|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The idea that COVID-19 originated from a biolab rather than accidentally due to Wuhan eating habits was initially censored and denounced as being “against the science”. In reality, there were pitched battles going on among scientists (as is healthy and normal) over the likely origins and among agencies as well.
Here’s how that split looked earlier this year.
While the National Intelligence Council and four unnamed agencies assessed that natural exposure to an infected animal was the most likely scenario for the first human infection, the Department of Energy and FBI’s assessment was that a laboratory-associated incident was more likely the cause.
Meanwhile, the CIA and an unidentified agency “remain unable to determine the precise origin of the COVID-19 pandemic, as both hypotheses rely on significant assumptions or face challenges with conflicting reporting,” the report states.
How ‘organic’ were those results? According to one CIA whistleblower, not natural at all.
Here’s the latest from House Oversight.
Staff on the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic and Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence have heard testimony from a whistleblower alleging that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) offered six analysts significant monetary incentives to change their position on COVID-19’s origin. The whistleblower, who presents as a highly credible senior-level CIA officer, alleges that of the seven members assigned to the CIA team tasked with analyzing COVID-19 origins, six officers concluded that the virus likely originated from a lab in Wuhan, China. The CIA, then however, allegedly offered financial incentives to six of the experts involved in the investigation to change their conclusion in favor of a zoonotic origin.
Financial incentives is carefully ambiguous and one could imagine any number of ways this could work, but analyses and investigations are corrupted all the time. The question is who in the political food chain decided to corrupt this one? It could be the usual case of bureaucrats covering fundaments. The CIA can’t be expected to stop a natural pandemic, but an unnatural one brewed up in a lab is another matter.
Or was this part of the same overall pressure campaign to cover up China’s role in the pandemic, for much the same reason that the USSR and Cuba’s role in the Kennedy assassination were covered up?
America has a long unfortunate history of covering up Communist attacks, the bigger the better, because otherwise we might have to do something about them. Missing suitcase nukes? Who knows. A virus devastates the country? Let’s blame climate change and call for more international cooperation.
What I’m saying is that it wouldn’t be the first time our authorities have done this.
A few decades ago, it was only those with self-adorned tinfoil hats that would speak openly about the corruption within the intelligence agencies. Hindsight is often 20/20…but maybe we should have listened. When spooks are willing to buy testimony to contradict the Wuhan lab leak, they’re not only compromised, but bought off in Yaun it seems.
One of my favorite movie scenes comes from Mark Wahlberg’s 2007 movie ‘Shooter’ about being framed by the government for a high profile political assassination. Most of the movie was overly simplistic, but when the former gunny sergeant seeks the help of an old retired spook played by The Band’s drummer Levon Helm, the dialog was probably closer to the truth than anyone realized.
Helm: “The world is not always what it seems, is it son?”
Gunny: “No sir.”
Helm: “You keep that in mind. Would’ve been a bad job to take, though.”
FBI agent on the run with gunny: “How come?”
Helm: “Whoever took the shot’s probably dead now. That’s how conspiracy works. Them boys on the grassy knoll, they were dead within three hours. Buried in the damn desert. Unmarked graves out past Terlingua.”
Agent: “And you know this for a fact?”
Helm: “Still got the shovel.”
Great dialogue! A scriptwriter could be proud of that.
Bureaucrats covering fundaments. Fundament is a synonym for shit.
I worked for the government for forty years. I saw many political decisions, for sure. I never, however, saw a decision in which staffers were given money by the agency to come to a pre-determined result. I am absolutely gobsmacked to learn that the CIA would pay analysts to reverse their decisions on such an important matter in order to relieve an administration from having to do something about an event, or attack, that killed over a million Americans. Why not save the money and have the CIA consist of just a single person paid to give opinions that always support the administration’s narratives? As cynical as I am after over four decades in Washington, I could not have believed this would happen, especially in the CIA. I am completely dejected by it.