quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
I’m suspicious why 3 years later these agencies are now admitting what we said all along? What is the end game here?

Yep. Every thinking person in the world has known that this came from Wuhan from the get go.

I wonder how long it took these 'Top Men' and/or Wizards of Smart to figure this out...

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
I’m suspicious why 3 years later these agencies are now admitting what we said all along? What is the end game here?

Yep. Every thinking person in the world has known that this came from Wuhan from the get go.

I saw a article discussing this new WHO health treaty and the writer was theorizing they are doing this NOW to be able to justify what’s coming with this new treaty which are more lockdowns and restrictions and other bullshit for future pandemics.

“See? We are now going to protect you against what the Chinese did in Whuhan!” Is their argument.

The initial response in DC was 100% about bringing down Trump. Everyone who denounced the lab leak hypothesis did so only because Trump had mentioned it. Clearly from Fauci's own emails we know nobody seriously believed the virus was natural origin.

They painted themselves into a corner with everything they did, doubling down even, just to get rid of Trump.

Eventually they lost the ability to fully control the narrative. What we're seeing now is the grudging acknowledgement of things which are becoming widely enough known. Masks didn't stop the spread. Lab leak is the best explanation. The virus is not serious for almost everybody. The treatment protocols weren't generally effective. Natural immunity is better than jab immunity.

The covid event is a multi-year arc. A process, not a single moment. The Swamp and their media made it about politics, digging a deep hole as they went (and doing yuuge damage to society). We're into Trickle-Truth now, where they let a little bit out when there is no choice.

We've been betrayed, lied to, gas-lighted, and now getting trickle-truth. Next they'll hope we'll forgive and forget.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

Yep. Every thinking person in the world has known that this came from Wuhan from the get go.

Well I'll be darned.

While many here made it clear from the get go that this was the case. My recollection is, you weren't one of them Gus. Glad you finally saw the light

“DeSantis Signs Bill Revoking Disney’s Self-Governing Power.” The sub-headline explained, “DeSantis declared end to ‘corporate kingdom’ before signing bill into law.”

(Isn't this the Covid thread? Well, everything is related... read on)

Last year’s bill announced the end of Disney’s local self-rule rights and exemptions from state taxes, called the “Reedy Creek special district,” but delayed the effect for a year for the details to be ironed out, and left open the possibility that the Legislature could renew the special taxing district. Yesterday the Governor brought the saga to its conclusion, signing the bill ending Disney’s “home rule” rights.

At the signing ceremony’s news presser, DeSantis explained, “Since the 1960s, they’ve enjoyed privileges unlike any company or individual in the state of Florida has ever enjoyed. They had exemptions from laws that everyone else had to follow. They were able to get huge amounts of benefits without paying their fair share of taxes.”

Disney will now be treated exactly the same as all the other theme parks in the state. DeSantis even told attendees to check their watches so that they’d know exactly “what time the corporate kingdom came to an end.”

I am totally fascinated by the pandemic’s historic political inversion . First, vaccine mandates caused the Republican Party to become the party of ordinary workers’ rights and personal medical autonomy, with the democrats supporting big business, “your-body-government’s-choice,” and crying about over-regulation. Now the democrats have snatched up the flag supporting mega-corporations , which used to be the Republican Party’s exclusive domain, and the Republicans have now officially become the populist party.

It’s hard to imagine what, besides THIS pandemic, could have possibly effectuated this kind of profound political reversal. Personally, I consider these developments to be fantastic shifts that will bear fruit for generations. In and amongst all the various daily worries, like the WHO’s odious pandemic treaty-non-treaty, it’s worth meditating a little about all the real, tangible winning that freedom has been doing lately.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com...rue&utm_medium=email

quote:

Originally posted by old rugged cross:
While many here made it clear from the get go that this was the case. My recollection is, you weren't one of them Gus.

Point out where I denied that it came from Wuhan and I'll happily admit to it. I don't believe that I ever did.

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
I’m suspicious why 3 years later these agencies are now admitting what we said all along? What is the end game here?

Really? The "end game"?

You can't see what's going on? You can't see that the truth has been slowly seeping under the floodgates, and now it's gotten to a point where the truth is undeniable and that it no longer serves their purpose, to deny the truth?

Whatever spy novel you have going on in your head- that's your business, but on the pages of this forum, I want you to rein in your cynicism.

US Committed to WHO Pandemic Accord, Ambassador Says

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...J1%2BbwODltYNYXO3ZjC

The lead negotiator representing the United States in discussions on a global pandemic accord said in a statement this week that the United States is committed to the accord amid debate on the draft document.

Leaders are meeting this week in Geneva as part of the fourth meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Bureau (INB) to consider a “Zero Draft” (pdf) of the agreement.

The INB was set up by the World Health Assembly in December 2021 to “draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”

The first draft was released this month and is being debated during this week’s meeting and will be continuing in April. The INB will issue a report on the development of the accord at the WHA in May with a final report expected in 2024. On the agenda this week is to decide whether the draft will be the basis of negotiations for a pandemic accord and discuss the document in-depth.

Ambassador’s Recommendations

The U.S. pandemic negotiator for the proposed accord, Ambassador Pamela Hamamoto, said this week that the United States is committed to forming the accord as part of a “major component of the global health architecture for generations to come.”

“Shared commitment, shared aspirations and shared responsibilities will vastly improve our system for preventing, preparing for, and responding to future pandemic emergencies,” she said. “We seek a Pandemic Accord that builds capacities; reduces pandemic threats posed by zoonotic diseases; enables rapid and more equitable responses; and establishes sustainable financing, governance, and accountability to ultimately break the cycle of panic and neglect.”

Hamamoto said the draft has a lot of work to build on and specifically said it is unbalanced toward response at the expense of prevention and preparedness.

“While we need to avoid duplicating substantive elements contained in the [International Health Regulations], such as surveillance and alerts, we need to discuss how best to address pandemic prevention and preparedness here,” she added. “These efforts should be mutually supportive and complementary.”

She added the United States would like to see a focus on “equity” across the draft, to be “inclusive and applicable for the improved health and wellbeing of all people” not only between countries, but “also within them.”

“Not just protecting populations from pandemics—but also from illness, death, and disrupted access to essential health care services during pandemics, including sexual and reproductive health services,” she said in the Feb. 27 letter.

Hamamoto said the United States did not support “common but differentiated responsibilities and capabilities,” something she said was “not appropriate” in the context of pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response.

The draft agreement explains the accord should emphasize “improving pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery of health systems relies on a commitment to mutual accountability, transparency and common but differentiated responsibility by all States Parties and relevant stakeholders.”

The concept of common but differentiated responsibilities and capabilities says that all member nations are responsible for the health of their people.

“Given that the health of all peoples is dependent on the fullest cooperation of individuals and States, all Parties are bound by the obligations of the WHO [proposed accord],” the draft language states. “States that hold more resources relevant to pandemics, including pandemic-related products and manufacturing capacity, should bear, where appropriate, a commensurate degree of differentiated responsibility with regard to global pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery.”

The draft states further the goal is to support every participating party to achieve the highest level of capacity while prioritizing specific needs and special circumstances of developing countries that may not be able to respond as well to a pandemic.

“We look forward to seeking common ground to best ensure universal application while also ensuring capacities are strengthened so that countries can meet their obligations.”


The Ambassador also said the United States had concerns about financing language in the accord related to specific allocations of domestic budgets or GDP, and hopes to work to identify appropriate financing methods for the accord.

She added the accord must “stand the test of time” while building on prior pandemics and also creating solutions that are “flexible and adaptable.”

“By creating solutions that are flexible and adaptable, by laying out commitments that are clear regarding triggers and responsibilities, and by strengthening coordination and capacities, together we can build a stronger global health architecture for all.”

What The Accord Could Do

“Countries have delivered a clear message that the world must be better prepared, coordinated and supported to protect all people, everywhere, from a repeat of COVID-19,” said Roland Driece, Co-Chair of the INB. “The decision to task us with the duty to develop a zero draft of a pandemic accord represents a major milestone in the path towards making the world safer.”

Some are worried the accord could hinder the autonomy of individual nations when it comes to responding to pandemics, while others argue the accord has no real means of legal enforcement.

“It has more heart and brain than I expected,” said Kelley Lee, scientific co-director at the Pacific Institute on Pathogens, Pandemics and Society, according to Nature. “But it still has insufficient teeth and an insufficient spine to ensure that we’ll definitely have a better response next time.”

According to Nature, researchers are concerned the treaty in its current form is too weak to keep signatories from following its rules.

“It’s still quite heavily reliant on voluntary compliance,” Lee told Nature.

Former Republican U.S. congresswoman Michelle Backmann called the possibility of the United States joining the accord a power grab by the Biden administration.

“There has never been a bigger power grab than this power grab—and it’s being led by the Biden administration,” Bachmann told Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. “The whole purpose of this legislation would be that 194 countries, all of the member states of the UN, would give up their sovereignty to the World Health Organization over health care.”

She added she believed the accord would empower the WHO to make decisions over things such as vaccines, masks, lockdowns and supply chains.

American Autonomy

While the document (pdf) has some language in place for legal and non-legally binding agreements, the United States would remain autonomous even if it joins the treaty next year.

“The Parties commit to safeguard the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence, and to facilitate the unimpeded access of humanitarian staff and cargo,” the zero draft says. “The commitment to facilitate such access is understood to be legally binding and to apply in all circumstances, consistent with humanitarian principles.”


Other language in the document containing legally binding language includes the sharing of information related to any viruses, such as the sharing of genomic sequencing under the proposed Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) System.

“The PABS System will be consistent with international legal frameworks, notably those for collection of patient specimens, material and data, and will promote effective, standardized, real-time global and regional platforms that promote findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable data available to all Parties,” the zero draft states.

Nations are also encouraged to incorporate measures in line with their own national laws in order to protect human rights during pandemic preparedness, prevention, response, and recovery.

The draft document notes the goal of “reaffirming the principle of sovereignty of States Parties in addressing public health patterns, notably pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and health systems recovery.”

The WHO’s draft says the vision of the agreement is to strive for a world “where pandemics are effectively controlled” while also “recognizing the sovereign rights of countries.”

“States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to determine and manage their approach to public health, notably pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery of health systems, pursuant to their own policies and legislation, provided that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to their peoples and other countries,” the agreement reads. “Sovereignty also covers the rights of States over their biological resources.”

quote:

“There has never been a bigger power grab than this power grab—and it’s being led by the Biden administration,” Bachmann told Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. “The whole purpose of this legislation would be that 194 countries, all of the member states of the UN, would give up their sovereignty to the World Health Organization over health care.”

Yeah, fuck you, leftist globalists. The goal here couldn’t be more clear. Power and control. If this gains traction, kiss any and all freedoms goodbye. They want mandatory vaccination (poisoning), travel restrictions (no travel without poisoning). Suspension of constitutional rights “for the good of all” (were going to poison you if you want to go out in public, eat, be a part of society) etc.

This furthers my suspicion that Covid was a dry run for the next plandemic. And half the people in this country have already signaled that they’re perfectly fine with being nanny-stated.

^^^ Yep. This WHO treaty is what I was talking about a couple of pages back.

quote:

Ok,now the. DOE has determined Covid was man made in Wuhan. ...

We've known that from the beginning... the bat theory never made sense.
But they've lied about it for 3 years. Why now?

Sasha Latypova thinks the timing is related to the WHO pandemic treaty:

" right on cue before WHO pandemic treaty is being put in place.

They are finally telling you the “truth” (yeah, we lied a little bit about pangolins and bats, but it was for your own good, silly peasants!) because WHO treaty is happening now, and they need everyone to fall in line supporting the global totalitarian biosecurity state, where the unelected overlords will “protect you” from “lab leaks from enemies and rogue scientists”.

It's a surrender of national sovereignty to a Bill Gates backed globalist organization.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
I give it 50/50, whether it was an accidental release, or a deliberate release. Either way, it came from the lab in Wuhan.

CCP government 'intentionally released' COVID-19 'all over the world,' Chinese virologist says

And we're worried about the Russians?

The CISM Military World Games (a sort of olympics for military athletes) was held in Wuhan in fall 2019 and a very large number of athletes reported getting sick.

commonly known as Wuhan 2019, was held from October 18–27, 2019 in Wuhan, Hubei, China.

The 7th Military World Games was the first international military multisport event to be held in China. The event was also the nation’s largest military sports event ever with 9,308 athletes from 109 countries competing in 329 events and 27 sporting disciplines.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...Military_World_Games

My daughter's former room mate (USNA, 2011) participated in those games and got very sick upon return with what she later realized was probably Covid.

If that's not enough, in the fall and winter of 2019, China substantially increased their international ambassadors traveling around the world.

The pathogen, IMO, was intentionally released in Oct-Dec 2019 specifically amongst groups of people that would be traveling all around the world.

I have been wondering if COVID was intentionally released by the Chinese as a test mule to see if they could in fact create and then spread a lethal virus to employ against potential enemies. Like the US.
I know, crazy right?

The military notified members and their dependents not to use DNA testing sites like 23 and me. These companies sell genetic information.

Makes me wonder if the CCP could ever create a virus that would exclude harm to ethnic Chinese based on genetics?


20 December 2019

https://www.militarytimes.com/...ting-security-risks/

https://www.scribd.com/documen...A-testing#from_embed

quote:

I have been wondering if COVID was intentionally released by the Chinese as a test mule to see if they could in fact create and then spread a lethal virus to employ against potential enemies. Like the US.
I know, crazy right?

I've said it on this forum before. It would make more sense to intentionally release a virus that scared people into taking an injection.

You can not guarantee how a virus will spread. You can not guarantee how it will mutate. You can however guarantee whatever you put into peoples arms with a needle.

I'm not a mad scientist, but if I was, that's how I'd do it.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

quote:

I have been wondering if COVID was intentionally released by the Chinese as a test mule to see if they could in fact create and then spread a lethal virus to employ against potential enemies. Like the US.
I know, crazy right?

I've said it on this forum before. It would make more sense to intentionally release a virus that scared people into taking an injection.

You can not guarantee how a virus will spread. You can not guarantee how it will mutate. You can however guarantee whatever you put into peoples arms with a needle.

I'm not a mad scientist, but if I was, that's how I'd do it.

And China and Russia refused to use MRNA vaccines. Both of the vaccines they developed were traditional vaccines.

You would think voters would be furious over the pandemic hysteria and very unlikely to support legislation that guarantees even greater hysteria in the event of a future pathogen. We would have been better off to simply carry on with our lives as usual, take every reasonable precaution, and bury our dead. The whole world pretty much looks foolish for parroting the response of the Chinese government.

Was on my way to work yesterday and passed a woman in a SUV, by herself…with a mask on.

Covid REALLY did a number on the mentally ill people of this country.

This point has been made dozens of times in this thread and other threads.

Take it easy

From you, I want to see less anger and more joy- about anything, anything at all.

Pfizer press conference on Covid vaccine....via The Babylon Bee: