04 August 2023

Covid cover-up: Wuhan lab leak suspicions, Anthony Fauci and how the science was silenced

Dr Anthony Fauci: “This was a reputational risk to him and his ­institute,” says Dr Robert Kadlec, Fauci’s boss.
     America’s top infectious diseases adviser, Anthony Fauci, delib­erately decided to downplay ­suspicions from scientists that Covid-19 came from a laboratory to protect his reputation and deflect from the risky coronavirus research his agency had funded, according to his boss, one of the most senior US health officials during the pandemic.

In an exclusive interview, Robert Kadlec – former assistant secretary for preparedness and response at the US Department of Health – told The Weekend Australian that he, Dr Fauci and National Institutes of Health director Francis Collins privately discussed how to “turn down the temperature” on accusations against China in the early days of the pandemic while they were trying to encourage Beijing to co-operate and share a sample of the virus.

But the senior US health official – who worked for George W. Bush and Donald Trump and went on to lead American efforts to develop a Covid-19 vaccine – said Dr Fauci mostly kept his knowledge of virologists’ concerns about a lab leak from Wuhan to himself.

The Weekend Australian revealed in 2021 that the National Institutes of Health and other US agencies funded 65 scientific ­projects at the Wuhan Institute of Virology over the past decade, many involving risky research on bat coronaviruses.

Vaccine ­research was the proximate cause’

Dr Kadlec’s comments give the closest insight to date on how Dr Fauci – who led coronavirus policy for two presidents and influenced the worldwide ­approach to the pandemic – handled the link between Covid-19 and China. They came as US congressional investigations in the past month revealed how scientists worked to silence concerns about a lab leak.

“I think Tony Fauci was ­trying to protect his institution and his own reputation from the possibility that his agency was funding the Wuhan ­Institute of Virology researchers who, beyond the scope of the grants received from the ­National Institutes of Health, may have been working with People’s Liberation Army researchers on defensive coronavirus vaccines,” Dr Kadlec said.

“I think it’s evident from his later released emails (obtained via Freedom of Information requests) that he had more sense of what his institute had funded at that moment. This was a reputational risk to him and his ­institute and certainly he probably sided with the international scientists that ­believed that false or unsubstantiated accusations could have a chilling effect on scientific collaboration between the western world and China.”

Dr Robert Kadlec, right, and Dr Fauci testify before a Senate Health Committee hearing on the US response to Covid on Capitol Hill on March 3, 2020.

Dr Kadlec, in his first ever media interview, added: “We think vaccine research resulted in the pandemic – that vaccine ­research was the proximate cause.”

In an extraordinary admission, Dr Kadlec said they decided to try to encourage a group of leading international scientists to calm down speculation on the origins of the virus.

The scientists held a phone call on February 1, 2020, in which they discussed concerns that SARS-CoV-2 looked like it may have been genetically engineered.

“When we talked about this in advance of that call, he (Fauci) would just try and see if he could get the scientists to take the temperature down, turn the rhetoric down. to at least find, we’re going to look into this but we don’t know,” Dr Kadlec said.

As both Mr Bush’s biodefence adviser and Mr Trump’s assistant health secretary for preparedness, Dr Kadlec has decades of experience in fighting public health crises. He created Operation Warp Speed, the plan to accelerate the development of a Covid-19 ­vaccine, and is credited for leading the push to vaccinate Americans. In 2018, he warned Congress the US was ill-prepared for a pandemic.

‘Turn the temperature down’

Dr Kadlec’s personal approach was to ask the National Academy of Sciences in late January 2020, to formally examine the sequence of SARS-CoV-2, to understand its origin. But publicly, he felt it was important to achieve co-operation from China from a public health perspective. Beijing had not yet shared a sample of the virus, critical for developing an effective vaccine.

“We decided to engage our national experts to look at this, the National Academy of Sciences,” he said. “It would take time to figure out what was going on. We were trying to prevent people from saying this was a bioweapon when we didn’t really know. That was my intent. It was Dr Fauci’s idea to see if he could get international scientists to examine the origins in a similar fashion. The object was to prevent speculation and turn the temperature down. There was something that could be said to turn the temperature of rhetoric down and avoid the wild speculation, of a bioweapon, that had already started at that point in time.”

That phone call was at the instigation of Dr Fauci after he spoke with scientist Kristian Andersen who expressed concern that SARS-Cov-2 may have been genetically engineered, because of its unusual features. In an email, Dr Andersen said “some of the features (potentially) look engineered” and several leading virologists “all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.”

Media-link

'New crucial witness': How did the pandemic start?

Dr Kadlec said Dr Fauci kept these suspicions, privately expressed by leading virologists that the virus had been engineered in a laboratory, mostly to himself.

The full extent of those suspicions is now laid bare in emails subpoenaed by US congress and published in recent weeks. In those emails, some scientists discussed the “shit show” that would eventuate if anyone serious accused China of, even accidentally, starting the pandemic. They also discussed the impact such an accusation would have on scientific research and international relations. But, publicly, they insisted the possibility of an inadvertent laboratory leak was a conspiracy and authored a paper published in Nature Medicine, that argued SARS-Cov-2 was almost certainly a natural virus. Dr Kadlec acknowledges the power of that paper, titled the Proximal Origins of SARS-CoV-2, as becoming the official word that a laboratory leak was a conspiracy theory.

“Their paper did result in casting the die for what would then be the international scientific response going forward,” he said.

“I found it really odd that in light of the now revealed private musings of some of the scientists indicated the sequence looked unusual, that the authors decided to draft a letter as an opinion piece.

“Many people were confused or mistaken by what they wrote as more of a peer-reviewed paper.”

Wuhan ‘fingerprints’

Dr Kadlec accused the scientists of having personal agendas that might have influenced their decision to author a paper that suggested a laboratory leak was a conspiracy theory. “Their initial opinion was likely shaded by their personal professional equities or the belief that what was going on in the US – statements by political leaders- could be problematic for world relations for China but also their professional interests in science,” he said.

Dr Kadlec alluded to the febrile political atmosphere in the US under Mr Trump as a likely influence on the scientists, although the scientists’ deliberations began in late January, and the former president did not make any public comment about a potential laboratory origin of Covid-19 until April.

The P4 laboratory on the campus of the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.

The authors of the Proximal Origins paper have argued in the media and congressional hearings that later virus research had led them to scotch their first fears of a lab leak – and to conclude instead that the origins of Covid-19 were zoonotic: i.e. the virus had been passed from animal to human, possibly via a Wuhan wet market.

However, new emails and posts over the Slack messaging platform that have surfaced in recent weeks pinpoint the ­moment this group began steering world attention away from the Wuhan lab. It was not months, or even weeks, but within days and hours of their realisation that the virus may contain “fingerprints” that connected it to the Wuhan ­Institute of Virology. The scientists are facing allegations that they embarked on a campaign of subterfuge that has rocked Washington.

’Blueprint for Covid-19’

Dr Kadlec has now spent a year and a half formally investigating the origins of the pandemic, putting together an A and B team to gather evidence for both a natural and laboratory origin respectively.

Gain-of-function research was banned by the Obama administration but lifted during the Trump era. Dr Kadlec says this was at the behest of the NIH. “Francis Collins and Fauci both had a similar world view which was scientists know best and there should be few restrictions on research,” he said.

The Wuhan Institute of Virology and EcoHealth Alliance drew up a proposal for grant funding for coronavirus research, which international scientists now believe could be the “blueprint” of Covid-19. Dr Kadlec chaired a committee to authorise whether gain-of-function could proceed. The proposal from the Wuhan institute was bouncing around US Government agencies, in search of funding, but it never went through his committee. “It shows you the fallibility or vulnerability of the oversight system,” he said.

Dr Fauci has denied his agency funded gain-of-function research, but Dr Kadlec said this wasn’t true. “It’s evident NIH supported research that has the potential for, and it at least one case resulted in gain of function,” he said.

02 August 2023

The Palestine Laboratory - How Israel exports the technology of occupation around the world

‘A sad and sordid record of how “the light unto the nations” became the purveyor of the means of violence and brutal repression from Guatemala to Myanmar and wherever else the opportunity arose.’

Noam Chomsky

On Tuesday 4 July the Australian Institute of International Affairs NSW hosted an address by Antony Loewenstein, author and political analyst, on the Israeli government’s use of its presence in Palestine to develop an international market in surveillance technology. As background, Loewenstein observed that, when he was growing up in Melbourne in the years after World War II, Israel was seen as deserving unqualified support: Israel, Zionism and Judaism had been seen as pretty much the same thing. But there was now increasing scrutiny among Jews of what is happening in Palestine under Israeli occupation. In his view, the existence of a Jewish state discriminates, by definition, against non-Jews. Media coverage, nevertheless, continued to simplify the situation as a two-way battle between Israelis and Palestinians.


Since its establishment, Israel (as detailed in his recently-published book The Palestine Laboratory) had been occupying increasing areas of Palestine and in that time had developed a range of tools and technologies for maintaining the occupation – “smart walls”, facial recognition, biometric data – designed to control and divide Palestinians. Technology such as Pegasus spyware, manufactured by the Israeli NSO group, was now exported throughout the world; it enabled governments to control mobile phones, emails and photos. And this was the tip of the iceberg. Israel had battle-tested these new technologies on its five million Palestinian captive population. Palestinians were powerless in this situation to affect Israel’s role: they were notionally governed by the corrupt Palestinian Authority but real power lay with the Israeli occupiers.

Israel had been an arms exporter to apartheid South Africa until its collapse in 1994. Today, Israel exports surveillance equipment and armaments to a large range of countries, many with dodgy human rights records – Rwanda, Myanmar, Saudi Arabia. It supplied surveillance technology to India, self-described as the world’s biggest democracy but in fact increasingly an ethnocentric dictatorship favouring the Hindu ascendancy and looking to Israel‘s role in Palestine as a model for India’s role in Kashmir and elsewhere.

Israel supplied drones to the EU to combat refugee movements over the Mediterranean, which is increasingly leading to drownings (with diminishing rescue attempts). Israeli surveillance towers had been installed on the US-Mexican border for “security” – essentially to combat unauthorised migration; this had been unchanged under the Biden presidency. These towers had first been tested in Palestine.

Israeli Celebrite phone hacking technology was increasingly employed by Australian police and government authorities for surveillance of private citizens. The normalisation of surveillance was now almost complete, with bipartisan support in such countries as Australia and the US,  and was little reported on by the media. Nazi and far-right movements in Europe – traditionally anti-Jewish – were admirers of Israel’s ethno-nationalism as applied in Palestine.

In response to audience questions and comments, Loewenstein said that the incoming Albanese government’s electoral commitment to recognising Palestine could imply recognition of the deeply-flawed Palestinian Authority, but would be a supportive gesture towards Palestinians. The government’s return to abstaining on UN resolutions critical of Israel (rather than opposing them) and to supporting a two-state solution was welcome.

But Australia (he said) should do more on human rights issues arising with Israel’s occupation. There is a marked lack of independence in Australian policy, with Australia generally reluctant to go beyond US policy lines, in relation to Israel as on other issues. There were signs of changing opinion in the younger populations of the US and Europe, turning against uncritical support and financing of Israel. Israeli public opinion, however, still showed little recognition of Israel’s practices in Palestine, marked by ethnic cleansing ever since 1948. The dominant perception of Palestinians among Israelis was as a threat. This was reinforced by Israelis’ experience of military service in the occupation.

Loewenstein saw little hope of a Mandela or a Ghandi arising among the Palestinians: if anything their commitment to armed resistance had grown under the continuing Israeli violence.

Asked if there were countries to which Israel would not sell security equipment, Loewenstein said the list was small: Iran, Syria and North Korea. (The picture was opaque with China and Russia.) This was an important means of achieving Israel’s international influence: Israel fully realised that weapons and spyware were of such fundamental importance that most governments were prepared to mute any criticism of Israeli behaviour as an implicit part of the deal.

Asked if Australia’s foreign influence legislation – which clearly targeted China – should be applied to Israel, Lowenstein outlined the extent of Israeli “soft power” diplomacy in Australia. Along with the US and Taiwan, Israel was the lead sponsor of visits by politicians and journalists. The Israeli lobby’s influence with the media was pervasive. There should be more accountability of these practices. In this context, he was critical of legislation in the US and Britain forbidding authorities such as local governments from banning purchases of Israeli products.

Antony Loewenstein (right) with AIIA NSW councillor, Ralph Housego
Source:AIIA.

31 July 2023

The Israeli Company Hacking Into Your Locked Mobile Phone

The use of military grade spyware by Australian government departments means our most personal data stored on our mobile phones – from financial details, contacts, and private photos, to an archive of messages and movements – is no longer secret.

The Israeli surveillance company Cellebrite's forensic tool, Universal Forensic Extraction Device (UFED), is used to crack mobile phones across the world. (Photo: Cellebrite)

From the provision of spyware and equipment, to electronic hardware and training programs, Israeli technology company Cellebrite is an integral part of Australia’s security infrastructure. 

A look at the AusTender website, where federal government contracts are listed, details 128 contracts between Australian government agencies and the Israeli company since 2011. 

Cellebrite is an Israeli digital intelligence company, staffed by former Israeli military and intelligence officers, that is now commonly used by law enforcement across the globe to hack and access data –  yet barely anybody in the public has heard of it. 

During the writing of my new book, The Palestine Laboratory, it was a firm that featured heavily. The most infamous Cellebrite spyware tool, the Universal Forensics Extraction Device (UFED), has been deployed by some of the most repressive states in the world, such as Russia and China, and across virtually all levels of the US government. A former Cellebrite employee wrote in 2021 that the company did nothing to stop the abuse of its products and was happy to sell them to the worst offenders on the planet. 

In Australia, Cellebrite is rarely in the headlines. The company enjoys little scrutiny, apart from recent stories in iTnews and the Guardian, detailing how Services Australia is using Cellebrite spyware to pursue alleged welfare fraud by cracking into individuals’ locked mobile phones. The hacking technology was allegedly used against a woman receiving single parent payments to determine if she had been in a relationship at the time. Although no charges were ever laid, the woman was chased for repayments. 

The range of Australian government departments now using Cellebrite’s unique phone spying abilities, from the Australian Tax Office to the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission to the Department of Home Affairs the home of ASIO, as well as Services Australia, shows that the corporation’s troubling record and accuracy across the globe has had no impact on it being able to secure contracts in Australia.

The history of Cellebrite and its role as an unaccountable arm of the Israeli state is detailed in this edited extract from my new book, The Palestine Laboratory.

The Palestine Laboratory: How Israel Exports The Technology Of Occupation Around The World is published by Scribe

It is not only NSO Group that’s causing harm around the globe. Cellebrite is another Israeli company that works with repressive states and yet it has received far less criticism. It is hard to know exactly why it has escaped NSO’s notoriety, but perhaps it’s because Cellebrite prefers to operate under the radar with its phone hacking capabilities or because NSO’s alliance with despots has uniquely captured the attention of researchers and media outlets that often fail to make the necessary ties to the Israeli state. “Cellebrite sells equipment to hack phones from short distance and NSO Group from long distance, but the effect is the same for activists,” Israeli human rights lawyer Eitay Mack told me.

Founded in the 1990s, Cellebrite started out as a consumer technology firm but by the 2010s was deep into the surveillance business and mobile phone hacking because it saw the potential of huge profits from working with law enforcement officials around the world. In late 2021, Cellebrite launched a large-scale PR campaign called “Heroes behind the Heroes,” featuring online ads and physical billboards that promoted the essential work being performed by their “digital intelligence solutions” in police forces around the globe.

Unsurprisingly, the PR blitz was selective about what services Cellebrite offered and who these advertisements were intended to influence. In 2022 Eitay Mack wrote to the company and Israel’s Defense Ministry to remind it where Cellebrite equipment had ended up, including Russia, where journalists are pursued, and the Philippines, where countless reporters were murdered during the reign of President Rodrigo Duterte.

The Australian Federal Police Commander signed over two Cellebrite machines to the Royal PNG Police Commissioner in June 2022 as part of the PNG-Australia Policing Partnership. (Photo: Australian High Commission PNG)

Neither the Israeli government nor Cellebrite could claim ignorance of what might happen to sophisticated surveillance gear in the hands of autocrats. There is a published photograph of Cellebrite employees meeting Duterte in 2018 and admitting that the corporation had trained a range of public bodies, some of whom were directly complicit in the murder of thousands of Filipinos during Duterte’s brutal “war on drugs.” When challenged on its complicity, Cellebrite told Haaretz that it had “strict oversight mechanisms” over its sales. It was a statement that was remarkably similar to NSO’s when pushed on its international relations.

The countries where Cellebrite surveillance tech has been used against critics, journalists, dissidents, or human rights workers include Botswana, Vietnam, Bangladesh, and Uganda. This includes the Universal Forensic Extraction Device (UFED) hacking tool, which allows the extraction of information from mobile phones.

In Bangladesh the hardware was used by the Rapid Action Battalion, a notorious paramilitary unit, which has been accused of extrajudicial killings and disappearances. When this connection was exposed in 2021, the company quickly announced that sales to Bangladesh were being suspended, though it was likely Bangladesh could still use the tech that had already been acquired.

Furthermore, Cellebrite said it would establish an advisory committee to ensure that “ethical considerations” were prioritized moving forward. Once again, Cellebrite used the same PR-driven tactic employed by NSO. Bangladesh has no formal ties with the Israeli government, but this did not stop Israeli intelligence experts from training Bangladeshi officers during a four-day event on the outskirts of Budapest, Hungary, in 2019. The Ethiopian federal police use Cellebrite products despite the government’s mass detention of minorities and repression of dissidents, journalists and activists.

Ethiopian police officers display Cellebrite’s UFED system. (Photo: Ethiopian federal police Facebook page)

Like NSO, Cellebrite resists media scrutiny. According to reporting in Haaretz, the Israeli Defense Ministry does not oversee Cellebrite sales because its products are somehow classified as dual-use civilian services and not a security-related export, a definition that therefore allows Cellebrite to operate in dozens of countries with no serious Israeli oversight.

The company has never had problems getting high-paying clients. Over 2,800 US government customers, including law enforcement agencies, including the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, and the Department of Agriculture, have purchased the company’s equipment, and the firm has hired prosecutors, police officers, and Secret Service agents to train people to use it. 

The company has announced that it has secured business with six of the world’s biggest oil refiners and six of the planet’s largest pharmaceutical firms. It has also moved into the increasingly profitable field of corporate surveillance. Elsewhere, Cellebrite systems were purchased around 2015 by the Venezuelan government amid allegations that it was used by the regime to target dissidents.

However, bad press has nevertheless sometimes impacted the company’s reach. The corporation said that it would no longer sell its UFED to Russia and Belarus after Eitay Mack revealed in court documents in 2021 that it had been used to surveil gay activists and opposition figures in both nations, including an associate of Russian political dissident Alexei Navalny and critics of Belarussian dictator Alexander Lukashenko.

In 2021 the company claimed to have withdrawn from activities in China and Hong Kong, but the Intercept later discovered that the brokers who had sold Cellebrite were still selling its hacking technology to Chinese police on the mainland and in Tibet. Human rights groups posited that the company was cutting official ties with some repressive states because it went public on the Nasdaq market in 2021 and wanted to leave controversy behind.

But doing that was not so easy. Cellebrite had sold its tools to Indonesia, a Muslim nation with no diplomatic relations with Israel, and the country had used them to target political opponents and activists, including in West Papua, as well as members of the gay community who used dating apps such as Grindr. Saudi Arabia was also a willing customer even after its 2018 assassination of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

In a 2020 interview, Cellebrite CEO Yossi Carmil rejected any suggestion that his firm was similar to NSO because what his company did was “very limited in its authority, unlike the world of the clients of NSO and others, where illegal things as well as covert things are done. Cellebrite is entirely in the good zone, with judicial orders. We don’t create hacking devices for private entities or espionage agencies.”

Upturn, a nonprofit in Washington, found in 2020 that Cellebrite tech was used frequently by US law enforcement to hack into smartphones, allegedly to fight crime. At least forty-nine out of the fifty biggest police department had used the tool to investigate crimes such as shoplifting, rape, and murder. Encrypted smartphones are routinely and successfully broken into with Cellebrite tech; Upturn found that it had been done hundreds of thousands of times between 2015 and 2020.

Like NSO, Cellebrite operates in nations that have friendly relations with Israel and in those with whom there’s little to no official diplomacy, on the basis that cyberweapons sales do not need to respect these niceties. Ethical considerations are not a factor in Israeli government decision-making.

 “It was amazing that Cellebrite wasn’t worried about US sanctions on countries like Russia and China and were still happy to sell equipment to Moscow and Beijing,” Eitay Mack told me, “but only when there was publicity against them they reacted and canceled contracts in both countries.”

The advantage for Israel, Mack said, is that “while it will be hard for Israel to sell Israeli guns or weapons that can be identified [as happened for decades before the cyber age], Israeli surveillance is different” and less identifiable as originating in Israel.

A former Cellebrite employee, previously a member of the defense establishment, wrote anonymously in Haaretz that “I can say from personal experience that the company does nothing to prevent the abuse of its products by customers.” The reason repressive states want Israeli tech, whether from Cellebrite or NSO, is simple: China and other states make “inferior alternatives.”

Extract from “The Palestine Laboratory: How Israel Exports The Technology Of Occupation Around The World”, published by Scribe and available now.

Source:Declassified Australia