A DRAFT: Ebola / HIV / SARS-CoV: overlapping groups, institutions, interests
Heimo Claasen (2.12.2022 and later editing, last 3.1.2023)

====
PART I
====

This draft - continiously worked on ! - was stimulated by the article of Sam Husseini and Jonathan Latham, PhD: "Did West Africa.s Ebola Outbreak of 2014 Have a Lab Origin?" October 25, 2022

REM: Having worked as independent journalist since 1974 in and from Brussels/Belgium, with special interest on EU-Africa relations, and sure on Belgian ex-Congo such, I had followed reports and the literature on Ebola from its beginning in 1976 - Belgian Peter Piot, then a young virologist would become quite wellknown - and then in the early 1980ies, HIV-AIDS ever more intensified the attention for social and political effects of epidemics.[1]
(To keep this draft short, I presume some general knowledge published widely since 2020, including names and positions of key "actors". Details and sources can be found in the relevant sections of my website, http://www.revobild.net/cov-hiv.html.)

For both of these issues, the questions about the origins have not been convincingly answered until today -- but have been been buried under enormous publicity and publishing efforts to deny anything else but a zoonose as explication.
And now it's for these proceedings again concerning SARS-Cov-2/Covid.

Regarding that latter, I see[2] two "triades" leading the campaign:

 I. In politics;
 ========
   Fauci -- from his installation at NIAID on (1984) financed Baric's Corona research: his very first publication on corona contagion in 1985: i.e. research for this must have begun already in 1984.
NIATD/NIH financing for Baric/UNC-CH has gone on through every year ever since since. Thei cooperation was certainly strangthened when Lisa E. Hensley, one of Baric's formost assitants, changed to work as a top NIAID adminministrator..

   Kadlec --  positioned in government (with a relevant prior career) crucially in the post-Obama administration; before that, and after Trump, in various Congress instances.

   Karesh -- had and has in Congress patent positions with "bipartisan" affairs. Karesh was co-founder for Ecohealth Alliance(EHA) with Daszak in 2000.

 II. In science:
 ========
   Baric -- can be reasonably qualified as "pope of corona research" for his preponderance in his network of scientific institutions busy with corona. Among them, the North Carolina "biotech triangle" with NC State U., Chapel Hill and Duke at Durham (and Duke's Singapore dependence).

   Daszak -- busy with sampling viruses of "amphibious" beasts from 2000 on (founding of EHA together with Karesh) and DoD- financed, switching to sampling of bat viruses with SARS(Cov-1) in 2003 and MERS (2012). From the pattern of his contributions to science journals it appears that Daszak (initiated? and) managed the "triade" cooperation among Baric, the Australians (CISRO + E.Holmes/Sydney), and Shi/Wuhan.

   Shi -- PhD U.Montpellier/France, then at Merieux (Lyon/France, established as a spin-off of Pasteur/Lyon), then in Wuhan (there, at first research on shrimp diseases until 2003). As appears from [2], her first publication on SARS was 2005, together with Daszak, Baric e.a. In-between, she had a  probably crucial stint at Baric's insitutes.
 Shi's "French Connection" must have been connected with, or at least couldn't be excluded from, the very official French support, originally, to construct the Wuhan BSL-4.
 Besides, there is a remark in one of the reports that Z.Shi is "close partner" with Lin-Fa Wang of Duke/Singapore who quite frequently appears as co-author with her and others of the "Triade". 

In a proposal for DARPA sponsoring ("Project DEFUSE" of 2018, which however had not been granted), Daszak presented even a visual view of the core of his network's "administative" and "management" setup.

MY CONCLUSIONS from the the authorship of publications  [2]:
============
(1.) EHA's foundation by Karesh and Daszak in N.Y., 2000 - it's a FIRM, an ".INC": the "NGO" is just a department of it - was a "front" of one of the many US-"security" org.s; with the activity to build-up of a network of contacts for sampling "amphibious" environmental organisms in at first West-Africa; a sheer informational, organisational activity: there was no research with the sampled specimen, EHA's/Daszak's tasks consisted of setting up a network of local "environmental" observers along the coast of the Gulf of Guinea, - then having become an area of US strategic "concern" - and to sample beasts which were forwarded to unreported (perhaps military) org.s.

(2.) Possibly Daszak's contact with Shi stems from Shi's then occupation with shrimp diseases in the Southeast Asian coastal waters, a major problem at the time for the shrimps fishery/elevators, she published about it. Then the occurrence of SARS(-1) 2002 in South China triggered their cooperation to the very first and "groundbreaking" article in 2005, according to a Daszak interview.

This is my view to what connected both the chains related to the SARS-Cov-2-origin _AND_ the figures as well as institutions leading the campaign to cover it up and promote the "zoonose" origin.
 
I see two interrelated dimensions in the "overlapping" between the Ebola, HIV, CoV campaigns,
 
First, and rather trivially: there had been not so many virologists at the time when Ebola appeared in 1976. This event certainly boosted this scientific branch but the onset of "AIDS" in the early 1980'ies definitively was decisive. And it catapulted that first generation of scientists with Ebola expertise and experience to the the upper ranks (cf. all those like Piot, Heyman, McCormick, J.Mann and others who published early HIV/AIDS papers and took the floor at the first "AIDS Conferences".)

Second, the "security" aspect: Surely, grave infectious diseases have been historically perceived as as danger for public health; and defensive reactions and regulations had been developed.
(EXTEMPORE: when AIDS came up in the early '80ies I was - typical product of the "liberating sixties" - shocked and I checked the regulations for health emergencies in my and other countries. And found that already THEN, existing legal previsions provided for the possibility of utterly dictatorial, if not totalitarian regimes in case of a "serious" epidemic.)
However, and in historical perspective, that same danger to public health had been used offensively and in war, documentation abound.

Regarding Ebola./.HIV:
------------------------------------
From about the very first Ebola occurrence in Congo/Zaire on, the involvement of "intelligence" and military instances has become known:

    Karl M Johnson, CIA+CDC, was the leading figure of the then-"Zaire" operation to contain it and to manage research about it. Based on his connection with the South African regime and both its scientific and political instances, he brought in logistical (a first! "mobile secure bio-lab") and expertise support from South Africa (prof. Swanepoel and his then assist. M. Isacsson) for the Ebola operation 1976/77 in Zaire
.
    William Close (father of), personal doc of then Zaire preaident Mobutu, was the de facto manager of the Mobutu's government health office. He had been airforce pilot in WW-II and raised in rank and had continued military connections ever since, especially then with "Zaire's" high brass. Which allowed hin to command crucial military logistics in support for the Ebola rescue operation.

Later, key actors in this realm became almost automatically leading figures in the upcoming HIV==AIDS-"in Africa" circuit, e.g. Peter Piot as the head of  the WHO-AIDS-department, or David Heyman and many others.

Regarding HIV./.CoV:
---------------------------------
The boost of research on HIV provided an enlarged base for linked microbiological activity. The rapidly increasing specifics from there spilled over into research in other realms, especially on retroviruses, e.g. with procedures like PCR and methods derived from HIV-research like using enzymes and "eternal" cell lines. There are numerous references to research on using genetic properties of HIV with other microbes already at the time before CRISPR (1993), and so many more since.

But the link with Corona has been established quite early on and exclusively by Fauci and Baric: As far as can be seen, the very first publication on "human" Corona by Baric dates from 1985 and was funded by NIAID, i.e. the decision for this must have been done by Fauci almost immediately after his ascension to the top of NIAID in 1984 and his formal function there to steer (not only by funding) HIV-AIDS research.

David Martin considers "that the problem is that right Anthony Fauci and NIAID found the malleability of coronavirus to be a potential candidate for HIV vaccines." This points to Fauci's obsession that only and uniquely a pharma-drug would and should be the solution against HIV==AIDS, cf. his personal and institutional promotion of AZT which - as is reasonably argued - in the first years killed perhaps more AIDS patients than the very HI Virus. However, it indicates to another aspect too: The use, exclusively by members of the "science Triade", of HIV-"pseudoviruses" in their SARS-CoV-X research, producing a number of chimera (and publications about it) - it's only to hope that none of these have escaped from their labs,[3]: there was a DRASTIC article about a _planned_ release by Daszak/Shi of a CoV-chimera.

Regarding "security" interests:
------------------------------------------------
Tulane, Galveston, NIAID (with its primordial task to defend against "bioterrorism") - all heavily involved with military/"security" relevant research - have contributed to the establishment of the Wuhan institutes (plural: i.e already to the preceding labs there before the WIV BSL-4.)
It's not that obvious with the French commitment (which for WIV-BSL-4 was the lead constructor) but the mere fact that the French president paid a formal as well as personal interest (with his visit there) is a strong indication (as well as the fact that the French retrieved rather suddenly when links of the Chinese military research co-cooperation with WIV became known for them.)
And then: while "Metabiota" was involved in Kenema with Ebola research, it became a key operator for Daszak-coordinated CoV-research in Georgia and Ukraine. An indeed "current affair".

Some final remarks:
-------------------------------
There are undeniable facts of terrorist actions and events. Though a key political aspect of the "bio-security/-terrorism" complex is certainly the obsession in (a major) part of the US (functional) political elite about a "socialist"=="communnist"=="Russian" threat which dates from already before the Bolshevist revolution of 1917, and which did not abate at all after the so obvious disintegration of the Stalinist empire.  On the contrary, after the disappearance of the (as state identifiable) enemy it's a presumed infectiousness of ideological remnants from this "condition" which constituted the "present danger" that had to be reigned in. And this could reside in just anyone.

Consequently (letting aside considerations to more fundamental politico-economic interests, see Part II), this resulted in a network of intertwined US government "security" and related institutions, cf. the  "hub" (pp 34,35) proudly presented from the US government -, including such pseudo-govt. org.s like "One Health" or "Predict", which since predominated the "CoV-narrative"; and the buy-up of (most of) the former Soviet personnel; quite similar to the take-over of the "experts" of former Japanese bio-/medical military criminals.

A prototype for this may be the "Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Act" of 2005 which despite of the laudable declaration in its name established a practice of "dual use" biotechnical research activity in US-sponsored institutes.

It has been the late North Carolina, Republican senator Burr, on the record for the defense for the NC tobacco industry who initiated steps towards a congressional enquiry about the origin(s) of SARS-CoV-2. The newly Republican Senate majority might perhaps allow to start up a procedure - which could be powerful, but seen some aspects of the real working of the institution, with "bipartisan" key figures like Karesh and Kadlek in important staff positions, the suspition of an outcome to make "China/Wuhan" the sole culprit  could be reasonable.

Besides, an ugly aspect of the "scientific Triade" is the fact that Baric threw his co-operant Shi under the bus with his initiative for the appeal to direct investigation into the SARS-CoV-2 origin solely and exclusively on "Wuhan"; or the sinister role of Mike Worobey in the "zoonose-only" campaign. He had played ugly already in the early research on the HIV-origin in first sliming his way into cooperation with the highly regarded (and integer) researcher Wiliam Hamilton, to then sabotage and discriminate his tutor (ref. with Edward Hooper's "The river" and blog entries.) Worobey now has cooked up the most recent - and most "fake-news" - study of the Wuhan "wet market" narrative for the CoV-2 origin; and got praised for that by key figures of the "Science- Triade".[4]


==============
PART II
Poiltical Transmissions
(forthcoming)
==============

[1] Documentary Channel-4 1989, on the debate about HIV/AIDS origins (English);
Documentary ARTE 1995 on the chase for the Ebola source (French) as well as the pitch for this, a first part in German, the second part English.

[2] My method: "manual" search with various search engines for authors' articles and there, declared Acknowledgments. This has been hardly complete or representative, as these engines are selective and I then selected from the hits presented. Some examples are collected in the related sections on this website.

There has been an interesting algorithmic research of the interconnections - financial, institutional, personal (e.g.marriages) - of Covid/SARS-Cov-2 researchers and publishing authors by an undeclared author "Mr.X" and presented in several German blogs: PDF: Mr.X's Network drawings. (Some designations are in German but the graphs are self-explaining.)

It maps what emerges as a Network which, like a well delimited cloud comprises the really dominant "elite" (ref. to C.W.Mills) of who determines public opinion and world policy concerning the CoV-complex. It was published in September 2021; I got to know of it long time after I had started assembling my more eclectic collection. At the outset based on questions for where the money of big foundations flows, it tracks enormous details of these relations. However, it does not - and could not by design - map more than these lines, not the very substance, e.g. for what the Gate$'s funds to Piot's London univ institution would have to do with it. (Which is what I am interested in.)

Another limitation is that "Mr.X" delimited his search algorithm to primarily EU targets and thus grabs only some correlated links to US (and other non-EU) connections. Nevertheless, it's an highly useful source for to follow these formal-monetary-personal lines of connections among that Network. There is an extensive interview - in German - with Mr.X which doesn't reveal his identity but well his competence in IT/data analysis.

Another highly relevant database has been provided with David E. Martin's "M-CAM" dossier on patents: This dates a first Fauci/Baric patent to 1999. But funding from NAID (and later by other NIH sources too) started with that first Baric research of 1985 and continued uninterrupted through all the years since, until today.

[3] It was Montagnier who in mid-Feb'20 first mentioned to a general public that HIV-inserts can be found in the just (on 20 Jan'20) published sequencing of SARS-CoV-2; and he became terribly and in most ugly ways attacked and insulted. His, together with bio-mathematician Jean-Claude Perez edited thesis focused at these inserts (and not, like almost all of the many SARS-CoV-2 articles on the CoV-Spikes and the FCS).
With recent works however, the traces of such inserts and their position in the genome have become key indicators for analyzing the signs for a lab-manipulated origin of the virus (independently and from different angles: Harrison/Sachs, or Bruttel e.a.) Typically, E.Holmes was among the first and most eager to attack Bruttel-e.a.

[4] Michael Worobey, "Dissecting the early COVID-19 cases in Wuhan" Science • 18 Nov 2021 • Vol 374, Issue 6572 • pp. 1202-1204 • DOI: 10.1126/science.abm4454.
This article has been "debunked" by several really facts checking authors but nevertheless it's still quoted in recent texts.

 -hc

Back to startpage