Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

2025 Federal Election

BLOCKBUSTER REPORT: Canada’s ties to Wuhan Institute of Virology and creation of COVID uncovered by Sam Cooper of The Bureau

Published

16 minute read

Exclusive: CSIS Told Us We Were Infected at Wuhan Games, Soldier Says—But Ottawa Kept It Quiet

Sam Cooper

CAF member has come forward with explosive testimony that Canadian intelligence agents assessed soldiers were infected with COVID-19 at the 2019 Wuhan Games—but the findings were buried in Ottawa.

“I was in Wuhan in the fall of 2019 at the World Military Games. A significant number of the team, and I myself, contracted COVID and became very, very ill.”

With that statement, delivered in confidential testimony to The Bureau, a Canadian Armed Forces member added his voice to one of the most powerful emerging revelations in the global search for the origins of COVID-19. His account closely matches the U.S. Department of Defense’s newly declassified conclusion that seven American soldiers fell ill with COVID-like symptoms during the same October 2019 military competition in Wuhan, China.

The American military investigation was ordered by Congress in 2021 but kept from the public until a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit forced its release. Critics now say the Biden administration suppressed the findings, which suggest U.S. intelligence agencies had early evidence of a viral outbreak tied to the Games.

The Canadian soldier believes voters deserve to know that CSIS—Ottawa’s civilian intelligence agency—also assessed that Canadian military athletes were infected in Wuhan, and that the Trudeau government chose not to inform the public. “Yes, CSIS and a number of other such organizations did interview members of the contingent,” he said of his experience upon returning to Canada. “They were professional and concerned only with facts. But when completing their interviews, they let it be known that their work and report would be suppressed.”

The Bureau has independently confirmed, through multiple confidential interviews, that Canadian intelligence did in fact interview military athletes and concluded they had experienced COVID-like symptoms while in Wuhan.

“The story of U.S. athletes becoming very sick while in Wuhan, or shortly after returning, and the institutional cover-up since—it mirrors exactly what Canadian Forces athletes experienced,” the CAF member explained.

“I say cover-up because, while it would have been difficult to know at the time that we had COVID, the timeline and intelligence were well known by May [2020.] Still, neither operational commanders or CAF health officials were willing or interested to conduct a fulsome assessment of the contingent.”

His testimony now stands alongside a torrent of new disclosures—including a bombshell release from the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency—that together appear to draw a new, starker picture of what happened in Wuhan and how it may be linked to dangerous Canadian research.

The DIA documents, made public only after a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by US Right to Know, include a 46-slide classified briefing dated June 25, 2020. It concludes that COVID-19 is most consistent with a lab-engineered virus created at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), likely under the direction of Dr. Shi Zhengli.

“Hypothesis: In mid-2019, one of the not fully characterized Bat-CoV-X chimeric viruses escaped from the WIV facilities and began infecting civilians in the city of Wuhan,” the document says.

In chronology, the DIA report focuses on a 2008 study co-authored by Dr. Shi, which showed that bat coronaviruses could be altered to infect human cells. The study described how swapping small genetic pieces in the virus allowed it to attach to human receptors. This work laid the foundation for later experiments in Wuhan that involved creating new hybrid viruses.

From 2011 to 2015, Dr. Shi’s team conducted a sweeping field study in Yunnan province, where they collected over 600 samples from multiple bat species living in caves and forested regions. The viruses were brought back to Wuhan and stored at the Institute—forming the core of a growing coronavirus research bank.

Shi’s team engineered a full copy of a virus called WIV1—a clone developed between 2015 and 2017—and then swapped in spike proteins from other bat coronaviruses—creating entirely new lab-made, or “chimeric,” viruses. According to U.S. intelligence analysts, this was one of the key human-made modifications that allowed the virus to more effectively bind to human cells—marking a potential step toward weaponizing the bat virus.

During this same 2015–2017 window, Chinese scientists also began experimenting with dangerous pathogens like SARS and MERS. They inserted a genetic feature known as a furin cleavage site—another significant modification known to increase a virus’s ability to infect human cells. These modified viruses were tested both in lab dishes and in live animals. The experiments were conducted under BSL-2 safety conditions, which in China are less strict than in the United States. According to U.S. military intelligence, Chinese BSL-2 labs have a documented history of leaks.

In this process, between 2017 and 2019, scientists at the Wuhan lab likely created a new virus called Bat-CoV-X using a secret bat virus genome as the base, the intelligence slide says. They continued building more versions by swapping in different genetic parts—especially the pieces that help the virus bind to human cells—and adding the furin cleavage site. These chimeric viruses were again tested in the lab and in animals throughout 2018 and into 2019, just before the outbreak began.

The final readable slide in the redacted DIA document concluded: “The molecular biology capabilities of WIV and the genome assessment are consistent with the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 was a lab-engineered virus that was part of a bank of chimeric viruses in Zhen-Li Shi’s laboratory at WIV that escaped from containment.”

By early 2020—when athletes around the world, including Canadian and U.S. soldiers, had already returned to their home countries with COVID-19-like infections—the Wuhan Institute of Virology and other Chinese government-controlled agencies began publishing studies promoting a natural zoonotic origin for SARS-CoV-2 and deflecting scrutiny from any laboratory origin theory.

The Canadian–Chinese Lab Connection

What makes the Defense Intelligence Agency’s timeline bombshell especially troubling for Canada is how closely it aligns with The Bureau’s earlier reporting on Dr. Xiangguo Qiu. Dr. Qiu was the now-expelled head of special pathogens at Canada’s National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg. Canadian intelligence documents reviewed by The Bureau confirm that Qiu had an active working relationship with Dr. Shi Zhengli, the Wuhan lab, and the People’s Liberation Army, beginning in 2017. Together, they co-led research on Ebola and synthetic bat coronaviruses—projects funded by the Chinese Academy of Sciences and supported by CanSino Biologics, a state-owned company tied to China’s military.

In a previous interview with The Bureau, Dr. Asher said he could not reveal the classified intelligence his team reviewed. However, he made clear that his State Department investigators were deeply concerned that Beijing was using the Winnipeg lab for military intelligence gathering and bioweapons research.

“The Wuhan Institute of Virology wasn’t just a government lab creating novel pathogens—it was and is a civil-military fusion hub that had a biological intelligence operational collection mission ensconced in its web of nefarious activities,” Asher said, including “illicitly acquiring Ebola and doing research on bio-synthesis of this massively deadly pathogen, to make it super contagious.”

On April 10, Asher posted the newly released DIA report to social media, writing simply: “Read and weep.”

“I told people in the media and wrote repeatedly four years ago that, from the early days, U.S. Department of Defense and national lab analysts had highlighted the probability that COVID was created with synthetic biology,” Asher wrote. “Well now, thanks to US Right to Know, you can see one of several presentations on this likelihood from DIA.”

Although there is no evidence that Dr. Qiu transferred any bat coronavirus samples or physical materials related to the WIV bat project, the newly released U.S. intelligence raises the possibility that her intellectual contributions from Canada may have been more central than previously realized. At minimum, the documents confirm that Qiu was operating inside one of the world’s most advanced virology labs in Canada while simultaneously collaborating with the same Wuhan scientists now identified in the U.S. report as architects of a chimeric virus bank.

The documents also confirm that Wuhan scientists aggressively pressured Canadian researchers to share samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and that Chinese military agents repeatedly breached security protocols at the Winnipeg lab—roaming unchecked through restricted areas—and clandestinely transported biological materials in and out while working with Dr. Qiu and her husband.

In detail, what the CSIS intelligence records show is that Dr. Qiu—a senior scientist at Canada’s National Microbiology Laboratory—began building formal ties with the Wuhan Institute and the Chinese Academy of Sciences in the years leading up to the pandemic. She applied to join the Thousand Talents Plan in 2017, a covert Chinese government program designed to recruit foreign experts. CSIS determined that the Wuhan Institute co-sponsored her application and that Qiu began receiving undisclosed funding through a secret Chinese bank account. She worked closely with Dr. Shi Zhengli, China’s top bat virus expert.

In June 2018, Dr. Qiu applied for a “high-end” research project through the Chinese Academy of Sciences, an institution CSIS describes as working closely with the People’s Liberation Army on dual-use biotechnology. This suggests a turning point: Dr. Qiu moved from academic collaboration to direct involvement in China’s military-linked pathogen research programs, effectively bridging Canada’s Winnipeg Lab with the Wuhan Institute of Virology on synthetic bat virus research.

Between 2018 and 2019, Dr. Qiu co-led two classified research streams with Dr. Shi at the Wuhan lab: one focused on gain-of-function experiments with Ebola, aimed at studying how the virus could be made more contagious; the second on synthetic bat coronavirus construction, building lab-made viruses.

In October 2018, a Wuhan lab technician referred to as “Individual 2” in CSIS reports was caught attempting to remove 10 unlabelled test tubes from the Winnipeg lab. While the contents have never been disclosed, the incident triggered internal alarms over unauthorized transfers. Then, in March 2019, Dr. Qiu and another Winnipeg scientist shipped live samples of Ebola, Nipah, and specially adapted virus strains to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. These transfers occurred just months before the U.S. intelligence timeline suggests a lab-engineered virus escaped containment in Wuhan.

While the Ebola and Nipah viruses she is known to have transferred are not coronaviruses, her scientific standing, access to biocontainment environments, and coordination with Dr. Shi suggest her work likely supported, directly or indirectly, the scientific environment that produced the agent of the COVID-19 pandemic. If the escape occurred in mid-2019, it would place Qiu and her prior visits to WIV in the direct window of critical research activities.

For Canadian readers and voters—as new revelations emerge about Chinese interference and apparent favouritism toward the Liberal government under Mark Carney—the Trudeau government’s failure to act on early intelligence warnings demands renewed scrutiny.

Canada’s intelligence agency raised red flags about Dr. Xiangguo Qiu’s activities as early as 2018. Yet collaboration with Chinese military-linked laboratories continued right up to the brink of the COVID-19 outbreak. Samples were transferred. Funding continued to flow. Warnings were dismissed. No one was held accountable.

For the Canadian soldier who came forward, at a minimum, Canadians should know more about China’s suspected role in the creation of the bat coronavirus and cover-up, and whether Canadian scientific capacity played a direct or indirect role.

“I have no special insights as to links with the Winnipeg lab, CCP/MSS infiltration there, or how this tied to COVID-19,” the Canadian soldier said. “That said, considering the vast, deep, and broad collusion between Canadian officials and organs of the PRC, nothing should be dismissed.”

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Invite your friends and earn rewards

If you enjoy The Bureau, share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe.

Invite Friends

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

2025 Federal Election

NDP’s collapse rightly cost them official party status

Published on

This article supplied by Troy Media.

Troy Media By Michael Taube

Official party status requires 12 seats. The NDP got seven. End of story

Rules are rules.

That, in a nutshell, is why the NDP wasn’t granted official party status in the House of Commons on Monday. Prime Minister Mark Carney and the
Liberals, to their credit, made the right decision.

Let’s examine why.

The 1963 Senate and House of Commons Act passed an amendment that gave an annual allowance to party leaders other than the prime minister and
leader of the Opposition. In doing so, the Canadian government had to establish what constitutes a “political party.” The definition they came up with was a sensible one: it had to have a “recognized membership of 12 or more persons in the House of Commons.”

This important amendment is still used today.

The NDP fell from 24 to a paltry seven seats in last month’s federal election. (There are a total of 343 seats in the House of Commons.) They finished with 1,234,673 votes, or 6.29 per cent, which was behind the Liberals, Conservatives and Bloc Québécois. Party leader Jagmeet Singh, who had represented the former Burnaby South riding since 2019, finished a distant third in the newly created Burnaby Central riding and resigned.

The NDP’s seven seats is well below the 12-seat requirement needed for official party status. This means Canada’s socialist alternative won’t be able to ask questions in the House of Commons and will lose out on money for research purposes.

Or, to put it another way, they’re plumb out of luck.

Hold on, some people said. They pointed out that the NDP’s seat count and popular vote only plummeted because many progressive voters backed Carney and the Liberals as the best option to counter U.S. President Donald Trump and his tariffs. They felt that the NDP’s long history as a champion for unions and the working class should count for something. They suggested there should be an exception to the rule.

Guess what? They’re wrong.

This is the worst election result in the party’s history. Even its predecessor, the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), did marginally better in its first campaign. The CCF won seven out of 245 seats—and earned 410,125 votes, or 9.31 per cent—in the 1935 election. Party leader J.S. Woodsworth, who had represented the riding of Winnipeg North Centre as an Independent Labour MP since 1925, comfortably held his seat.

Meanwhile, this won’t be the first time they’ve ever lost official party status.

The NDP dropped from 43 to nine seats in the 1993 election. It was a dismal showing, to say the least. There was a suggestion at the time that then-party leader Audrey McLaughlin, the first woman to lead a party with political representation in Canada’s House of Commons, deserved a better fate. While the NDP certainly came closer to achieving the 12-seat requirement in this particular election, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and the Liberals decided against granting them official party status.

Why? As I mentioned earlier, rules are rules.

Then again, British pilot Harry Day notably told his fellow flying ace Douglas Bader in 1931, “You know my views about some regulations—they’re written for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.”

Does this mean that individuals and organizations who follow rules are, in fact, fools? Not at all. While certain rules in a liberal democratic society can range from slightly questionable to utterly ridiculous, they’re usually put in place for a specific purpose.

In the case of the House of Commons, it’s to ensure that a bar has been set with respect to political representation. Is 12 seats the right number? That’s difficult to say. It certainly prevents small protest parties and one-issue parties that unexpectedly win a tiny number of seats in an election from acquiring power and status right off the bat. They need to win more seats and grow in size and stature to reach a point of respectability. Most of them never reach this point and disappear while others float in a constant state of mediocrity like the Green Party of Canada. ’Tis the nature of the political beast.

One final point. If Singh and the NDP had reached double digits in total number of seats in 2025, a solid case could have been made in favour of official party status. If they had finished with 11 seats, it would have almost been a lock. Neither scenario ultimately materialized, which is why Carney and the Liberals did exactly what they did.

Michael Taube is a political commentator, Troy Media syndicated columnist and former speechwriter for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He holds a master’s degree in comparative politics from the London School of Economics, lending academic rigour to his political insights. 

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.

Continue Reading

2025 Federal Election

Judicial recounts give Conservatives 2 more seats, keeping Liberals short of majority

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

After a judicial recount, Conservative candidate Kathy Borrelli has officially won over Liberal incumbent Irek Kusmierczyk, in the Ontario riding of Windsor-Tecumseh-Lakeshore.

Judicial recounts from the 2025 federal election have given the Conservative Party two new seats, with one candidate winning by just four votes.

After a judicial recount, Conservative candidate Kathy Borrelli has officially won over Liberal incumbent Irek Kusmierczyk, in the Ontario riding of Windsor-Tecumseh-Lakeshore.

Borrelli got 32,090 votes, with Kusmierczyk getting 32,086 votes, and NDP candidate Alex Ilijoski getting 4,240 votes.

In the Newfoundland riding of Terra Nova-The Peninsulas, Conservative candidate Jonathan Rowe beat out Liberal Anthony Germain by just 12 votes after a recount with the initial result showing a Liberal victory.

The new election results mean the Conservatives now have 144 seats with the Liberals at 169, three short of a majority.

Judicial recounts are automatically triggered when the margin of victory for a candidate is less than 0.1 percent of valid votes.

While these recounts have favored the Conservatives, others have gone in the Liberal Party’s favor.

A May 16 judicial recount switched the southern Ontario riding of Milton East-Halton Hills South to the Liberals with a 21-vote victory over the Conservatives.

Overall, the election results have been a big blow to the Conservative Party, which on top of losing the election also saw its leader, Pierre Poilievre, fail to win his long-held seat. However, Poilievre is expected to run in a yet-to-be-announced by-election in Alberta to reclaim a seat in Parliament.

Continue Reading

Trending

X