Why is the government redacting documents and refusing to share information it holds on events that might help us grapple with the mystery of the pandemic’s origins after almost five million deaths? Here are the documents behind my MoS article (Part 1) dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Eddie was locked up at 13, stuck in solitary confinement with a bowl for a toilet and fed through a hatch. Now he has spent almost half his life incarcerated while his family fight for his freedom. Why? Because he has autism & learning disabilities in a country lacking care
He is among many victims of a grotesque human rights scandal taking place in the UK that wrecks lives, devastates families and wastes big sums of money. Yet ministers & NHS chiefs have again broken their promise to tackle the scandal - my @theipaper column inews.co.uk/opinion/human-…
There have been scores of damning inquiries, devastating reports, disturbing media exposes. So many promises to end abusive 'treatment' that destroys lives and almost everyone accepts is medically & morally wrong. So why does so little get done - and why's there not more outrage?
African Parks statement in response to my investigation says it became aware of abuse claims in the letter to Prince Harry last May, then accusing @Survival
of not co-operating with inquiries. But as I wrote today, Survival first told them about abuse from their guards in 2013!
In 2014, the African Parks community manager admitted they knew of problems with corruption, violence and poaching by their own guards in a meeting with Survival but said they needed hard evidence to act against individuals, according to the campaign group’s contemporaneous notes
In 2017, a report by Survival International accused both African Parks and WWF of silence over human rights abuses in the Congo Basin. ‘Across the region, Baka face harassment, theft, torture and death at the hands of wildlife guards,’ it stated. assets.survivalinternational.org/documents/1683…
Four years since Taiwan tipped off the WHO about a new virus causing havoc in Wuhan. Zero evidence has emerged backing claims of zoonotic transmission but there are alarming signs that high risk gain-of-function experiments took place in low level biosafety conditions in the city
Yet still there is a conspiracy of silence from most Western politicians and much of the media, which helped a small group of US & UK research funding bodies and a few patsy scientists to push the idea that even discussing the idea of a lab leak was to promote a conspiracy theory
We know China covered up outbreak of a strange new coronavirus with unusual features. This had disastrous consequences. Beijing and most non-comprised scientists have accepted the market theory as a red herring since mid-2020. We have learned the risky nature of research in Wuhan
Listening to Sir Patrick Vallance's interview with BBC (bbc.co.uk/programmes/p09…). Asked why his emails discussing the pandemic origins were redacted when I sought them under FOI (dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1…), he admits this is a problem for transparency and undermines public trust...
He says he would be happy for the emails to be released but claims he could not do so since they were not his emails and he was only attending a meeting organised by others. He insists the details are not exciting...
...but then adds, intriguingly, 'the output of that was a scientific paper published by that group'. Presumably this was 'The proximal origin of Sars-CoV-2″ published in Nature Medicine that concluded “we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible”.
World's most famous medical journal is accused of doing China's dirty work - my Mail on Sunday report on how @TheLancet stifled debate on the lab leak theory while praising Beijing dailymail.co.uk/debate/article…
Reveals that cabal behind Peter Daszak's infamous statement trying to close down debate on 'conspiracy theories suggesting Covid-19 does not have a natural origin' and endorsing China's 'rapid, open and transparent sharing of data' is preparing a second statement in the journal
Another scientist discloses that the editor rejected his attempt to discuss scientific involvement in persecution of Uighurs on grounds that it might cause problems for his Beijing editor - yet he repeatedly attacks democratic leaders in the UK & US