"International Covid Summit III" - Covid-19 was a bioweapon?

Apache Inbound

Apache Inbound

Midfield
*** Warning - this post and links may contain misinformation claiming to attribute the views of a few individuals with some form of official status - this was NOT an EU sanctioned event or internationally recognised 'summit', but a meeting of a few individual MEP independently of the EU structures***

According to the EU summit panel, Covid-19 was engineered rather than naturally occurring and was released on purpose in Wuhan by the US for the purpose of triggering a global pandemic to raise public acceptance of vaccines.

So the tinfoilers were right all along?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1660678694321684482


Summary of the above over 3 hour hearing at EU Parliament:


https://www.thestandard.com.hk/section-news/section/11/252653/US-'intentionally-released-Covid-virus-in-Wuhan'-EU-summit-told
 
Last edited by a moderator:


Apache Inbound said:
*** Warning - this post and links may contain misinformation claiming to attribute the views of a few individuals with some form of official status - this was NOT an EU sanctioned event or internationally recognised 'summit', but a meeting of a few individual MEP independently of the EU structures***
According to the EU summit panel, Covid-19 was engineered rather than naturally occurring and was released on purpose in Wuhan by the US for the purpose of triggering a global pandemic to raise public acceptance of vaccines.

So the tinfoilers were right all along?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1660678694321684482


Summary of the above over 3 hour hearing at EU Parliament:


https://www.thestandard.com.hk/section-news/section/11/252653/US-'intentionally-released-Covid-virus-in-Wuhan'-EU-summit-told
Click to expand...
Why did the US want everyone to take a vaccine? To do what? Was Trump involved given he was president?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apache Inbound said:
According to the EU summit panel, Covid-19 was engineered rather than naturally occurring and was released on purpose in Wuhan by the US for the purpose of triggering a global pandemic to raise public acceptance of vaccines.

So the tinfoilers were right all along?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1660678694321684482


Summary of the above over 3 hour hearing at EU Parliament:


https://www.thestandard.com.hk/section-news/section/11/252653/US-'intentionally-released-Covid-virus-in-Wuhan'-EU-summit-told
Click to expand...
Fact #1 : It Was From International COVID Summit III

The viral video clip above is from the International COVID Summit III, which appears to be a private conference organised by COVID-19 conspiracy theorists and anti-vaccination activists:

Held in the Anna Lindh room of the European Parliament, it was not an official EU or European Parliament event, and had only 5 MEPs attend as “co-hosting members” of the event.



Fact #2 : Coronavirus Was First Isolated In 1930s

David Martin said that the first coronavirus as a model of a pathogen was isolated in 1965. Well, I have no idea what he meant by “as a model of a pathogen”, but that’s wrong on several counts.

  • first coronavirus sample (IBV) was isolated in 1930s
  • second coronavirus sample (MHV) was isolated in 1947
  • third coronavirus sample (B814) was isolated in 1961
  • fourth coronavirus sample (229-E) was isolated in 1966
  • all four virus samples were determined to be from same group, and named “coronavirus” in 1967
The first known sample of a coronavirus was isolated and identified as a virus in 1933. That virus was called infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) in 1936, but later renamed as Avian coronavirus.

The second sample of a coronavirus was discovered in 1947. At that time, it was also not known as a coronavirus, but called mouse hepatitis virus (MHV). It would later be renamed as Murine coronavirus.

In 1961, a sample was isolated from a British schoolboy who was suffering from the common cold. That sample, designated as B814, was later confirmed to be a novel (new) virus in 1965. However, it was not called a coronavirus in 1965 either.

In 1966, new samples of a different virus – designated 229-E, were collected from University of Chicago medical students suffering from the common cold. Even then, that virus was not known as a coronavirus.

Fact #3 : Coronavirus Was Identified In 1967

In the video, David Martin appears to say that the “coronavirus was identified in 1965 as one of the first infectious, replicatable viral models that could be used to modify a series of to her experiences of human conditions“.

I have no idea what most of the word salad meant, including the word “replicatable”, but I can tell you that the coronavirus was only identified as a new group of viruses in 1967, not 1965.

Remember the four coronavirus samples that were collected earlier? They were new viruses, but were not known as coronavirus at that time. It was only in 1967 that an electron microscope analysis of those four different viral samples showed that all four viruses belong to the same group.

It was only in 1967, that June Almeida and David Terrell made that discovery, and called the new group of viruses“coronavirus”, based on the characteristic spikes on their surfaces that make them look like the sun’s corona.

Fact #4 : 1967 Experiment Did Not Involve Human Manipulation

In the video, David Martin appears to say that “in 1966, the very first CoV coronavirus model was used as a transatlantic biological experiment in human manipulation“.

He would later repeat this saying “in 1967 – the year I was born, we did the first human trials on inoculating people with modified coronavirus“.

He listed his source as the 1967 study called Effects of a “New” Human Respiratory Virus in Volunteers (PDF download). He may have mixed up his dates a little. In any case, his claim is wrong on multiple levels:

  • that was the fourth and most recent coronavirus sample – 229-E
  • the virus was not known to be a coronavirus at that time
  • the study did not involve human manipulation
What the British scientists did was give the 229-E virus to volunteers to determine :

  • if it causes colds, and
  • the serum neutralising antibody when infected with viruses of this type
There was no manipulation and no modification of the 229-E virus sample before it was given to volunteers.

Fact #5 : Biological Weapons Convention Only Began In 1975

In the video, David Martin appears to wonder, “Where were we when we actually allowed, in violation of biological and chemical weapons treaties? Where were we, as a human civilisation, when we thought it was an acceptable thing to do to take a pathogen from the United States and infect the world with it? Where was that conversation and what should have been that conversation in 1967? “.

Well, for one thing – the 1967 experiment happened long before the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) came into effect on 26 March 1975. There was no conversation to be had.

In addition, the BWC does not limit scientific experiments on viruses, so even if it had been in effect, the 1967 experiment on volunteers would not have breached its rules as it was not being developed as a bioweapon! Again, there was no conversation to be had.

Fact #6 : There Are Many Coronavirus Species

The coronavirus family consists of a multitude of different viruses, with completely different characteristics. Think of them as car models – they are all cars, but every model has a different look and different characteristics.

Hence, it is wrong to associate past coronaviruses with the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19. Any genetic link has to be determined by its genetic code, not by when a virus was discovered!

By 2020, scientists have discovered at least 45 coronavirus species, which were classified into four different genera – Alphacoronavirus, Betacoronavirus, Deltacoronavirus, and Gammacoronavirus.

SARS-CoV-2 is a Betacoronavirus that is most closely related to SARS-CoV-1 – the virus that caused the SARS outbreak in 2002-2004. However, it was a novel (new) coronavirus when it was discovered, and was not derived / engineered / developed from SARS-CoV-1.

There is simply no evidence to suggest that SARS-CoV-2 was developed as a bioweapon from the SARS-CoV-1, or any other coronavirus species.

Fact #7 : No Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Was Engineered

What David Martin said at the International COVID Summit sounds startling, but if you analyse his word salad and sources carefully, you will realise that he has not actually offered any evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 was engineered in any way, much less developed as a bioweapon!

It is plausible that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was created in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and accidentally released in a leak of some sort, but that has never proven one way or another. It is just as plausible that it was brought into Wuhan by some yet-to-be-identified animal host.

There is currently no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered and released as a bioweapon.
 
Baloo said:
Fact #1 : It Was From International COVID Summit III

The viral video clip above is from the International COVID Summit III, which appears to be a private conference organised by COVID-19 conspiracy theorists and anti-vaccination activists:

Held in the Anna Lindh room of the European Parliament, it was not an official EU or European Parliament event, and had only 5 MEPs attend as “co-hosting members” of the event.



Fact #2 : Coronavirus Was First Isolated In 1930s

David Martin said that the first coronavirus as a model of a pathogen was isolated in 1965. Well, I have no idea what he meant by “as a model of a pathogen”, but that’s wrong on several counts.

  • first coronavirus sample (IBV) was isolated in 1930s
  • second coronavirus sample (MHV) was isolated in 1947
  • third coronavirus sample (B814) was isolated in 1961
  • fourth coronavirus sample (229-E) was isolated in 1966
  • all four virus samples were determined to be from same group, and named “coronavirus” in 1967
The first known sample of a coronavirus was isolated and identified as a virus in 1933. That virus was called infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) in 1936, but later renamed as Avian coronavirus.

The second sample of a coronavirus was discovered in 1947. At that time, it was also not known as a coronavirus, but called mouse hepatitis virus (MHV). It would later be renamed as Murine coronavirus.

In 1961, a sample was isolated from a British schoolboy who was suffering from the common cold. That sample, designated as B814, was later confirmed to be a novel (new) virus in 1965. However, it was not called a coronavirus in 1965 either.

In 1966, new samples of a different virus – designated 229-E, were collected from University of Chicago medical students suffering from the common cold. Even then, that virus was not known as a coronavirus.

Fact #3 : Coronavirus Was Identified In 1967

In the video, David Martin appears to say that the “coronavirus was identified in 1965 as one of the first infectious, replicatable viral models that could be used to modify a series of to her experiences of human conditions“.

I have no idea what most of the word salad meant, including the word “replicatable”, but I can tell you that the coronavirus was only identified as a new group of viruses in 1967, not 1965.

Remember the four coronavirus samples that were collected earlier? They were new viruses, but were not known as coronavirus at that time. It was only in 1967 that an electron microscope analysis of those four different viral samples showed that all four viruses belong to the same group.

It was only in 1967, that June Almeida and David Terrell made that discovery, and called the new group of viruses“coronavirus”, based on the characteristic spikes on their surfaces that make them look like the sun’s corona.

Fact #4 : 1967 Experiment Did Not Involve Human Manipulation

In the video, David Martin appears to say that “in 1966, the very first CoV coronavirus model was used as a transatlantic biological experiment in human manipulation“.

He would later repeat this saying “in 1967 – the year I was born, we did the first human trials on inoculating people with modified coronavirus“.

He listed his source as the 1967 study called Effects of a “New” Human Respiratory Virus in Volunteers (PDF download). He may have mixed up his dates a little. In any case, his claim is wrong on multiple levels:

  • that was the fourth and most recent coronavirus sample – 229-E
  • the virus was not known to be a coronavirus at that time
  • the study did not involve human manipulation
What the British scientists did was give the 229-E virus to volunteers to determine :

  • if it causes colds, and
  • the serum neutralising antibody when infected with viruses of this type
There was no manipulation and no modification of the 229-E virus sample before it was given to volunteers.

Fact #5 : Biological Weapons Convention Only Began In 1975

In the video, David Martin appears to wonder, “Where were we when we actually allowed, in violation of biological and chemical weapons treaties? Where were we, as a human civilisation, when we thought it was an acceptable thing to do to take a pathogen from the United States and infect the world with it? Where was that conversation and what should have been that conversation in 1967? “.

Well, for one thing – the 1967 experiment happened long before the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) came into effect on 26 March 1975. There was no conversation to be had.

In addition, the BWC does not limit scientific experiments on viruses, so even if it had been in effect, the 1967 experiment on volunteers would not have breached its rules as it was not being developed as a bioweapon! Again, there was no conversation to be had.

Fact #6 : There Are Many Coronavirus Species

The coronavirus family consists of a multitude of different viruses, with completely different characteristics. Think of them as car models – they are all cars, but every model has a different look and different characteristics.

Hence, it is wrong to associate past coronaviruses with the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19. Any genetic link has to be determined by its genetic code, not by when a virus was discovered!

By 2020, scientists have discovered at least 45 coronavirus species, which were classified into four different genera – Alphacoronavirus, Betacoronavirus, Deltacoronavirus, and Gammacoronavirus.

SARS-CoV-2 is a Betacoronavirus that is most closely related to SARS-CoV-1 – the virus that caused the SARS outbreak in 2002-2004. However, it was a novel (new) coronavirus when it was discovered, and was not derived / engineered / developed from SARS-CoV-1.

There is simply no evidence to suggest that SARS-CoV-2 was developed as a bioweapon from the SARS-CoV-1, or any other coronavirus species.

Fact #7 : No Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Was Engineered

What David Martin said at the International COVID Summit sounds startling, but if you analyse his word salad and sources carefully, you will realise that he has not actually offered any evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 was engineered in any way, much less developed as a bioweapon!

It is plausible that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was created in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and accidentally released in a leak of some sort, but that has never proven one way or another. It is just as plausible that it was brought into Wuhan by some yet-to-be-identified animal host.

There is currently no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered and released as a bioweapon.
Click to expand...

Where did you pull that cut & paste odyssey from?
 
Apache Inbound said:
*** Warning - this post and links may contain misinformation claiming to attribute the views of a few individuals with some form of official status - this was NOT an EU sanctioned event or internationally recognised 'summit', but a meeting of a few individual MEP independently of the EU structures***

According to the EU summit panel, Covid-19 was engineered rather than naturally occurring and was released on purpose in Wuhan by the US for the purpose of triggering a global pandemic to raise public acceptance of vaccines.

So the tinfoilers were right all along?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1660678694321684482


Summary of the above over 3 hour hearing at EU Parliament:


https://www.thestandard.com.hk/section-news/section/11/252653/US-'intentionally-released-Covid-virus-in-Wuhan'-EU-summit-told
Click to expand...



what a load of tinfoil wrapped shite. vaccines have been in use long before covid :lol:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Apache Inbound said:
*** Warning - this post and links may contain misinformation claiming to attribute the views of a few individuals with some form of official status - this was NOT an EU sanctioned event or internationally recognised 'summit', but a meeting of a few individual MEP independently of the EU structures***

According to the EU summit panel, Covid-19 was engineered rather than naturally occurring and was released on purpose in Wuhan by the US for the purpose of triggering a global pandemic to raise public acceptance of vaccines.

So the tinfoilers were right all along?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1660678694321684482


Summary of the above over 3 hour hearing at EU Parliament:


https://www.thestandard.com.hk/section-news/section/11/252653/US-'intentionally-released-Covid-virus-in-Wuhan'-EU-summit-told
Click to expand...
You are one of the most idiotic posters that this forum has

an absolute loon who loves to spread more horseshite than an average farmer

why its allowed is utterly beyond me
Frankel said:
No point marra.

They keep letting the OP and his alternative usernames back on.
Click to expand...
It’s absolutely ridiculous .
Apache Inbound said:
*** Warning - this post and links may contain misinformation claiming to attribute the views of a few individuals with some form of official status - this was NOT an EU sanctioned event or internationally recognised 'summit', but a meeting of a few individual MEP independently of the EU structures***
According to the EU summit panel, Covid-19 was engineered rather than naturally occurring and was released on purpose in Wuhan by the US for the purpose of triggering a global pandemic to raise public acceptance of vaccines.

So the tinfoilers were right all along?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1660678694321684482


Summary of the above over 3 hour hearing at EU Parliament:


https://www.thestandard.com.hk/section-news/section/11/252653/US-'intentionally-released-Covid-virus-in-Wuhan'-EU-summit-told
Click to expand...
@Roger

@Pancho


@McMackem

@Keith S30S

@oROSSo

when is this poster going to be stopped from posting the likes of this ?

it’s beyond a joke
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ghfd said:
You are one of the most idiotic posters that this forum has

an absolute loon who loves to spread more horseshite than an average farmer

why its allowed is utterly beyond me

It’s absolutely ridiculous .
Click to expand...

The European Covid-19 Summit held in European Parliament is spreading misinformation?

What points of their assertions do you challenge?
 
Apache Inbound said:
The European Covid-19 Summit held in European Parliament is spreading misinformation?

What points of their assertions do you challenge?
Click to expand...

International COVID Summit III : What Is That Really?!​

Don’t be surprised if you never heard of the International COVID Summit III, especially when it’s been labelled as an official conference organised by the European Parliament!

Even I never heard of it, but after doing some research, this was what I discovered…

Fact #1 : There Was No International COVID Summit 1 Or 2

Interestingly, this conference was called International COVID Summit III, but I could find no reference to the two previous two conferences – the first International COVID Summit, and International COVID Summit 2 do not appear to exist!

What actually existed were the Global COVID-19 Summit, which was held on September 22, 2021; and the 2nd Global COVID-19 Summit which was held on 12 May 2022.

Both Global COVID-19 Summit 1 and 2 involved heads of states and governments, as well as heads of international organisations, NGOs, and industries across the world. There does not appear to be a third Global COVID-19 Summit yet.

So why would this International COVID Summit jump to its “third” iteration, when this was really the first time it was held? Could it be trying to mislead people into thinking that it was the third version of the Global COVID-19 Summit?!

Fact #2 : It Was Not An Official European Parliament Event

It is easy to see why people would believe the claim that the International COVID Summit III was an official European Parliament event. The videos and screenshots show a liberal use of the European Parliament logo, and accompanying statements suggest the same.

However, if you check the European Parliament website, you will not find International COVID Summit III listed at all. You also won’t find it in the European Parliament’s list of official events for May 2023:

Hearings : A committee is permitted to organise a hearing with experts, where this is considered essential to its work on a particular subject.
In May 2023, only one hearing was scheduled and has not yet occurred – Public Hearing on “Legal Migration; the skills and talent package”.
Workshops : Workshops are organised by the policy departments and enable members to put questions to and exchange views with experts on subjects associated with parliamentary business or subjects of current interest.
No workshops were held, or are scheduled for May 2023.
Other Events : All other public events organised as part of committee activities involving external speakers or experts.
There are two events scheduled for May 2023 – both on 23 May 2023. The first is called “LIBE to hold exchanges with two data protection authorities“. The second is “Exchange of views on the migrant shipwreck off to the Italian coasts“.

Fact #3 : The Summit Was Held In Room PHS 1A2

It took some digging, but I managed to trace the location of this event. It was not held in the grand plenary hall where the 705 Members of the European Parliament meet, of course.

Rather, the International COVID Summit III took place in Room PHS 1A2 in the Paul-Henri SPAAK building – one of the many rooms available for MEPs to use.

Interestingly, this room (officially Room 1A002) was named as the Anna Lindh Room in September 2003, in honour of Sweden’s murdered foreign minister.

Fact #4 : The Summit Was Hosted By ECR + ID Parliamentary Groups

The International COVID Summit III appears to be sponsored by the European Parliament Members from the ECR (European Conservatives and Reformists), and the Identity and Democracy (ID) groups.

That explains how this “summit” or “conference” was held within the European Parliament building, even though it was not an official or sanctioned event.

From the event itinerary, it appears that just five European Parliament Members attended the International COVID Summit III:

  • MR. IVAN VILIBOR SINČIĆ, Non-attached Member of the European Parliament – CROATIA
  • MRS. FRANCESCA DONATO, Non-attached Member of the European Parliament – ITALY
  • MR. MISLAV KOLAKUŠIĆ, Non-attached Member of the European Parliament – CROATIA
  • MRS. CHRISTINE ANDERSON, Identity and Democracy – GERMANY
  • MR. CRISTIAN TERHEȘ, European Conservatives and Reformists – ROMANIA
Obviously, speaking to those five MEPs do not constitute speaking to the European Parliament itself, since 700 other MEPs were not in the room, and it wasn’t even an official event!

On top of that, the event banner show that they were not there as official representatives of the European Parliament, but as “co-hosting members” of the event…

Fact #5 : It Was All Talk, No Action

The International COVID Summit ran for about 9 hours, from 9 AM until 6 PM, and featured a long list of the usual suspects. But despite many of them giving bombastic testimony, the summit / conference ultimately resulted in nothing.

Because it was not an official European Parliament meeting or event, it had absolutely zero effect. The summit organisers did not even think of asking the attendees to pass a motion or action plan of any kind.

From what I can tell – the entire “summit” consisted of allotted time for the speakers to speak to the attendees and a livestream, from within a European Parliament room.

Perhaps that was ultimately the purpose of this event – to give those speakers the patina of European Parliamentary approval? Perhaps that was all they needed. After all, people are already claiming on social media that those speakers were testifying to the European Parliament.

But if you made it this far, you already know that this is not true at all. Sadly, most people will not know that.
 

Back
Top