One aspect that is missed here is that many of these improvised analysts (i do not like the word sleuths) are actually very qualified in their fields and have top academic backgrounds.
That's why they succeeded. Make no mistake.
What will eventually dawn on people is how masterful the setup of DRASTIC was.
It's an informal organisation that is very open, very resilient and flexible by design.
It allows for a mix of styles, from the rebellious taunt to the peer reviewed article.
DRASTIC people worked the coal mine, jumped into the mudbath.
But they were also able to interface with top media (Washington Post, WSJ, Spectator, Le Monde, etc) without forgetting the more mainstream ones (TVs, Daily Mail, Sun, etc).
Then they were able to raise their game and work with other groups such as the Paris Group, then start framing this into a constructive engagement once the guerrilla warfare was settled.
This does not happen by chance. It happens because the design and thoughts are there.
IMHO Billy (and others) did a stellar job.
It's a masterpiece of 'grassroot intelligence', which covers collection, interpretation and last communication (at different levels).
And that's why I don't like 'internet sleuth' because that gets stuck at the collection level.
Let's get a few things clear about this declassified ODNI assessment (ODNI: Office of the Director of National Intelligence) : washingtonpost.com/national-secur…
First as is written on page 2:
"This assessment is based on information through August 2021."
In other words it does NOT include any information that has come up since the summary assessment of 26th Aug 21. dni.gov/index.php/news…
In particular it does not include the DEFUSE revelations (especially about the FCS).
Or the latest revelations that show that GoF on BatCoVs was indeed happening within the WIV.
It is based on data frozen in time - nothing new since the summary report: dni.gov/index.php/news…
The NIH tries to call it 'limited' and 'unexpected'.
[I won't go trough the details but it is not much unexepected as far as I can tell - it's a fully possible result that was being tested for here.]
That was part of year 5 reporting - officially submitted on the 3rd August 2021 according to the records.
"Nothing goes right all the time. So it is in research labs. Despite sophisticated safety installations and strict rules in virology labs accidents and leaks happen. Indeed, they are underreported."
"The virologists doing this work said it would help them predict the next pandemic virus. Armed with this insight, they claimed it would be possible to develop preventive vaccines and drugs that could be frozen and stored."
"African diplomats are becoming exasperated by China's demands for diplomatic support on every issue from Covid-19's origins to the human rights of the Uighurs in Xinjiang province,.."
"..whether it's in the World Health Organization, the UN Human Rights Council, diplomatic sources told Africa Confidential."
"Chinese diplomats email, text and call their African counterparts directly to get them to sign joint letters, support motions and other measures.."
“Withholding data from the government agency that funds your work with taxpayer dollars does not engender trust. Federal research grants are not an entitlement." plus.cq.com/shareExternal/…
"Failing to comply with oversight measures put into place largely for safety reasons is inexcusable. I’m not going to sit idly by while [EHA] inaction allows unqualified grifters and opportunists free reign to disparage my entire profession, ultimately making everyone less safe"
Jaime Yassif (@JaimeYassif), senior fellow for global biological policy and programs:
"I would have flagged this project.
Looking at the experiment of concern that's highlighted in the letter, it appears to me as gain-of-function research, even before the 'one log' requirement."