Who would you trust more - Bill Rice or our government?

Regarding the Covid Pandemic, today I play Devil’s Advocate with myself. Per my ‘early-spread check-list,’ I haven’t been proven wrong yet.

Sherlock Holmes would have quickly picked up on all the things real virus-origins sleuths should have done … but never did. All credible case evidence leads to one primary suspect.

Regarding my taboo hypothesis of early spread, I would like to note that for five years I’ve been trying to disprove my own hypothesis. Today I’m publishing an “Early Covid” checklist that itemizes the features of my hypothesis I’ve actually been trying to rule out or debunk.

I’ll start with a key question:

Do contagious viruses actually exist?

My answer: I think so or else so many clusters of people wouldn’t get sick all at the same time with the exact or very similar symptoms.

If contagious viruses, in fact, exist, could these viruses make some people sick?

My answer: Yes … but/or if I’m wrong, someone needs to tell the world what pathogens or toxic substances are making large numbers of people sick all at the same time.

Did far more people than normal become sick between October 2019 and early March 2020?

Yes, without question. (Note: If I found no evidence that supported this conclusion, I would have given up my “early spread” research years ago. However, I didn’t find this evidence; I found the opposite.)

Wouldn’t a virus that made more people sick than normal “cold and flu seasons” perhaps be evidence a “novel virus” was spreading?

I certainly believe this.

Devil’s Advocate Bill: “But just because more people were getting sick doesn’t mean a novel virus was spreading.”

This, I acknowledge, is true. A very bad flu season a couple of months before official Covid could, indeed, have been “just a coincidence.”

Would this be an odd, interesting or note-worthy coincidence?

To me, yes.

Were the symptoms many people experienced somehow different than previous bouts of Influenza Like Illnesses these sick Americans experienced?

Yes. (See my last story and future stories).

Would certain unique or different symptoms or clinical markers be another possible feature of a “novel” virus?

I think so; that’s my theory and I’m sticking with it.

If people were sick for longer periods of time (or it took them many weeks or months to once again feel “normal”) could this be a feature of a novel virus or different type of respiratory disease?

I think so. When large numbers of people report the same “anecdotes,” such anecdotes, in my opinion, should not be disregarded as insignificant or irrelevant.

Were public health officials aware that unusually large numbers of Americans were becoming sick in this particular flu season?

Of course they were aware of this. The CDC and 50 state public health agencies publish weekly ILI Surveillance Reports that showed this.

Thousands of media reports in all 50 states made note of this “particularly bad” flu season.

Authors who work for the CDC published a paper on the record number of school closings in this flu season. The CDC has records of “flu tests given” and knows this number also spiked to unprecedented numbers in the 25 weeks of this flu season.

What did they know and when did they know it?

Per my Spider Sense, “they” knew a lot more than they’ve said and they knew this much earlier than they’ve told us.

In considering possible early spread, do respiratory virus symptoms even matter?

They should, but apparently don’t. For alternative media skeptics, the “symptoms-don’t-matter” mantra is another red flag.

“Elementary, my Dear Watson …”

Didn’t Sherlock Holmes once solve a case by taking note of a dog that didn’t bark?

He sure did. Holmes, by all accounts, was an unusually astute English gentleman, someone who routinely made key observations few others would pick up on. This, in fact, is why he solved so many crimes and mysteries.

Why is this Sherlock Holmes anecdote possibly relevant to early spread?

Holmes solved this case by simply noting something that should have happened but didn’t happen. (The guilty man’s dog always barked when strangers arrived, but during this particular crime, this canine didn’t bark at his own master. This allowed Holmes to figure out the dog’s master was the guilty party).

What should public officials have done in trying to solve the mystery of Covid origins?

They should have thoroughly investigated every possible case of “early spread.” They should have interviewed every person who experienced early Covid symptoms and who later tested positive for Covid antibodies.

For example …

• They should have tested more than one tranche of archived Red Cross blood.

• They should have interviewed all 109 Red Cross blood donors who tested positive for antibodies (instead of none of these positive donors).

• They should have tested crew members of all U.S. Naval vessels for Covid antibodies instead of just crew members on two ships (Results: 60 percent positive on one ship; 41 percent positive on the other).

• They should have interviewed Mayor Michael Melham of New Jersey, Tim and Brandie McCain of Alabama and 30 other named people I’ve identified as likely early-spread candidates and given these antibody-positive citizens their own antibody tests.

• They should have interviewed and given antibody tests to every visitor to the Wuhan World Military Games who became sick at those October 2019 Games.

(Also, they should have assigned a least 10 to 1,000 employees to investigate the embalmers’ clots phenomena.)

Did they do any of these things?

No.

Given this was a national emergency and that dating the origins and the source of this “deadly” virus should have have been a major priority, are there any credible reasons for not doing these common-sense activities?

No.

*** (Why should readers share this article? So that it will reach more people!) ***

Why did things that should have happened not happen?

Per my hypothesis or working case theory: Key people in the U.S. government (and outside the U.S. government) didn’t want to “confirm” early spread.

Why would they not want to confirm this?

The answer, per my theory: Proven or confirmed evidence that showed this virus didn’t begin to spread in Wuhan, China in December 2019 would debunk the official story-line (aka “the cover-story” would be blown).

The official story is this was a “naturally-occurring” virus and that it didn’t originate in a lab, right?

This is indeed the official story.

If this is NOT true, what conclusions could someone plausibly make?

In our New Normal, I’ve found it’s always smart to believe the opposite of what the experts and authorities say. Applying this logic, one is left with the strong possibility this virus was created in a lab and any symptoms it might have caused in millions of people began months earlier than December 2019.

Wouldn’t that conclusion mean our trusted public health officials were lying and, for some reason, were participating in a cover-up?

That’s the conclusion I’ve made. So far at least, this case theory fits or jibes with all the known and more-credible key evidence.

If public health officials concocted a bogus origins story and have been lying for years, is it possible they would lie about other key elements of the Covid narrative?

Not only is this possible, I would say it’s very likely.

Do detectives take note whenever suspects are proven to be serial liars?

Good (or real) detectives do.

If someone lies about something important, will this person perhaps lie again about other important things?

Per my life observations, yes … especially when they know their lies are unlikely to be exposed.

Who is investigating virus origins?

Hmm, this is an excellent question. Actually no one, at least no one in the government. Nor no one in the “watchdog” mainstream media.

It should be noted that officials say they have investigated this question. However, see my above answers to questions about the credibility of known and proven liars.

Can contagious viruses actually be created in a lab?

Honestly, I’m not sure. However, I do know that billions of tax-payer dollars have been given in grants to scientists who say they are experimenting with viruses and have been doing this for many years or decades.

Why are they doing this?

The cover story is they’re trying to anticipate future deadly spreading viruses and are doing this research so someone can create a life-saving “vaccine.”

Have any life-saving vaccines actually been created by these scientists?

Well, that’s what they say.

They created a vaccine to protect against anthrax in the Gulf War (a vaccine that probably caused Gulf War Syndrome).

They created a vaccine to protect everyone from the Swine Flu in the Gerald Ford administration (a vaccine that was pulled from the market after 50 million citizens got the shot and everyone learned there was no deadly Swine Flu virus).

Every year, they create new vaccines to protect people from the flu (but tens of millions of vaccinated citizens keep getting the flu).

Scientists created the Covid “vaccines” (aka national security “counter measures”) which they said would stop Covid dead in its tracks. However, skeptics, who have noted the huge spikes in all-cause deaths since the vaccine roll-out, don’t believe this spill.

Could scientists create a virus in a lab that was more virulent or contagious, but didn’t kill any more people than a normal flu?

I’m guessing, but probably. I definitely wouldn’t rule out this scenario.

Aren’t virtually all coronaviruses or flu viruses non-deadly to 99.9 percent of healthy people who contract said viruses?

That’s my understanding.

The conspiracy would be too massive, right?

Is it possible a massive cadre of conspirators could create mass panic of a “deadly spreading virus” and, if so, how would these conspirators accomplish this sinister and bizarre goal?

• In my opinion, they would use a new PCR test that produced “cases” where most people had no real respiratory virus symptoms.

• They would then effectively murder hospital patients and nursing home residents via iatrogenic protocols and call these deaths “Covid deaths.”

• Anyone who died from other possible reasons would be labeled a “Covid death” if these people had tested positive via this PCR test.

I believe all of the above could be done, especially if all potentially-influential skeptics were silenced or bullied by the ramp up of a new Censorship Industrial Complex.

Per my theory, not only could this happen, it did happen.

You are saying you believe sinister conspiracies are possible and can really happen?

That’s exactly what I’m saying.

Who would have the motive to pull off such a brazen crime and cover-up?

Many people and organizations. As they say, follow the money. However, the main organization that would have an obvious motive to cover-up the true Covid story (and the origins story) would be the U.S. government.

Wouldn’t there be too many conspirators or accomplices to pull off such a shocking “crime against humanity?”

Actually, the more people who were involved, the less likely the guilty will be identified, exposed and held accountable. While this might seem counter-intuitive, it makes perfect sense if you think about it.

So, for now, you are sticking to your “Early Spread” hypothesis?

Yes. I trust the instincts of independent citizen journalists and researchers far more than I trust the experts and authorities.

I trust the people who aren’t being paid to cover-up crimes against humanity.

(And I sincerely appreciate clear-thinking citizens who generously support original, independent and “contrarian” journalism).

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.