­tries.34,35,36,37

The fed­er­al mora­to­ri­um on lethal virus exper­i­ments in the U.S. was lift­ed at the end of Decem­ber 2017,38 even though researchers announced in 2015 they had cre­at­ed a lab-cre­at­ed hybrid coro­n­avirus sim­i­lar to that of SARS that was capa­ble of infect­ing both human air­way cells and mice.

The NIH had allowed the con­tro­ver­sial research to pro­ceed because it had begun before the mora­to­ri­um was put in place — a deci­sion crit­i­cized by Simon Wain-Hob­son, a virol­o­gist at Pas­teur Insti­tute in Paris, who point­ed out that “If the [new] virus escaped, nobody could pre­dict the tra­jec­to­ry.“39

Oth­ers, such as Richard Ebright, a mol­e­c­u­lar biol­o­gist and biode­fence expert at Rut­gers Uni­ver­si­ty, agreed, say­ing “The only impact of this work is the cre­ation, in a lab, of a new, non-nat­ur­al risk.“40

Wuhan is Home to Lab Study­ing World’s Lat­est Pathogens

In Jan­u­ary 2018, Chi­na’s first max­i­mum secu­ri­ty virol­o­gy lab­o­ra­to­ry (biose­cu­ri­ty lev­el 4) designed for the study of the world’s most dan­ger­ous pathogens opened its doors — in Wuhan.41,42 Is it pure coin­ci­dence that Wuhan City is now the epi­cen­ter of this nov­el coro­n­avirus infec­tion? 

The year before, Tim Tre­van, a Mary­land biosafe­ty con­sul­tant, expressed con­cern about viral threats poten­tial­ly escap­ing the Wuhan Nation­al Biosafe­ty Lab­o­ra­to­ry,43 which hap­pens to be locat­ed just 20 miles from the Wuhan mar­ket iden­ti­fied as ground zero for the cur­rent NCIP out­break.44 As report­ed by the Dai­ly Mail:45

“The Wuhan lab is also equipped for ani­mal research,” and “Reg­u­la­tions for ani­mal research — espe­cial­ly that con­duct­ed on pri­mates — are much loos­er in Chi­na than in the U.S. and oth­er West­ern coun­tries … But that was also cause for con­cern for Tre­van. 

Study­ing the behav­ior of a virus like 209-nCoV and devel­op­ing treat­ments or vac­cines for it requires infect­ing these research mon­keys, an impor­tant step before human test­ing. 

Mon­keys are unpre­dictable though, warned [Rut­gers Uni­ver­si­ty micro­bi­ol­o­gist Dr. Richard] Ebright. ‘They can run, they can scratch they can bite,’ he said, and the virus­es they car­ry would go where their feet, nails and teeth do.’ ” 

Coro­n­avirus Out­break Sim­u­la­tion Took Place in Octo­ber 2019

Equal­ly curi­ous is the fact that Johns Hop­kins Cen­ter for Health Secu­ri­ty, the World Eco­nom­ic Forum and the Bill and Melin­da Gates Foun­da­tion spon­sored a nov­el coro­n­avirus pan­dem­ic pre­pared­ness exer­cise Octo­ber 18, 2019, in New York called “Event 201.“46 The sim­u­la­tion pre­dict­ed a glob­al death toll of 65 mil­lion peo­ple with­in a span of 18 months.47 As report­ed by Forbes Decem­ber 12, 2019:48

“The experts ran through a care­ful­ly designed, detailed sim­u­la­tion of a new (fic­tion­al) viral ill­ness called CAPS or coro­n­avirus acute pul­monary syn­drome. This was mod­eled after pre­vi­ous epi­demics like SARS and MERS.” 

Sounds exact­ly like NCIP, does­n’t it? Yet the new coro­n­avirus respon­si­ble for NCIP had not yet been iden­ti­fied at the time of the sim­u­la­tion, and the first case was­n’t report­ed until two months lat­er. 

Forbes also refers to the fic­tion­al pan­dem­ic as “Dis­ease X” — the same des­ig­na­tion used by The Tele­graph in its Jan­u­ary 24, 2020, video report, “Could This Coro­n­avirus be Dis­ease X?“49 which sug­gests that media out­lets were briefed and there was coor­di­na­tion ahead of time with regard to use of cer­tain key­words and catch­phras­es in news reports and opin­ion arti­cles. 

Johns Hop­kins Uni­ver­si­ty (JHU) is the biggest recip­i­ent of research grants from fed­er­al agen­cies, includ­ing the Nation­al Insti­tutes of Health, Nation­al Sci­ence Foun­da­tion and Depart­ment of Defense and has received mil­lions of dol­lars in research grants from the Gates Foun­da­tion.50 In 2016, Johns Hop­kins spent more than $2 bil­lion on research projects, lead­ing all U.S. uni­ver­si­ties in research spend­ing for the 38th year in a row.51

If research fund­ed by fed­er­al agen­cies, such as the DOD or HHS is clas­si­fied as being per­formed “in the inter­est of nation­al secu­ri­ty,” it is exempt from Free­dom of Infor­ma­tion Act (FOIA) requests.52

Research con­duct­ed under the Bio­med­ical Advanced Research and Devel­op­ment Author­i­ty (BARDA) is com­plete­ly shield­ed from FOIA requests by the pub­lic.53 Addi­tion­al­ly, agen­cies may deny FOIA requests and with­hold infor­ma­tion if gov­ern­ment offi­cials con­clude that shield­ing it from pub­lic view “pro­tects trade secrets and com­mer­cial or finan­cial infor­ma­tion which could harm the com­pet­i­tive pos­ture or busi­ness inter­ests of a com­pa­ny.“54

The U.S. Cen­ters for Dis­ease Con­trol and Pre­ven­tion under the U.S. Depart­ment of Health and Human Ser­vices states that its mis­sion is “to pro­tect Amer­i­ca from health, safe­ty and secu­ri­ty threats, both for­eign and in the U.S.“55 Clear­ly, it will be dif­fi­cult to obtain infor­ma­tion about gov­ern­ment-fund­ed bio­med­ical research on microbes like coro­n­avirus con­duct­ed at major uni­ver­si­ties or by phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal cor­po­ra­tions in bio­haz­ard labs. 

How like­ly is it, then, that the coro­n­avirus out­break mak­ing peo­ple so sick today “sud­den­ly” emerged sim­ply because peo­ple ate bats and snakes in a Wuhan mar­ket? It looks more like a biose­cu­ri­ty acci­dent but, until more is known, inevitably there will be more ques­tions than answers about whether this lat­est glob­al pub­lic health emer­gency is a more ambi­tious tac­ti­cal “sand table exer­cise,” echo­ing unan­swered ques­tions about the 2009 swine flu pan­dem­ic fias­co. 

This time, there could be a lot more bod­ies left on the field, although some sta­tis­ti­cians con­duct­ing ben­e­fit cost analy­ses may con­sid­er 65 mil­lion casu­al­ties in a glob­al human pop­u­la­tion of 7.8 bil­lion peo­ple56 to be rel­a­tive­ly small when advanc­ing med­ical research con­duct­ed in the name of “the greater good.”