Connect with us

COVID-19

Another Government Agency Now Says COVID Likely Leaked From Lab: REPORT

Published

5 months ago

6 minute read

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Emily Kopp

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) now believes that the COVID-19 virus originated from a lab in China, The New York Times reported on Saturday.

Five years after Chinese authorities first confirmed a novel coronavirus was spreading in Wuhan, China, the CIA has made the determination with “low confidence” that the pandemic began at one of the city’s research labs, The New York Times reported. Three intelligence community elements now assess the pandemic began with a lab accident, a hypothesis once deemed a conspiracy theory by some and subject to censorship on social media. The CIA joins the Department of Energy, which determined the pandemic had a lab origin with low confidence, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which assessed a lab origin with moderate confidence.

The National Intelligence Council and four intelligence community elements determined the pandemic had a natural origin, while one other remaining intelligence community element remains undecided.

The news follows the Senate confirmation of CIA Director John Ratcliffe Thursday. Ratcliffe, who served as the Director of National Intelligence from 2020-2021, has long stated publicly that the classified intelligence implicates Wuhan’s labs. Ratcliffe has also claimed the CIA has dithered in its public assessment due to political concerns.

“My informed assessment, as a person with as much or more access than anyone to our government’s intelligence during the initial year of the virus outbreak and pandemic onset, has been and continues to be that a lab leak is the only explanation credibly supported by our intelligence, by science and by common sense,” Ratcliffe testified to the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic in 2023. “In fact, were this a trial, the preponderance of circumstantial evidence provided by our intelligence would compel a jury finding of guilt to an accusation that the coronavirus research in the Wuhan labs was responsible for spawning a global pandemic.”

According to The New York Times report, the new conclusion is informed by a second look at the conditions of the labs in Wuhan. However, no new materials are available for public inspection.

The revelation follows news that outgoing National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan tasked the Office of the Director of National Intelligence with assembling a panel to take a renewed look at the pandemic’s origins. The 11th hour move was reminiscent of when a cadre of experts within the State Department released a fact sheet with declassified intelligence surrounding the Wuhan Institute of Virology during the waning days of the first Trump administration despite internal resistance to their investigation.

Ratcliffe has expressed concern about politicization within the intelligence community regarding China and COVID-19, particularly within the CIA.

“When we pushed to declassify intelligence exposing some of what the U.S. government knew about the virus’s origins and the Communist Party’s initial coverup, we faced constant opposition, particularly from Langley,” Ratcliffe wrote in a 2023 op-ed. “When preparing the President’s Daily Brief, it wasn’t unusual to ask why the CIA’s China assessments seemed at odds with intelligence from the other 17 U.S. spy agencies.”

It remains to be seen whether Ratcliffe will continue to push for the declassification of this intelligence in his new role.

Others have expressed concerns about the impartiality and rigor of the intelligence community’s assessments, including the worry that virologists with undisclosed biases have shaped the intelligence community’s view.

In a November 2024 letter, Republican Sen. Roger Marshall of Kansas raised the alarm that a close collaborator of the Wuhan Institute of Virology may have shaped the intelligence community’s understanding of the issue. The ODNI consults with the Biological Sciences Experts Group, a group of nongovernmental scientists which advises on biosecurity issues. University of North Carolina virologist Ralph Baric — who worked on coronavirus engineering projects with the Wuhan Institute of Virology — is affiliated with the group, according to the letter.

Records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act by U.S. Right to Know in 2023 showed Scripps Institute virologist Kristian Andersen, who communicated with National Institutes of Health leaders in the early pandemic about a prominent scientific article that would dismiss the lab leak theory, briefed State Department analysts in March 2020.

The Defense Intelligence Agency Office of the Inspector General has opened an inquiry into whether an assessment by scientists at the National Center for Medical Intelligence was improperly excluded from the president’s brief, according to a December Wall Street Journal report.

The House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic sent letters to the CIA in September 2023 revealing whistleblower testimony alleging the CIA analysts who assessed the pandemic’s origin were compelled to change their conclusion from a lab origin to undecided through a “monetary incentive.” But the committee’s final report did not include any further information about this line of inquiry.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 1 hour ago

Carney’s Honeymoon Phase Enters a ‘Make-or-Break’ Week

Energy / 2 hours ago

Kananaskis G7 meeting the right setting for U.S. and Canada to reassert energy ties

conflict / 2 hours ago

Israel bombs Iranian state TV while live on air

Alberta

Alberta announces citizens will have to pay for their COVID shots

Published on June 16, 2025

By

From LifeSite News

By Anthony Murdoch

The government said that it has decided to stop ‘waste’ by not making the shots free starting this fall.

Beginning this fall, COVID shots in the province will have to be pre-ordered at the full price, about $110, to receive them.  (This will roll out in four ‘phases’. In the first phases COVID shots will still be free for those with pre-existing medical conditions, people on social programs, and seniors.)

The UCP government in a press release late last week noted due to new “federal COVID-19 vaccine procurement” rules, which place provinces and territories as being responsible for purchasing the jabs for residents, it has decided to stop “waste” by not making the jab free anymore.

“Now that Alberta’s government is responsible for procuring vaccines, it’s important to better determine how many vaccines are needed to support efforts to minimize waste and control costs,” the government stated.

“This new approach will ensure Alberta’s government is able to better determine its overall COVID-19 vaccine needs in the coming years, preventing significant waste.”

The New Democratic Party (NDP) took issue with the move to stop giving out the COVID shots for free, claiming it was “cruel” and would place a “financial burden” on people wanting the shots.

NDP health critic Sarah Hoffman claimed the move by the UCP is health “privatization” and the government should promote the abortion-tainted shots instead.

The UCP said that in 2023-2024, about 54 percent of the COVID shots were wasted, with Health Minister Adriana LaGrange saying, “In previous years, we’ve seen significant vaccine wastage.”

“By shifting to a targeted approach and introducing pre-ordering, we aim to better align supply with demand – ensuring we remain fiscally responsible while continuing to protect those at highest risk,” she said.

The jabs will only be available through public health clinics, with pharmacies no longer giving them out.

The UCP also noted that is change in policy comes as a result of the Federal Drug Administration in the United States recommending the jabs be stopped for young children and pregnant women.

The opposite happened in Canada, with the nation’s National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) continuing to say that pregnant women should still regularly get COVID shots as part of their regular vaccine schedule.

The change in COVID jab policy is no surprise given Smith’s opposition to mandatory shots.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, early this year, Smith’s UCP government said it would consider halting COVID vaccines for healthy children.

Smith’s reasoning was in response to the Alberta COVID-19 Pandemic Data Review Task Force’s “COVID Pandemic Response” 269-page final report. The report was commissioned by Smith last year, giving the task force a sweeping mandate to investigate her predecessor’s COVID-era mandates and policies.

The task force’s final report recommended halting “the use of COVID-19 vaccines without full disclosure of their potential risks” as well as outright ending their use “for healthy children and teenagers as other jurisdictions have done,” mentioning countries like “Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, and the U.K.”

The mRNA shots have also been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children and all have connections to cell lines derived from aborted babies.

Many Canadian doctors who spoke out against COVID mandates and the experimental mRNA injections were censured by their medical boards.

LifeSiteNews has published an extensive amount of research on the dangers of the experimental COVID mRNA jabs that include heart damage and blood clots.

Continue Reading

International

Pentagon agency to simulate lockdowns, mass vaccinations, public compliance messaging

Published on June 12, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Tim Hinchliffe

With lockdowns, mass vaccination campaigns, and social distancing still on the table from the last around, it appears that AI and Machine Learning will play a much bigger role in the next.

DARPA is getting into the business of simulating disease outbreaks, including modeling interventions such as mass vaccination campaigns, lockdowns, and communication strategies.

At the end of May, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) put out a Request for Information (RFI) seeking information regarding “state-of-the-art capabilities in the simulation of disease outbreaks.”

The Pentagon’s research and development funding arm wants to hear from academic, industry, commercial, and startup communities on how to develop “advanced capabilities that drive technical innovation and identify critical gaps in bio-surveillance, diagnostics, and medical countermeasures” in order to “improve preparedness for future public health emergencies.”

As if masks, social distancing, lockdowns, and vaccination mandates under the unscientific guise of slowing the spread and preventing the transmission of COVID weren’t harmful enough, the U.S. military wants to model the effects of these exact same countermeasures for future outbreaks.

The RFI also asks participants “Fatality Rate & Immune Status: How are fatality rates and varying levels of population immunity (natural or vaccine-induced) incorporated into your simulations?“

Does “natural or vaccine-induced” relate to “population immunity” or “fatality rates” or both?

Moving on, the RFI gets into modeling lockdowns, social distancing, and mass vaccination campaigns, along with communication strategies:

Intervention Strategies: Detail the range of intervention strategies that can be modeled, including (but not limited to) vaccination campaigns, social distancing measures, quarantine protocols, treatments, and public health communication strategies. Specifically, describe the ability to model early intervention and its impact on outbreak trajectory.

The fact that DARPA wants to model these so-called intervention strategies just after the entire world experienced them suggests that these exact same measures will most likely be used again in the future:

“We are committed to developing advanced modeling capabilities to optimize response strategies and inform the next generation of (bio)technology innovations to protect the population from biological threats. We are particularly focused on understanding the complex interplay of factors that drive outbreak spread and evaluating the effectiveness of potential interventions.” — DARPA, Advanced Disease Outbreak Simulation Capabilities RFI, May 2025.

“Identification of optimal timelines and capabilities to detect, identify, attribute, and respond to disease outbreaks, including but not limited to biosensor density deployment achieving optimal detection timelines, are of interest.” ­— DARPA, Advanced Disease Outbreak Simulation Capabilities RFI, May 2025.

With lockdowns, mass vaccination campaigns, and social distancing still on the table from the last around, it appears that AI and Machine Learning will play a much bigger role in the next.

For future innovation, the DARPA RFI asks applicants to: “Please describe any novel technical approaches – or applications of diverse technical fields (e.g., machine learning, artificial intelligence, complex systems theory, behavioral science) – that you believe would significantly enhance the state-of-the-art capabilities in this field or simulation of biological systems wholistically.”

Instead of putting a Dr. Fauci, a Dr. Birx, a replaceable CDC director, a TV doctor, a big pharma CEO, or a Cuomo brother out there to lie to your face about how they were all just following The ScienceTM, why not use AI and ML and combine them with behavioral sciences in order to concoct your “public health communications strategies?”

When you look at recently announced DARPA programs like Kallisti and MAGICS, which are aimed at creating an algorithmic Theory of Mind to model, predict, and influence collective human behavior, you start to get a sense of how all these programs can interweave:

“The MAGICS ARC calls for paradigm-shifting approaches for modeling complex, dynamic systems for predicting collective human behaviour.” — DARPA, MAGICS ARC, April 2025

On April 8, DARPA issued an Advanced Research Concepts (ARC) opportunity for a new program called “Methodological Advancements for Generalizable Insights into Complex Systems (MAGICS)” that seeks “new methods and paradigms for modeling collective human behavior.”

Nowhere in the MAGICS description does it mention modeling or predicting the behavior of “adversaries,” as is DARPA’s custom.

Instead, it talks at length about “modeling human systems,” along with anticipating, predicting, understanding, and forecasting “collective human behavior” and “complex social phenomena” derived from “sociotechnical data sets.”

Could DARPA’s MAGICS program be applied to simulating collective human behavior when it comes to the next public health emergency, be it real or perceived?

“The goal of an upcoming program will be to develop an algorithmic theory of mind to model adversaries’ situational awareness and predict future behaviour.” — DARPA, Theory of Mind Special Notice, December 2024.

In December 2024, DARPA launched a similar program called Theory of Mind, which was renamed Kallisti a month later.

The goal of Theory of Mind is to develop “new capabilities to enable national security decisionmakers to optimize strategies for deterring or incentivizing actions by adversaries,” according to a very brief special announcement.

DARPA never mentions who those “adversaries” are. In the case of a public health emergency, an adversary could be anyone who questions authoritative messaging.

The Theory of Mind program will also:

… seek to combine algorithms with human expertise to explore, in a modeling and simulation environment, potential courses of action in national security scenarios with far greater breadth and efficiency than is currently possible.

This would provide decisionmakers with more options for incentive frameworks while preventing unwanted escalation.

We are interested in a comprehensive overview of current and emerging technologies for disease outbreak simulation, how simulation approaches could be extended beyond standard modeling methods, and to understand how diseases spread within and between individuals including population level dynamics.

They say that all the modeling and simulating across programs is for “national security,” but that is a very broad term.

DARPA is in the business of research and development for national security purposes, so why is the Pentagon modeling disease outbreaks and intervention strategies while simultaneously looking to predict and manipulate collective human behavior?

If and when the next outbreak occurs, the same draconian and Orwellian measures that governments and corporations deployed in the name of combating COVID are still on the table.

And AI, Machine Learning, and the military will play an even bigger role than the last time around.

From analyzing wastewater to learning about disease spread; from developing pharmaceuticals to measuring the effects of lockdowns and vaccine passports, from modeling and predicting human behavior to coming up with messaging strategies to keep everyone in compliance – “improving preparedness for future public health emergencies” is becoming more militaristically algorithmic by the day.

“We are exploring innovative solutions to enhance our understanding of outbreak dynamics and to improve preparedness for future public health emergencies.” — DARPA, Advanced Disease Outbreak Simulation Capabilities RFI, May 2025.

Reprinted with permission from The Sociable.

Continue Reading

Trending

X