China refuses to participate in 2nd phase of WHO’s Covid origins probe, says research into lab leak theory goes against ‘science’ — RT World News

Beijing has put the brakes on its involvement in the World
Health Organization’s (WHO) investigation into the origins of Covid-19,
citing its disapproval of any inquiries into the possibility that the
virus came from a lab.
The Chinese government
will not take part in a second phase of the WHO’s probe into what caused
the pandemic, Zeng Yixin, deputy head of China’s National Health
Commission, said on Thursday.

The senior health official said at a press conference in Beijing that he was “surprised”
to see research into the lab leak theory – which was initially
dismissed by the WHO as highly unlikely – as a listed objective for the
organization’s proposed second visit to Wuhan and other locations in

“In some aspects, the WHO’s plan for the next phase of
investigation of the coronavirus origin doesn’t respect common sense,
and it’s against science. It’s impossible for us to accept such a plan,” he said.

Liang Wannian, a senior scientist and the representative for the
Chinese side of the WHO’s joint investigation, said during the same
press briefing that, instead of returning to China, the team of experts
should prioritize the “very likely” possibility that
coronavirus originated in animals. He also pointed to reports of
Covid-19 being found in wastewater from different countries around the
same time that the disease was first detected in Wuhan, and suggested
that investigators expand their research to locations outside China.

officials also used the press conference to reiterate that the Wuhan
Institute of Virology had no links to the outbreak. Yuan Zhiming,
director of China’s National Biosafety Laboratory and professor at the
Wuhan lab, stressed that, before December 30, 2019, he and his
colleagues had never preserved or studied the novel coronavirus.

spending around four weeks in China early this year, the experts
concluded in their initial report that the virus likely originated in an
animal before spreading to humans in December 2019. But the findings
have come under scrutiny from Western states, which claim the
investigation lacked transparency. US President Joe Biden has since
ordered US intelligence agencies to conduct their own assessment into
how the health crisis began.

The theory that Covid-19 may have
leaked from a laboratory – possibly the Wuhan Institute of Virology –
was embraced by Donald Trump’s administration in the early months of the
health crisis. At the time, US media outlets rejected the idea as
implausible and even dangerous misinformation. But, in recent months,
the theory has gone mainstream, after Washington began to question the
thoroughness of the WHO’s preliminary findings.

The WHO has
expressed similar concerns about China’s purported lack of openness.
Last week, its director-general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, called on
Beijing to be “transparent and open, and to cooperate” with the organization’s ongoing probe into Covid-19’s origins.

Also on
WHO chief says China still hasn’t provided raw Covid-19 data, hindering investigation into origin of the virus

Beijing has rejected such allegations, insisting it has cooperated fully with the international investigation.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said last week that the origin probe is a “scientific issue” and “all parties should respect the opinions of scientists and scientific conclusions, instead of politicizing the issue.”

Beijing has seemingly dismissed the idea that the virus could have come
from a Chinese lab, it has remained open to the possibility that it may
have leaked from an American facility. On Wednesday, the Chinese
Foreign Ministry backed calls for an investigation into whether
coronavirus came from Maryland’s Fort Detrick biolab, after 4.7 million
Chinese petitioned the WHO to send experts to the US military facility.

Political transformation is Approaching Like an Oncoming Train | The Wentworth Report

Political transformation is Approaching Like an Oncoming Train. By the Z-Man.

For some it is always 1985 and the biggest fear is the commies will get control. Some are locked in 1968 where they are trying to keep corporate interests from crushing the working man. These people live like modern people, but their worldview remains in the world of the past. …

This post in the American Conservative is a good example of the type. It is a long piece about the future of conservatism that reads like it was written in 1992. No mention of immigration, the most important issue facing the world at this time. No mention of race and racial politics, which has convulsed the country since the end of the Obama administration. …

Listen to the people behind the Critical Race Theory stuff and they carry on as if it is 1955 and the imaginary Jim Crow stuff is real. They claim to be fighting the racism of whites and the oppression of the white power structure. They are weirdly unaware of the fact that none of this ever existed or exists today. Everyone with the least bit of power is on their side. Their people they are attacking are without any representation in the halls of power. For the antiwhites, time stopped in 1968. …

Then we have demographics. White people are the oldest tribe in tribal America now, so whites are going to be slower to adapt to the new reality. The fans of Ben Shapiro are old people mostly. He is what they hoped the future would be like and what they imagine it was like in their past. For someone who is 70 years old, it is tough to accept that all they fought to preserve will be washed away. The dream of returning to the civic nationalist paradise is better than facing present reality.

Reality is the thing that does not go away when you stop believing it. …

Something similar is happening on the Left. Jimmy Dore, for example, is a man who considers himself on the Left. Yet, he is every bit as skeptical about the radicals as the typical dissident. Glenn Greenwald is another good example. Matt Taibbi is another guy who is having an awakening. These are people looking around and coming to the realization that their old views on things no longer track with reality. The old Left is starting to have their own red pill moment.

Political transformation is like the old line about bankruptcy. It is slow at first, often glacial, then it happens all of a sudden. The individual begins to break free from their time bubble and then all off a sudden they have their awakening. As is always true about the behavior of people, some are too timid to look up.

Times have changed, and the politics and ideological leanings of most people have not kept up with hteir circumstances. On top of that, the world’s financial system is on the verge of a radical transformation (thinks debt and inflation), which will shake up everyone’s status and feeling of security.

The political class will need an awesome distraction to save their skins. Perhaps aliens?

I saw up close how Rumsfeld deliberately caused the deaths of US troops for personal gain. He deserves a special place in hell — RT Op-ed

I saw up close how Rumsfeld deliberately caused the deaths of US
troops for personal gain. He deserves a special place in hell

Scott Ritteris a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and author of ‘SCORPION KING:
America’s Suicidal Embrace of Nuclear Weapons from FDR to Trump.’ He
served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty,
in General Schwarzkopf’s staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998
as a UN weapons inspector. Follow him on Twitter @RealScottRitter
In my time as a US intelligence officer and UN weapons
inspector, I was twice privy to the former US defense secretary’s MO: to
manufacture and manipulate ‘intelligence’ so as to start wars. The
Devil will need to watch his back.
While I never met Donald
Rumsfeld in person, our paths crossed indirectly on several occasions.
What I learnt from these experiences hardened my heart toward a man who
caused so much harm based on actions that placed ambition over

In the days following my September 3, 1998, testimony
before a joint session of the Senate Armed Forces and Foreign Affairs
Committees, where I challenged the US government’s inconsistent policies
regarding the disarmament of Iraq, I received a letter from the former
defense secretary. When I heard yesterday that Rumsfeld had passed away at the age of 88, I re-read the letter and ruminated about the man who wrote it, and how I felt about him in retrospect.

Also on
‘The new paper of
record’? Teen Vogue basks in anti-war praise after obit calls Rumsfeld
‘accused war criminal & torture defender’

Any direct communication from a former cabinet member –
especially a secretary of defense – is not to be trifled with,
especially if it is complimentary in tone and content.

“Dear Mr. Ritter,” Rumsfeld wrote, “I watched you on C-SPAN as you presented your testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.”

was a superb job. You presented your position thoughtfully,
constructively, and forcefully, and were not blown by the winds from the
other side of the table. Congratulations on your testimony.
Congratulations on your performance on behalf of the UN and the United
States. Know that you have my best wishes for what I am confident will
be a superb future. We need more people like you in our wonderful
country, and the example you are setting is a proud one.”

letter gave me pause. Up until that time, I’d had no direct connection
with the man. I knew of him by reputation only, first as secretary of
defense under President Gerald Ford who, together with the then-White
House chief of staff Dick Cheney and a Pentagon official named Paul
Wolfowitz, helped promulgate exaggerated claims of Soviet strategic
nuclear capability through a so-called ‘Team B’ of politicized analysts whose mission was to second-guess a more nuanced and balanced assessment delivered by the CIA.

Team B assessment went on to influence the national security policies
of the Reagan administration, leading to a nuclear arms race coupled
with a dangerous escalation of tensions between the US and the Soviet
Union that nearly manifested itself on more than one occasion in the
kind of nuclear conflict that would have ended the world as we knew it.

I was someone who had helped the US and the Soviet Union climb down
from the threat of conflict premised on exaggerated threats through the
vehicle of verifiable disarmament, the cabal of conspiracy theorists
with whom Rumsfeld had found common cause did not register high on my
list of people whose opinion I respected.

My opinion of him did
not improve when, during my work as a UN weapons inspector charged with
disarming Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD) capabilities, I had
the occasion to debrief General Wafiq al-Samarrai,
the former head of military intelligence under Saddam Hussein. Samarrai
provided the Iraqi perspective on a pair of visits made by Rumsfeld to
Iraq – one in December 1983 and another in March 1984 – and the consequences of these visits.

noted that the purpose of Rumsfeld’s two high-profile missions to
Baghdad, where he served as a direct envoy of then-president Ronald
Reagan, was to foster a better relationship between the two nations in
an effort to make joint cause against their common enemy, Iran. This
goal, however, was complicated by Iraq’s ongoing use of chemical weapons
against Iran, which put the US in the difficult position of having to
condemn Iraq at the same time as it was seeking better relations.

irony of the US angst, Samarrai told me, was exposed later, when, as a
result of the Rumsfeld missions, the US began sharing intelligence with
Iraq that helped the Iraqi military target Iranian troop concentrations.
This intelligence was critical to Iraq’s success in the second battle
of al-Fao, in April 1988, during which the Iraqis used information
gleaned from US satellite imagery to help target Iranian defenses with
chemical weapons, leading to the destruction of Iranian forces and the
recapture of the Fao peninsula.

According to Samarrai, the US
intelligence personnel who sat with him inside the military headquarters
complex in Baghdad knew what the Iraqi plans were, including the use of
chemical weapons, and how the intelligence they were providing would
facilitate the deployment of those weapons.

My meetings with
Samarrai, which took place over time, initially in the headquarters of
the Jordanian General Intelligence Service, in Amman, and later in safe
houses operated by the British Secret Intelligence Service in London,
only reinforced my overall low opinion of US policy regarding Iraq, and
those who formulated and implemented it, including Donald Rumsfeld.

By the time I received Rumsfeld’s letter, I had earlier reviewed the work of the so-called ‘Rumsfeld Commission
on the threat posed by ballistic missiles. In May 1998, I had been told
by Randy Scheunemann, who, at the time, was a senior national security
advisor to then-Senate majority leader Trent Lott, that my assessments
regarding Iraqi missile capabilities, which had been shared with the US
by the UN, had played a major role in influencing the Rumsfeld
Commission’s assessment of Iraqi capabilities.

Indeed, when I read the executive summary of the commission’s report, I found my voice present in the text:

Iraq has maintained the skills and industrial capabilities needed to reconstitute its long range ballistic missile program,” the report noted.

plant and equipment are less developed than those of North Korea or
Iran as a result of actions forced by UN Resolutions and monitoring.
However, Iraq has actively continued work on the short range (under 150
km) liquid- and solid-fueled missile programs that are allowed by the
Resolutions. Once UN-imposed controls are lifted, Iraq could mount a
determined effort to acquire needed plant and equipment, whether
directly or indirectly.”

In many ways, this assessment
represented almost word for word the reports I was preparing at the UN
about the risks of having economic sanctions lifted without a viable
ongoing monitoring presence in place.

But then the report added a sentence that deviated from all reality: “Such
an effort would allow Iraq to pose an ICBM [intercontinental ballistic
missile] threat to the United States within 10 years.”

someone who had investigated the Iraqi ballistic missile capability more
closely than any other person on the planet, I knew this statement to
be false, and, indeed, every report I prepared for the UN pointed out
that Iraq did not possess the ability to produce a viable missile threat
either to Europe or the US, and there was no indication that Iraq
would, if able, ever seek to acquire such a capability.

As far as
I was concerned, the Rumsfeld Commission was little more than Team B
reconstituted, this time to exaggerate the threat of ballistic missiles
from Iraq in the same way Team B had exaggerated the threat posed by
Soviet missiles back in the 1970s.

Also on
‘The real victim of the Iraq War’: AP roasted for describing late Donald Rumsfeld as ‘visionary’ whose reputation was ‘soiled’

So, when Rumsfeld was nominated and subsequently confirmed as the
secretary of defense for President George W. Bush, I knew exactly the
character and ability of the man who would be central to the Bush
administration’s WMD-based case for war with Iraq. And, as such, his
exaggerated hyperbole in selling the conflict before, during, and after
the decision to invade was made came as no surprise.

Rumsfeld’s role in fabricating threats to the national security of the
US in the form of Team B and the Rumsfeld Commission, I was not taken
too much aback when information about the formation of the Office of Special Plans(OSP)
– a special unit whose mission was to cherry-pick intelligence reports
to manufacture a case for war with Iraq – became public. This was, after
all, Rumsfeld’s modus operandi.

What I was not prepared
for was the meeting I had in Amman in December 2003 with a former
senior Iraqi officer who had been involved in Iraq’s ballistic missile
programs. This officer informed me that, in the summer of 2003, he had
been interrogated on several occasions by a team from the OSP that had
situated itself in one of Saddam’s former villas in what was, in
post-invasion Baghdad, known as the Green Zone.

This team was concerned that the US had not found any WMD. “Our president is in trouble,”
they told this Iraqi officer. The team wanted him to help them come up
with a scheme whereby nuclear material would be brought into Iraq and
hidden in a manner that suggested it had existed during the time of

The Iraqi officer would then help them fabricate
documents attesting to the authenticity of this material, constructing a
false chain of evidence that would link it to Saddam’s regime. It would
then be ‘discovered’ by the CIA-led team overseeing the search for WMD
in Iraq at the time.

The Iraqi officer scoffed at the idea. “You do know,” he told them, “that
there are experts in uncovering Iraqi WMD, like Scott Ritter, who would
expose such an effort as a fraud in short order. You’d never get away
with it.”

The OSP team was nonplussed by this objection. “You know Ritter and how he operates,” they responded. “You can help us build a bulletproof case that even he couldn’t poke holes in.”

The Iraqi officer laughed. “We spent nearly a decade trying to construct lies to conceal our WMD from Mr. Ritter,” he said. “He uncovered them all. Why do you think we would have any better luck now?”

Also on
Iraq War architect Donald Rumsfeld dead at 88

The OSP team eventually got the point, and never again mentioned
the idea of planting WMD in Iraq. But what this incident, if true (and
I’ve never had any reason to doubt the veracity of anything this
particular Iraqi ever told me – his reporting on the fate of Scott Speicher,
the US pilot shot down during the Gulf War, was unerringly accurate),
underscored the extent to which Rumsfeld and his minions would go to
mislead the American people about issues that eventually cost the lives
of thousands of US servicemen and women, bankrupted the country they
served both morally and fiscally, and left hundreds of thousands of
Iraqis dead and their country in ruins.

Donald Rumsfeld, in his letter, told me that the example I was setting to the people of America was “a proud one.”
I wish I could say the same about any aspect of his decades of service.
There is a place in hell reserved for those who deliberately put the
lives of those entrusted to secure our nation at risk for their own
personal gain. Rumsfeld is one such person, and his seat should be right
next to the Devil himself.

China, Universities And Climate Change | PA Pundits – International

From the team at CFACT ~ By Mark Mathis of The Clear Energy Alliance ~ Who loves climate hysteria? China does! And so do American universities. Why, you ask? Because China is pumping billions of dollars into America’s elite academic institutions. A sizable portion of that cash goes to “research” into the “climate crisis” narrative. China gets stronger as the presumed climate crisis encourages western nations to voluntarily make their energy infrastructure weaker. Along the way, universities are sent loads of cash tied to the Communist Chinese government. Aren’t you a little suspicious of CCP motives? Are universities?


Trump Roasts Big Tech For Going ‘Crazy’ When He Mentioned Wuhan Lab | PA Pundits – International

By Alexander Hall ~

Liberals jumped the gun on COVID censorship, and former President Donald Trump let them know it in his appearance on The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Trump wasn’t shy about taking a victory lap responding to liberals who initially scorned his theory that COVID-19 emerged from a lab in Wuhan: “Now, they’re all saying that I was right.”

The difference between a conspiracy theory that must be censored and an acceptable possibility only appears to be a few months of time. “Former President Donald Trump said Tuesday critics ‘went crazy’ last year when he said the coronavirus could have escaped from a Chinese lab and he was ‘more confident’ than before that’s how the pandemic emerged,” reported Fox News on Tuesday.

Fox News continued: “The hypothesis was widely called a ‘debunked’ or ‘fringe” conspiracy theory by media outlets last year. Google and Facebook suppressed sharing of and searching for the theory that it emerged from the lab, which conducts bat coronavirus research and had widely known security issues.”

Now that the so-called experts appear increasingly wrong and as the lab leak theory gains credibility, Big Tech censors have egg on their faces.

Host Clay Travis directly observed how the narrative quickly shifted: “All of the sudden, everybody is circling back and saying, ‘Oh, maybe this did happen,’ but all of these different tech platforms disallowed the conversation and debate to actually take place.” Trump blasted liberals for suggesting alternative “phony” explanations such as that COVID-19 “came from a bat colony, a thousand miles away. Much of that has really been disproven.”

The radio show also discussed Trump’s response to Big Tech censorship in general and whether he would start his own platform:

Trump condemned censorship “by Amazon and by Google and by Apple.” He then recounted “what happened to Parler and others, they get shut down as soon as somebody puts something that’s somewhat controversial.” Trump then declared: “No. You have to have your own cloud or you have to have your own means of getting it out, because as soon as you get big or powerful or you start saying anything that’s somewhat conservative, they will censor you.”

Big Tech was ruthless when crushing rumors of the Wuhan Lab narrative last year. Twitter allegedly cracked down on news outlet ZeroHedge after it shared the lab narrative in February 2020.

Forbes claimed that a spokesperson from Twitter indicated that “ZeroHedge was removed for violating its platform manipulation policy, which the social media giant describes as ‘using Twitter to engage in bulk, aggressive or deceptive activity that misleads others and/or disrupts their experience.’” However, the Daily Mail cited a resurfaced research paper from South China University of Technology that appeared to lend some credence to ZeroHedge’s initial reporting.

Conservatives are under attack. Contact your local representative and demand that Big Tech mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Alexander Hall contributes posts at the NewsBusters site, and he is a staff writer for MRC TechWatch.

Read more Great Articles at NewsBusters .

Conspiracy: Theory and Practice, by Edward Snowden | STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC

Edward Snowden deep dives into conspiracies and conspiracy theories. From Snowden at

I. The greatest conspiracies are open and notorious — not theories, but practices expressed through law and policy, technology, and finance. Counterintuitively, these conspiracies are more often than not announced in public and with a modicum of pride. They’re dutifully reported in our newspapers; they’re bannered onto the covers of our magazines; updates on their progress are scrolled across our screens — all with such regularity as to render us unable to relate the banality of their methods to the rapacity of their ambitions. The party in power wants to redraw district lines. The prime interest rate has changed. A free service has been created to host our personal files. These conspiracies order, and disorder, our lives; and yet they can’t compete for attention with digital graffiti about pedophile Satanists in the basement of a DC pizzeria. This, in sum, is our problem: the truest conspiracies meet with the least opposition. Or to put it another way, conspiracy practices — the methods by which true conspiracies such as gerrymandering, or the debt industry, or mass surveillance are realized — are almost always overshadowed by conspiracy theories: those malevolent falsehoods that in aggregate can erode civic confidence in the existence of anything certain or verifiable. In my life, I’ve had enough of both the practice and the theory. In my work for the United States National Security Agency, I was involved with establishing a Top-Secret system intended to access and track the communications of every human being on the planet. And yet after I grew aware of the damage this system was causing — and after I helped to expose that true conspiracy to the press — I couldn’t help but notice that the conspiracies that garnered almost as much attention were those that were demonstrably false: I was, it was claimed, a hand-picked CIA operative sent to infiltrate and embarrass the NSA; my actions were part of an elaborate inter-agency feud. No, said others: my true masters were the Russians, the Chinese, or worse — Facebook.

Continue reading→

Scientists Obfuscated Source Of COVID-19-Like Virus Stored At Wuhan Lab
Authored by Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), Shi Zheng-li, the director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, is the common thread through which many key research projects and gain-of-function experiments on coronaviruses are connected. Her work shows a curious…

Former ‘Smallville’ Actress Speaks Out Before Sentencing For Role In Sex Cult: ‘Biggest Mistake And Regret Of My Life’ – Nwo Report

Comment by tonytran2015: The line between reality and “conspiracy theories” is blurring.

Allison Mack, best known for playing Chloe Sullivan on “Smallville,” is about to be sentenced for her role in recruiting and blackmailing women into joining the NXIVM sex cult.

In a letter to the court, obtained by The Hollywood Reporter, Mack addressed “those who have been harmed by my actions,” apologizing for what she had done.

“It is now of paramount importance for me to say, from the bottom of my heart, I am so sorry,” she wrote.

John McAfee’s lawyer says anti-virus tycoon showed no indication he would take his own life — RT World News

The lawyer for anti-virus software tycoon John McAfee – who was
found dead in his Spanish jail cell on Wednesday while awaiting
extradition to the United States – says he saw no indication the
businessman wanted to kill himself.
Javier Villalba told Reuters on Thursday that he “had constant telephone contact” with McAfee and “at no point had he shown any special worry or clue that could let us think this could have happened.”

Villalba added that McAfee’s death was particularly painful “because it was not justified under any circumstance that this man remained in the jail.”

had been incarcerated in Barcelona, Spain since October last year as
the United States sought his extradition for alleged tax evasion. McAfee
was found dead in his cell just hours after the Spanish National Court approved his transfer to the US.

theories surrounding McAfee’s death have since blown up on social
media, due to previous statements by the businessman which warned that
if he is found dead of an apparent suicide “a la Epstein” in the future, he was “whackd.”

Also on
‘If I suicide myself, I didn’t’: Supporters dredge up old McAfee tweets to cry foul over death as his Instagram page posts ‘Q’

On Father’s Day, several days before McAfee’s death, his wife Janice McAfee published a statement claiming that the US government wanted her husband to “die in prison” to “make an example of him for speaking out against corruption within their government agencies.”

“There is no hope for him ever having a fair trial in America because there is no longer any justice in America,” she declared, before concluding that the eight months her husband had spent in jail had been “hard on his overall health both mentally and physically.”

Earlier this month, John McAfee had tweeted that he had “nothing” left financially, despite the US government thinking he has “hidden” cryptocurrency.

wish I did but it has dissolved through the many hands of Team McAfee
(your belief is not required), and my remaining assets are all seized,” he said, claiming his friends had also “evaporated through fear of association.”

“I have nothing. Yet, I regret nothing,” McAfee concluded.
McAfee faced up to 30 years in prison in the US if found guilty of tax evasion.