November 24, 2020 collated by Gerald Parkoff, Efrat, Israel
The evidence shows that SARS-CoV- 2 is a laboratory product created by using bat coronaviruses ZC45 and/or ZXC21 as a template and/or backbone. The virus shows that the it was designed in a laboratory.
-
- The genomic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 is suspiciously similar to that of a bat coronavirus discovered by military laboratories in the Third Military Medical University (Chongqing, China)
and the Research Institute for Medicine of Nanjing Command (Nanjing, China). - But the receptor-binding motif (RBM) within the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, which determines the host specificity of the virus, resembles that of SARS-CoV from the 2003 epidemic in a
suspicious manner. Genomic evidence suggests that the RBM has been genetically manipulated. - SARS-CoV-2 contains a unique furin-cleavage site in its Spike protein, which is known to greatly enhance viral infectivity and cell tropism. Yet, this cleavage site is completely absent in this particular class of coronaviruses found in nature. In addition, rare codons associated with this additional sequence suggest the strong possibility that this furin-cleavage site is not the product of natural evolution and could have been inserted into the SARS-CoV-2 genome artificially by techniques other than simple serial passage or multi-strain recombination events inside co-infected tissue cultures or animals.
- In the summary and conclusion of the Yan Report, we are told: “An unusual furin-cleavage site may have been introduced and inserted at the S1/S2 junction of the Spike protein, which contributes to the increased virulence and pathogenicity of the virus.“ Why?
- ********************************************************************************
- Whether the Covid II Virus was released by accident or deliberately cannot be determined. If the release was deliberate, to what effect and purpose?
- The warnings of a Pandemic by Bill Gates in 2015 and by Anthony Fauci in 2017 lead one to think that the release was deliberate and planned. Event 201 shows that they had a time schedule. Otherwise, how the forecast and why the preparation?
- Why was the SARS II Virus designed to be so pathogenic? It could not have been for the purpose of creating a vaccine. Vaccines are made either with a killed virus, or a live but attenuated virus
- If pathogenic, was it a bio weapon? against whom? By whom? There was cooperation between between the NIH and the Wuhan Laboratory. There were also close scientific links between the Wuhan Laboratory and the University of Texas.
- If Gain of Function research was shared by the United States and China, who was the enemy? Was it meant to be a bio weapon against the world’s populations?(which in fact happened) To what purpose did they want to harm people?
- Dr. Ling Ming Yan writes in the second Yan Report: The scientific evidence and records indicate that the current pandemic is not a result of accidental release of a gain-of-function product but a planned attack using an Unrestricted Bioweapon. The current pandemic therefore should be correspondingly considered as a result of Unrestricted Biowarfare.
- To increase the pathogenic effect of the virus , The CDC, NIAID, and WHO in the West banned anti-viral drugs which protect the ACE-2 Receptors. These anti-viral drugs eliminated the pathogenic consequences of the virus before it could cause infection. So why were they banned and why censorship in scientific videos describing the biological action of Hydroxychloroquine in particular?
- Can a virus that is so infectious be controlled anymore than poison gas, whose release into the atmosphere is then governed by the direction of the wind?
- People had no place to seek help when infected. Clinics and hospitals had no protocols and no effective medicines for the early stages of infection. “Stay home and drink tea.” This in the 21st century. What does that tell us about the CDC, the NIH, and WHO? From the time of the Andrew Wakefield affair, Censorship has been used to protect the Vaccine Industry.
- If the pandemic was planned, by whom? Such a revelation would make the perpetrator culpable for all of the deaths and economic destruction caused by the lockdowns.
- Klaus Schwab states openly that the Pandemic represents a window of opportunity for the Great Reset Program and the implementation of Stakeholder Capitalism.
Tragedy need not be the only legacy of the COVID-19 crisis. On the contrary, the pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, re-imagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future.
To achieve a better outcome, the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate and every industry from oil and gas to to tech, must be transformed. In short we need a “Great Reset” of Capitalism. as found at this link.
- The genomic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 is suspiciously similar to that of a bat coronavirus discovered by military laboratories in the Third Military Medical University (Chongqing, China)
The stated plan of The Great Reset is to capitalize from the weakening of entire economies and social fabrics to achieve their goal. They are careful not to take credit for the release of the virus.
For this reason, articles advocating a laboratory origin for the virus have been excluded from peer-reviewed research journal publications. Why should this happen? Why censorship in the Halls of Science? Is it to hide the planning of the Pandemic, as a deliberate act of disruption?
- Should Gain of Function research be banned and placed in a class along with research designing Hydrogen Bombs? Both are threats to Civilization.
- No one can prove that the virus was deliberately released into the environment. The NIH must must explain why Gain of Function Research is permitted and continuing.
The evidence shows that SARS-CoV- 2 should be a laboratory product created by using bat coronaviruses ZC45 and/or ZXC21 as a template and/or backbone.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has led to over 910,000 deaths worldwide and unprecedented decimation of the global economy. Despite its tremendous impact, the origin of SARS-CoV-2 has remained mysterious and controversial. The natural origin theory, although widely accepted, lacks substantial support.
The alternative theory that the virus may have come from a research laboratory is, however, strictly censored on peer-reviewed scientific journals. Nonetheless, SARS-CoV-2 shows biological characteristics that are inconsistent with a naturally occurring, zoonotic virus.
In this report, we describe the genomic, structural, medical, and literature evidence, which, when considered together, strongly contradicts the natural origin theory. The evidence shows that SARS-CoV- 2 should be a laboratory product created by using bat coronaviruses ZC45 and/or ZXC21 as a template and/or backbone. Building upon the evidence, we further postulate a synthetic route for SARS-CoV-2, demonstrating that the laboratory-creation of this coronavirus is convenient and can be accomplished in approximately six months. Our work emphasizes the need for an independent investigation into the relevant research laboratories. It also argues for a critical look into certain recently published data, which, albeit problematic, was used to support and claim a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2.
From a public health perspective, these actions are necessary as knowledge of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 and of how the virus entered the human population are of pivotal importance in the fundamental control of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as in preventing similar, future pandemic
*************************************************************
Importantly, ZC45 and ZXC21 are bat coronaviruses that were discovered (between July 2015 and February 2017), isolated, and characterized by military research laboratories in the Third Military Medical University (Chongqing, China) and the Research Institute for Medicine of Nanjing Command (Nanjing, China). The data and associated work were published in 2018. Clearly, this backbone/template, which is essential for the creation of SARS-CoV-2, exists in these and other related research laboratories.
What strengthens our contention further is the published RaTG13 virus18, the genomic sequence of which is reportedly 96% identical to that of SARS-CoV-2. While suggesting a natural origin of SARSCoV-2, the RaTG13 virus also diverted the attention of both the scientific field and the general public away from ZC45/ZXC21
In fact, a Chinese BSL-3 lab (the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Centre), which published a Nature article reporting a conflicting close phylogenetic relationship between SARSCoV-2 and
ZC45/ZXC21 rather than with RaTG13, was quickly shut down for “rectification”36. It is believed that the researchers of that laboratory were being punished for having disclosed the SARS-CoV-2—ZC45/ZXC21 connection. On the other hand, substantial evidence has accumulated, pointing to severe problems associated with the reported sequence of RaTG13 as well as questioning the actual existence of this bat virus in nature.
A very recent publication also indicated that the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the RaTG13’s Spike protein could not bind with the ACE2 Receptors of two different types of horseshoe bats (they closely relate to the horseshoe bat R. affinis, RaTG13’s alleged natural host, implicating the inability of RaTG13 to infect horseshoe bats. This finding further substantiates the suspicion that the reported sequence of RaTG13 could have been fabricated as the Spike protein encoded by this sequence does not seem to carry the claimed function. The fact that a virus has been fabricated to shift the attention away from ZC45/ZXC21 speaks for an actual role of ZC45/ZXC21 in the creation of SARS-CoV-2.
The Yan Report, Summary and Conclusions
4.3 SARS-CoV-2 is an Unrestricted Bioweapon
Although it is not easy for the public to accept SARS-CoV-2 as a bioweapon due to its relatively low lethality, this virus indeed meets the criteria of a bioweapon as described by Dr. Ruifu Yang. Aside from his appointment in the AMMS, Dr. Yang is also a key member of China’s National and Military Bioterrorism Response Consultant Group and had participated in the investigation of the Iraqi bioweapon program as a member of the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) in 1998. In 2005, Dr Dr. Yang specified the criteria for a pathogen to qualify as a bioweapon74:
1. It is significantly virulent and can cause large scale casualty.
2. It is highly contagious and transmits easily, often through respiratory routes in the form of aerosols. The most dangerous scenario would be that it allows human-to-human transmission.
3. It is relatively resistant to environmental changes, can sustain transportation, and is capable of supporting targeted release.
All of the above have been met by SARS-CoV-2: it has taken hundreds of thousands lives, led to numerous hospitalizations, and left many with sequela and various complications; it spreads easily by contact, droplets, and aerosols via respiratory routes and is capable of transmitting from human to human75-77, the latter of which was initially covered up by the CCP government and the WHO and was first revealed by Dr. Li-Meng Yan on January 19th, 2020 on Lude Press; it is temperature-insensitive (unlike seasonal flu) and remains viable for a long period of time on many surfaces and at 4°C (e.g. the ice/water mixture).
Adding to the above properties is its high rate of asymptomatic transmission, which renders the control of SARS-CoV-2 extremely challenging. In addition, the transmissibility, morbidity, and mortality of SARS-CoV-2 also resulted in panic in the global community, disruption of social orders, and decimation of the world’s economy. The range and destructive power of SARS-CoV-2 are both unprecedented.
Clearly, SARS-CoV-2 not only meets but also surpasses the standards of a traditional bioweapon. Therefore, it should be defined as an Unrestricted Bioweapon.
4.4 The current pandemic is an attack on humanity
The Second Yan Report, Summary and Conclusion
GENEVA – COVID-19 lockdowns may be gradually easing, but anxiety about the world’s social and economic prospects is only intensifying. There is good reason to worry: a sharp economic downturn has already begun, and we could be facing the worst depression since the 1930s. But, while this outcome is likely, it is not unavoidable.