Himalaya Farm Canada 文𤦍
Proof reader UCool

On the evening of the Election (November 3, 2020), heroic scientists Dr. Li-Meng Yan, Professor Kang and Dr Hu joined the live broadcast of Lude Media and analyzed the recent New York Times article suppressing Dr. Li-Meng Yan’s research papers. Dr. Li-Meng Yan stated that since she publicly revealed the truth about the virus, she has been attacked by major mainstream media.

However, as the truth has been continuously revealed in English, more and more people in the English-speaking world have begun to pay attention. Although people have a different understanding of her work, there is also a growing realization that the possibility of a laboratory-made virus cannot be ruled out. At the same time, we also see the strength of the CCP’s ‘BGY’ strategy. They have successfully corrupted much of the scientific community. These evil forces have not given up. As long as there is a glimmer of hope, they will fight for the right to speak.

In this battle about the origin of the virus, the New York Times, published an article attacking Dr Li-Meng Yan on Nov 2nd entitled “In Hunt for Virus Source, WHO Let China Take Charge”. With respect to this article, Dr. Li-Meng Yan and Professor Kang agreed that the author’s approach was subtle and euphemistically justifying the CCP and WHO with petty scolding and big favors.

The article starts by criticizing the CCP and the WHO, condemning the CCP for concealing the epidemic. It says the CCP is not concerned with protecting humans in the face of the epidemic, but rather with saving face. This hinders investigation of the truth about the virus. In the process of obstructing the investigation, it put pressure on the WHO, so that the WHO made the mistake of not reporting the spread of the epidemic early enough, and greatly hindered the investigating of the source of the virus. However, the narrative in the article changes. It continues by describing the WHO as being squeezed between the CCP and President Trump. The WHO had to compromise with the CCP while at the same time facing Trump’s criticism. This led to the late announcement of the epidemic. Through this narrative the author draws the reader’s attention to Trump as the problem – because Trump wanted to use the WHO’s failure to fight the epidemic as an excuse to destroy the WHO. Therefore, the article concludes, the conspiracy theory that Trump and the forces behind him have promoted about the origin of the virus are unacceptable.

“From the beginning of the outbreak, the WHO – the only public health organization with global mandates – was both indispensable and powerless. This Geneva-based institution has released key information about testing, treatment and vaccine science. When the Trump administration decided to develop its own kits instead of relying on WHO’s plans, poor performance caused delays in testing.”

“Internal documents and interviews with more than 50 public health officials, scientists and diplomats have allowed us to understand how a powerless WHO is eager to gain access and cooperation with the CCP, but these two goals are difficult to achieve. Its cautious approach provides space for Trump and his allies to promote speculation and baseless conspiracy theories, and to shift blame for their own mistakes.”

The author of this article draws the reader’s attention to the difference between Chinese culture and Western culture as one culprit for the misunderstandings, and again assigns the South China seafood market as the source of the virus. The article argues the reason the CCP did not collect evidence of the virus in the early stage was due to the destruction of evidence as a result of extensive disinfection. It claims that the CCP was afraid that more people would be infected, and it therefore delayed the collection of virus evidence for the sake of people’s lives. At the same time, the CCP had to save face and Chinese culture demands that internal (family) problems should not be publicized. In order to save face, the truth of the epidemic was covered up and the WHO did not get the necessary information. This narrative justifies the CCP’s actions as being for the good of the people and only accidentally damaging the evidence. Although the CCP implemented harsh measures to control the virus, it has effectively controlled the spread, unlike Trump’s performance. The article compares Trump and the CCP, seeming to criticize the CCP, but excusing every point of criticism. It encourages readers to understand the CCP’s difficulties and the good intentions of their actions. This compares to President Trump’s incompetent fight against the virus.

The article attempts to white-wash the CCP’s actions, but is actually full of contradictions. In the same live LuDe Media Interview involving Dr Li-Meng Yan and Dr. Hu, he pointed out that the article mentioned Gao Fu and Professor Lipkin holding a picture of a dead mouse. Lipkin said that the dead mouse was probably the intermediate host. Can a dead mouse be determined to be the host by just looking at a photo, without any autopsy or biopsy? This only shows that the professionalism of Gao Fu and Lipkin is extremely poor. In addition, the New York Times stated that local officials in Wuhan cleaned the market early to prevent the spread of the disease, and therefore they did not get any animal samples. However, later the article states that Gao Fu had obtained the virus sample, and Gao Fu himself also said that he had obtained the sample. However, no virus was detected in the sample.

The article attributed all claims that the source of the virus was the Wuhan laboratory, to anti-China conspiracy theories. Dr. Hu said that this has nothing to do with being anti-China. Exposing the virus as a product of the laboratory is revealing the evil deeds of the CCP regime.

Dr. Hu pointed out that all these CCP actions are designed to prevent an investigation of the source of the virus. Senator Tom Cotton just won reelection to the Senate. He was the first senator to propose a thorough investigation of the source of the virus. His election shows that some Americans are questioning where the virus came from. In interviews before the election, many people said that they would not vote for Trump because of the ineffectiveness of Trump’s early fight against the epidemic. Trump was misled by false information in the early days of the pandemic and made false statements – for example that the virus would disappear by April. Trump, as a non-professional, took professional advice to make this statement. The re-election of Congressman Cotton and the fact that some people are considered not voting for Trump because of his perceived mishandling of the pandemic, may be proof that, at least, the American people care about the epidemic and expect the truth.

The New York Times article considers many theories about the natural origin of the virus. However, the article is different from many previous articles in that it does not mention Ratg13 and Pangolin as part of the natural origin. Previously, RAtg13 was recognized academically as the most powerful evidence for the natural origin of the virus, and pangolins were said to be the likely intermediate host. This article in no way mentions Ratg13 and pangolins as intermediate hosts, It is a reaction to the fact that the support for this falsified evidence is weakening in the mainstream media.

Recently, the New York Times introduced Wang Linfa to stand up for the natural origin of the CCP-virus. Wang Linfa was interviewed by the New York Times in June 2020. He appeared as an international scientist. Born in Shanghai. He is a virologist. He was a fellow of the Australian Academy of Science and Engineering. He was the head of the emerging infectious disease project in the medical school jointly established by Duke University and the National University of Singapore. He was a member of the first group of people approved by the CCP to study abroad after 1978. He received a PhD in molecular biology and biochemistry from the University of California, Davis. Wang claimed he got a teaching job abroad in May 1989 and returned to China in June to participate in the Tiananmen Square massacre on June 4th (6-4). He witnessed the massacre by the CCP. “It makes me totally unprepared,” Wang Linfa said of the massacre. “Seeing the tanks in Tiananmen Square, I said, okay, my political mind is not as good as my scientific mind.” Dr. Li-Meng Yan questioned his statement: “as a 6-4 person who returned to China to participate in the democratic movement when the whole country was blocked and the whole country is in the process of the arresting pro-democracy activists, how was he able to return abroad immediately?” On this issue, Dr. Hu added on this issue that Wang Linfa went abroad in 1982. At that time, when there were no self-funded foreign students in CCP-controlled China, the most likely ‘public funding’ would be the CCP sponsored training of spies. Dr. Hu went on to say that if he went abroad from 1987 to 1989, he would carry half a pig as a bribe (??) to the counselor to get a chance to study abroad. Those opportunities were not actually about studying abroad, but only a chance to learn abroad for half a year. Many people used the opportunity to stay abroad after leaving the country. However, Wang Linfa went directly to study abroad for his Ph.D. At that time, only a few major branches of the military and a few major ministries could directly send people to study abroad. What kind of person can he be? In addition, Shi Zhengli didn’t expect to introduce this virus to bats at first. Who told Shi to look for bats? It’s Wang Linfa! LuDe confirmed in that live interview that Wang Linfa was a Chinese agent.

Dr. Li-Meng Yan makes an important point. Wang Linfa, was the one who told them what the intermediate host was and where to find it.

From these clues, we know that Wang Linfa has very deep ties with the CCP from his early years, and even now. In June. Wang Lin issued a categorical statement that it is absolutely impossible for the CCP virus to originate from the Wuhan Virus Laboratory, and he said that the Wuhan Virus Laboratory does not have samples of this coronavirus at all. Are a CCP spy’s words credible?

Dr. Li-Meng Yan pointed out that the CCP would offer overseas experts as spokespeople to reveal their narrative in June 2020. Sure enough, Wang Linfa became their spokesperson in November. In the New York Times article, the author claims that scientists all want to solve problems. They interviewed many international experts, including Wang Linfa, and they all said that they want to do scientific research on the basis of facts. Dr. Li-Meng Yan commented: “Yes, I also want to do scientific research on the basis of facts, and I pursue scientific research evidence and facts to do this research. If you want to continue to lie in the name of doing scientific research, the facts will still be as I state in my reports. Every step you take, you will find that your lies will be exposed by us.”

Dr. Hu emphasized here that the core goal of the New York Times article is to compete for investigative power. They divided the investigation into two stages. The first to investigate hospital records and interview early patients. The ridiculous thing is that the WHO said that this matter could not be discussed with the CCP, and that they finally had to give in and let the CCP investigate. As the WHO is an independent investigative agency, is there anything more ridiculous than this to let the suspects investigate themselves? The second is to find an intermediate host. Such an important investigation, WHO said, will be assigned after the US election. Because they expect that after Joe Biden is elected, the WHO will again have the participation of the United States, and with Biden’s support, they can falsify the origin of the virus.

After Joe Biden wins the election, he will re-join the WHO, and let them lead the team to investigate the origin of the virus in China. Dr. Li-Meng Yan said that this is ridiculous. No matter what, if you discuss with the CCP trying to get the truth about a virus when the truth can kill the CCP, one possible way to get no results is to hook up with CCP. The only way to get the truth about the Virus is to destroy the CCP first and then continue the follow-up investigation. The WHO has long been proven to have no credibility. Big media such as the New York Times used tactful means to excuse the CCP, telling readers about the WHO’s difficulties and finding various excuses for its negligence. Their purpose is to lead readers to agree that although the WHO has made mistakes, Trump’s actions in withdrawing from the WHO ruined the WHO, which is excessive and unacceptable. Dr. Li-Meng Yan said that the source of the virus is not a scientific issue, but a political issue. Although she provided scientific evidence for tracing the source, all the evidence points to the nature of the Chinese Communist regime. This regime is anti-humanity. The CCP allowed this virus to ravage the world and caused humanity to suffer historic destruction. If you still expect an organization that is collaborating with the CCP for a long time to offer the truth, it could only happen because they are afraid of the CCP. The CCP is using this situation to confuse the public, and to feed the narrative of natural origin. Another strategy they may use is to find individual scapegoats to make the laboratory-leak theory more complete. Or they can try to deodorize the event as an accident that happened while they were trying to prioritize public safety. It is also possible to glorify the truth about the CCP virus as being the same as what happened in the Yunnan mine, caused by hard-working scientists who collected samples and then accidentally leaked them. The CCP has made a series of complicated and interlocking moves to confuse the public, but they also have a lot of manpower and material resources to support their deception.

When Dr. Li-Meng Yan and Dr. Hu were talking about the New York Times article, it was vaguely revealed that the virus might be a leak, just for the CCP to play the last card. If the intermediate host animal cannot be found, the CCP will use a laboratory leak to cover up the truth. When preparing to leak the statement, the CCP also proceeded along multiple lines. On the one hand, insisting that the virus comes from the seafood market, on the other hand, that it may have been a leak. Including the use of a sequence of samples from Yunnan mines in the process of making the virus, this could all serve as groundwork for what comes after, to continue to hide the truth. No matter where the narrative leads, they can never be shown to have lied, but to be upholding one truth.

First of all, at the beginning of the pandemic, the CCP should not have let this happen, because the virus came from the laboratory. Secondly, this virus is impossible to leak, it can only be artificially produced, and all signs point to this. In this process, in order to expand the lethality of the virus, the CCP has concealed early reports, denied human-to-human transmission, denied cases, and failed timely treatment, and used carriers to direct the virus to overseas as much as possible before being exposed by the Whistleblower Movement. At the same time, after the epidemic was exposed, the CCP used Wuhan to close the city, and the CCP hoarded a large amount of PPE in advance. Some overseas Chinese and organizations paid for masks and protective gear for the China and almost ended up buying up PPE all over the world. This led to a lack of protective gear in various countries following the outbreak overseas. After the outbreak of the epidemic abroad, countries lacked protective equipment. After that, there were efforts to prove the source of the virus. Shi Zhengli, Guan Yi, Cao Wuchun of the Academy of Military Sciences, and Yang Ruifu took the lead to advance the theory of the natural origin of viruses. At the same time, the WHO, “Lancet”, “New England”, “Nature” and other top journals joined forces with them. The CCP wanted to cover up the truth. Dr. Li-Meng Yan said: “It doesn’t matter, there is evidence from the beginning. And no fraud can be perfect. As long as you walk with the evidence, just like I said, walking a tightrope, no matter where it takes you, you can take it down. Solve it. I’m putting this sentence here. The CCP can listen. If their Chinese version of the New York Times is listening, they can also hear it. Our fellow supporters can also record all of this. Spread this sentence on the Internet, I am responsible for myself. We must extract the evidence. Because a regime can be so dark that it is indifferent between humans and gods. As long as God does not want mankind to perish, we must point out the truth!”

As the evidence for laboratory origin of the virus accumulates, the battle between justice and evil has become increasingly fierce. Although the “New York Times” wrote the articles carefully to discredit Dr. Li-Meng Yan, it can be seen that the CCP is actually retreating. They are already afraid to bring up the subject of having tried to confuse the world into understanding the new coronavirus with the pseudo-evidence of Ratg13. Moreover, the article has begun to pave the way for laboratory leaks. The “New York Times” has not succeeded in writing an article to absolve the CCP of guilt, but rather they are stepping onto thin ice, making a dying struggle to cover up the truth of the virus. As Dr. Li-Meng Yan said, no fraud can be perfect. As long as you follow the evidence, all frauds can be revealed.

Reference link:

  1. 11/3/2020 路德时评(路博艾冠康胡谈嘉宾闫丽梦博士伊安先生):大选夜分析!
  2. 寻找新冠病毒起源:被中国左右的WHO调查
  3. 大流行时代,被世界所需要的“蝙蝠侠”
  4. 《纽约时报》攻击闫博士,实则表现出中共在疫情真相上已然溃崩