Coronavirus. Conspiracy Theory or Cover up?

Conspiracy Theory or Cover up?

1. 3 letters agencies

One would expect that U.S. intelligence agencies, with full access to the relevant information, would quickly conclude that the virus leaked from the Wuhan laboratory. However, their assessments were as follows:

• Central Intelligence Agency (CIA):
→ Low confidence in a lab-related origin (disclosed publicly only years later)
• Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI):
→ Moderate confidence that a lab incident was the likely source

Why was this the case?
Did they want to avoid a firm conclusion to conceal the U.S. government’s involvement? Were they concerned about damaging relations with China? Could they have been covering up their own participation or failures? Or was this perhaps part of an effort to prevent President Trump’s re-election—considering the FBI spent two years investigating the ultimately discredited “Russiagate” narrative?

2.  Dr. Fauci

With all the information above, what would you expect Dr. Fauci to think upon hearing the news that a novel coronavirus had emerged from Wuhan? One would assume he immediately understood what had happened, as it implicated research he had approved or overseen—research involving potential risks.

In that context, the “natural spillover hypothesis” served as a convenient scapegoat. Hence, statements like:

·         National Geographic, May 3, 2020
Interview with Fauci:

“Everything about the stepwise evolution over time strongly indicates that this virus evolved in nature.”
(National Geographic, How COVID-19 Makes Us Rethink Global Health Security)

·         White House press briefings, April–May 2020
Fauci stated that genomic analysis showed the virus was “consistent with natural evolution” and that there was no evidence of deliberate manipulation.

And that information was then spread by the press:

• CNN, April 18, 2020
  Reporting on Fauci’s comments emphasized that the virus was “totally consistent with a natural jump,” and the lab-leak idea was framed as conspiratorial by commentators.
• Washington Post / New York Times (April–May 2020)
  Articles cited Fauci’s comments to counter what they called “conspiracy theories” even when Fauci himself used more cautious language.

Compare what he said publicly vs what was known internally and discussed inside of NIAID:

• Senior virologists acknowledged:

·         A lab accident was plausible

·         Genomic data could not rule out lab origin

• Emails below show:

·         Concern about furin cleavage site

·         Concern about lab safety practices

• No identified animal host
• No documented spillover event

Internal emails

Feb 1, 2020 – Email to Fauci

Kristian Andersen → Anthony Fauci

“Some of the features (potentially) look engineered.”
“We have to look very closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features look unusual.”

Feb 2, 2020 – Follow-up internal discussion

Same group of scientists (Andersen, Farrar, Holmes, Garry) in private correspondence:

“It’s not crackpot to suggest that SARS-CoV-2 could have emerged via laboratory manipulation.”

What is your opinion — did Dr. Fauci consciously try to cover up the origin of the virus?

3. Dr. Peter Daszak

Would you think Dr. Peter Daszak knew exactly what happened — or at least believed it was very plausible that the virus came from WIV? And yet, he misled America! Congress DID conclude that Daszak and EcoHealth Alliance misled, withheld information, minimized risks, and obstructed oversight, which functioned like a cover-up!!!

Daszak said publicly:

Feb–Mar 2020 (media & public letters):

• Asserted SARS-CoV-2 had a natural origin
• Strongly dismissed lab-origin discussion
• Framed lab-leak ideas as baseless or conspiratorial

Lancet Letter – Feb 19, 2020

Daszak organized and signed a letter stating:

“We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.”

 Important:
The letter did not disclose that:

• Daszak funded WIV
• EcoHealth collaborated directly with WIV on coronavirus research
• He had professional conflicts of interest

This omission is explicitly criticized by Congress.

A. He knew WIV was doing risky work

• EcoHealth funded WIV work on:

·         SARS-like bat coronaviruses

·         Spike protein experiments

• Some experiments increased viral infectivity
• These results were not promptly reported to NIH. Congress found EcoHealth violated reporting requirements.

B. He knew oversight and biosafety were weak, but Daszak continued to defend safety publicly

C. He knew lab-origin was plausible (privately)

Internal emails and testimony show:

·         Internal scientific uncertainty

·         Lack of confirmed animal host

·         Sensitivity of lab-origin questions

·         Yet he advocated shutting down that discussion publicly

The House Select Subcommittee found that Daszak:

• Withheld material information
• Provided misleading statements
• Failed to disclose conflicts of interest
• Obstructed congressional investigation
• Made false statements to Congress (potential criminal referral)

4. China

China played its role in cover up.  China did not openly investigate or share critical early evidence. Instead, it restricted data, controlled messaging, punished whistleblowers, and denied access — actions that prevented the world from determining COVID-19’s origin.

1) Information suppression

• Doctors in Wuhan who warned colleagues were silenced or reprimanded
• Labs were ordered not to release data publicly
• Online discussion was censored

This is documented by Chinese government notices and later acknowledged by Chinese authorities themselves.

2) Destruction of data

• Wuhan Institute of Virology took offline a public virus database in September 2019
• The database has never been restored
• No full backups were provided to international investigators

Samples

• Early patient samples were destroyed or made inaccessible
• Chain-of-custody records were not shared

And what happened to Shi Zhengli, the so-called “Bat Woman”?
Access to her has been severely restricted, yet she continues her coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). Should we now expect an even more dangerous situation — perhaps a more potent virus that somehow “bypasses” China? WE ARE IN DANGER — AND NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT IT! Do you honestly feel safe trusting the so-called “three-letter agencies” to figure it out?

How reckless, dangerous, and treasonous it was to transfer such advanced technology to China! Who are the people making these decisions — and how have they been held accountable? THE ANSWER IS “NO”, nobody in prison or having any legal troubles!!!