An article published by the UK Daily Mail on March 17th is entitled “One of the first to suggest Covid was created in a lab, biologist Alina Chan faced death threats and was branded a ‘race traitor’. Now she tells IAN BIRRELL… ‘There was a real conspiracy among very powerful scientists. The cover-up was morally repugnant” The story is unfolded at length and well worth the time spent reading it. Our article today discusses how this could have happened and why similar tropes are continuing to influence public opinion to this day.
Listen to the Audio version here.
From the outset, anyone who even suggested that the investigation of the origin of COVID-19 should include the possibility that COVID-19 came from a lab that faced censorship, ridicule, and professional ostracism. It is now well known this was an organised campaign by a cabal of some of the world’s leading scientists apparently anxious to avoid any blame. They went so far as to use their influence as a ‘trusted source’ and their position in society to undermine, discredit and suppress the early lab leak conclusions of the secret services of many countries. Simultaneous with their publication of fraudulent papers promoting a zoonotic origin, these same scientists were exchanging emails between themselves admitting that the lab origin of COVID-19 was far and away the most plausible explanation.
As you know, we have written revealing snippets of this story before, but among the interesting new features which are emerging now are the apologies being offered by journalists who were deceived into writing articles which supported the zoonotic origin and also attacked those asking questions. It is about time our New Zealand papers followed suit and came clean.
Media outlets have begun to admit error
On March 16th the NY Times, which was an early enthusiastic champion of a zoonotic origin, published an article entitled “We Were Badly Misled About the Event That Changed Our Lives“. It reports that 77 Nobel Laureates and 31 scientific societies were involved in the cover up that included deliberately planning to mislead journalists. Alarmingly, the article warns that risky research on deadly pathogens is still going on at Wuhan whose early results are reported in a 2025 paper published by the journal Cell. The NY Times believes we should all be very worried about this, especially because the research is continuing under an inadequately low lab safety protocol (BSL-2 plus).
Extraordinarily, some of the scientists involved in the cover up are still making key decisions that affect us all. Jeremy Farrar, now chief scientist at the World Health Organisation (WHO), instructed the authors of a paper that was subsequently published by Nature: they should specifically rule out a lab origin. Lord Vallance, now the UK Government’s Science Minister, quashed the conclusion of MI6 Chief Sir Richard Dearlove that a lab leak origin was 100% certain.
Despite signs of awakening among some media outlets, misleading scientific papers, which exclusively promoted a zoonotic origin and attacked anyone suggesting a lab leak, have still not been retracted. For example such papers at Nature Medicine, the Lancet, and our own Te Punaha Matatini are still up online uncorrected by the subsequent revelations, reliable data and analysis. Moreover some doctors who were leading the charge to suppress questions about vaccine safety are trying to reposition themselves as ‘trusted sources’ by reinterpreting pandemic history. Don’t be fooled. The mea culpas are skin deep only.
Zero Hedge has published an article entitled “Dr. Leana Wen Admits Some COVID ‘Conspiracy Theories’ Were Actually True“. From early on in the pandemic, Wen took a harsh stance on vaccine dissent during her regular appearances on CNN as a medical analyst, her opinion pieces for the Washington Post and her time as a guest contributor for NPR, PBS, BBC, and MSNBC, where she called for severe restrictions on the unvaccinated. She now admits that COVID-19 vaccines among other things caused menstrual difficulties and says “Covid dissenters should have been able to ask questions” and that she would have answered them. A faux apology with a hollow ring. No doubt she misses those heady days when she shone in the international media limelight.
All this wisdom of hindsight hides the fact that the same people apologising today and telling us they were misled were actually given the evidence at the time but ignored it. NY Times reporter Donald McNeil Jnr. is now complaining bitterly that he was deliberately fooled into believing the zoonotic origin. Saying in a Telegraph interview that “he became sceptical of the hypothesis the virus was engineered in a Wuhan lab after several top epidemiological virologists insisted it wasn’t possible”. McNeil said their efforts to throw him “off track” influenced the newspaper’s coverage of the theory and likely contributed to the topic being “dropped” for a year. In his book The Wisdom of Plagues, McNeil said the scientists “clearly misled me early on” and he was a “victim of deception”. In fact McNeil was told at the time by no less a person than renowned microbiologist Richard H Ebright that the research at Wuhan was ‘like looking for a gas leak with a lighted match’. McNeil should have looked deeper, no excuses.
How distorted information networks manipulate us
The situation gives us an insight into how information networks influence us in the modern era. There are such massive amounts of information circulating out there today that people rely on so-called trusted sources to tell them what to think and say. The media, governments, science communities, health authorities, PR companies, pharmaceutical giants and intelligence services all know how this works and have shown themselves prepared to distort the truth, manipulate trusted sources and exploit information networks to serve their own ends. (To find out more about network behaviour read The Human Network—How We’re Connected and Why it Matters by Mathew O. Jackson).
As is the case for hypnosis, there are ranges of susceptibility to being influenced. Susceptibility can be greatly enhanced through the manipulation of multiple information sources simultaneously. Simply put, if there are a small enough number of influential trusted sources relied upon by the public, misleading statements deliberately sent by a very very small number of ‘experts’ to target these sources can overwhelm or rapidly transform public conversations and crowd out contrary opinions. In other words, people hear the same story over and over again from multiple sources despite the fact that it originates from a single source. This results in an extreme bias which over reflects the views of the single source. Precisely what happened to the public discussions about COVID-19 origins and vaccine safety.
As regards the source of COVID-19, the situation was farcical from the start. The source of the outbreak was so obvious from the beginning, that it is hard to know how anyone could say it came from an animal with a straight face. Yet the surge of information designed to influence the media was so overwhelming that many so-called trusted news sources like the BBC are still sticking to the story that we may never know where COVID-19 came from. As if they are standing on their doorstep looking out and then someone appears by their side and they wonder where they came from. Of course they came from inside the house, there was nowhere else they could have come from.
COVID-19 vaccine messaging was designed to mislead
The mRNA COVID-19 vaccine safe and effective messaging was equally overwhelming. The pharmaceutical industry was already highly practiced at influencing decisions through its control of information networks and regulatory practices. Medicines regulatory bodies worldwide, like our Medsafe, are linked together by ICMRA (International Coalition of Medicines Regulatory Authorities) and WHO databases funded by the pharmaceutical industry. These databases electronically and instantly provide ready made opinions, rules and so-called facts that the national bodies adopt without sufficient forethought or investigation. This in turn compromises the advice they give to governments and the media which now carries with it the authoritative trusted Medsafe stamp of approval and authenticity. This message is relayed to the public through the multiple channels enlivened by Medsafe. This then becomes the subject of multiple private conversations which are reinforced when it becomes apparent that our overseas contacts all have reached the same conclusions (because they too have been influenced by the same fraudulent sources). Hey presto, it now appears almost idiotic and antisocial to hold any differing opinion.
It is important to note that the information originally circulated through ICMRA and WHO and then reposted by for example five eyes intelligence partners, medical networks, media articles and search engines was moulded to be highly specific and restrictive. It was designed to head off any vaccine hesitancy or criticism in advance and to overwrite any embarrassing facts that might run counter to the safe and effective narrative. From the outset a very short list of possible vaccine side effects was promulgated. This meant that the very obvious fact that millions of people around the world were reporting a wide range of serious illnesses following COVID-19 vaccination could be ignored or even condemned as hysteria or imagination.
The effect of this misinformation has been devastating. For example the UK Telegraph reports that the NHS has paid an American consulting company to assess claims for vaccine damage compensation. Of the 13,000 applicants, only a paltry 203 have been awarded any compensation. As a result, in total the US consultants have been paid more than the victims. This has only been possible because of the myths spread widely by ICMRA, WHO, and other so-called trusted sources that COVID-19 vaccines were inherently safe. In other words, the facilitators have been rendered blind by the perpetrators. They remain brainwashed by an information network so saturated by misinformation that they cannot change their opinions in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. You may reasonably conclude that those in positions of authority or influence unable to change their minds at this point are exhibiting symptoms akin to obsessive compulsive mental states or psychopathy.
Don’t be fooled by media sources who have conceded one small point of misinformation, pleading that they were misled. If they were really serious about correcting the situation, they would be publishing articles everyday asking questions and revealing the true extent of the gaslighting. They would be demanding help for the victims. They would be asking why biotechnology labs are still conducting research to make viruses more infectious and deadly and why governments are proposing to deregulate biotechnology and do away with testing and labelling. Don’t be fooled by medical experts who say we got it wrong then, but now we are back on track. Their paradigm and agenda remains unchanged. There is still a way to go before we are safe from the mad beliefs about genetic manipulation and transhumanism that have come to dominate the arrogant and money hungry biotech sector.
The way ahead in the information age
In the modern age, information has been mistaken for knowledge. To chart a way ahead, we have to understand that there is no end to information. During a visit to any library it becomes obvious that not all the books can be read, let alone remembered and not all of them are true. The information in the books remains in the books, what to speak of the information contained in computers. The authentic personal means of gaining knowledge is through the five senses, the mind and the intellect. Sorting out truth from falsehood involves personal experience, logic and traditional understanding. Our capacity to successfully navigate this path requires self-reflective consciousness.
Information networks have become imbalanced, they are easily influenced by a few sources. This is possible because too many people have given too much trust to information they receive via personal communication devices whose content has been narrowed down by algorithms controlled by AI with the intention of influencing content exposure. In essence, anonymous people or interests are controlling our reality. Sideways communication between social network members (that’s us) has become dominated by the controlled content. In effect, a closed controlled information network is created.
Networks operated by physical laws are truly balanced. They can only be represented by multidimensional diagrams. They are safe by virtue of their interlocking multifaceted design rooted in their fundamentally unified self-referral supersymmetric source. The gravitation of the sun is at the centre of the solar system, but the planets interact with each other and also to a small extent have a reciprocal influence on the sun. Moreover the laws of nature involved operate from a silent abstract and universal space. All living systems rely on the continuous flow of information within their networks. Whereas entropy or disorder increases in closed systems, in open living systems order increases.
Administrative systems which try to centralise power, discourage or control lateral communications, and close off the population from influences outside the network boundaries are doomed to fail. These inward looking systems of administration will not be able to maintain themselves. They inevitably start to fall apart, as is happening now. Essentially, the administration of global problems has to cede elements of decision-making to a broader knowledge network that is more likely to make valid decisions.
To create this knowledge network, an extended period of self discovery is required. The full potential of the silent abstract universal field of natural law can be realised and harnessed in the least excited state of consciousness which is identical with the source of all the laws of Nature. The effect of balanced networks can be very powerful and rapid. History records the upsurge of creativity during the renaissance or philosophy during the enlightenment. Archeological records of ancient civilisations evidence periods of high learning and prosperity. A period of revival of knowledge and a social phase transition has already begun. The best way to navigate the vast changes that are set to transform our world is to hold onto the Self, our inner consciousness, which is the knower of reality and the compass of right action.
