Comments 1 - 11 of 11 Search these comments
The chain of custody was elucidated in early 2020. I remember reading about it, including the artificiality of the virus as it stood at the time, DARPA origins, etc. etc.. Of course, the floor of public discourse belongs to those who lie most fervently, scream the loudest, the longest, and have the monolithic MSM on their side. What's old is new again. Buried, then resurrected. It must be Easter.
The big remaining question is whether the virus was created by Fauci specifically to sell the vaxx.
Something for y'all conspiracy FACTSists (as opposed to theorists) out there.
Conspiracist's is a more accurate term. Dropping "theory" means it's factual.
Tidal Wave of Documents on Gain-of-Function and the Leak of the Virus
Stuff is starting to get interesting (and undeniable)
There is so much news hitting the streets that is that is being censored by main stream media and social media today, that it is overwhelming easy comprehension.
Let’s start with the letter to sent to Secretary of the HHS, Xavier Becerra from Representatives Jim Jordan (Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary) and James Comer (Ranking Member, Committee on Oversight and Reform). Here is the opening excerpt:
... Now, I have all sorts of questions about this. My first and foremost question is why would the researchers chose a chimera that attaches to human ACE2 receptors as the target?
Sounds like a decision has been made to throw Fauci and Collins under the bus to protect the other mass murderers like Bourla.
Before you read it, remember 2020 and how Trump and others were shouted down about Chinese lab leak theory. I am convinced now, based on facts below, that it was not only a lab leak, it was leak of a virus made in lab with US (NIH) and Chinese funding. The next question is, was it released on purpose or by accident, and if on purpose, then why.
https://theintercept.com/2021/09/23/coronavirus-research-grant-darpa/?source=patrick.net
A GRANT PROPOSAL written by the U.S.-based nonprofit the EcoHealth Alliance and submitted in 2018 to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, provides evidence that the group was working — or at least planning to work — on several risky areas of research. Among the scientific tasks the group described in its proposal, which was rejected by DARPA, was the creation of full-length infectious clones of bat SARS-related coronaviruses and the insertion of a tiny part of the virus known as a “proteolytic cleavage site” into bat coronaviruses. Of particular interest was a type of cleavage site able to interact with furin, an enzyme expressed in human cells.
Since the genetic code of the coronavirus that caused the pandemic was first sequenced, scientists have puzzled over the “furin cleavage site.” This strange feature on the spike protein of the virus had never been seen in SARS-related betacoronaviruses, the class to which SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes the respiratory illness Covid-19, belongs.
The furin cleavage site enables the virus to more efficiently bind to and release its genetic material into a human cell and is one of the reasons that the virus is so easily transmissible and harmful. But scientists are divided over how this particular site wound up in the virus, and the cleavage site became a major focus of the heated debate over the origins of the pandemic.
Many who believe that the virus that caused the pandemic emerged from a laboratory have pointed out that it is unlikely that the particular sequence of amino acids that make up the furin cleavage site would have occurred naturally.