Holly Rae Research

Written March 14 2023

Last week, US FBI director Christopher Wray told FOX news that “the FBI has for quite some time now assessed that the origins of the pandemic are most likely a potential lab incident in Wuhan.” On March 1^st, Senator Josh Hawley introduced a bill that has now passed through the senate and the house which calls to “declassify any and all information relating to potential links between the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origin of the novel coronavirus.” This pursuit of truth in regards to the origin of the virus that completely changed millions of lives and took many sounds like justice to most Americans who have been tuned into the curated narrative around SARS-COV-2. Yet to many who have suspected since 2019 that this Chinese lab had some kind of involvement in the virus’ origins, this admission from the FBI and the bill to investigate the virus’ origins in China may sound like an ironic or even suspicious change of the popular narrative that would tolerate no questioning of the zoonic origins of the virus just months ago. The complete 180 that our popular news sources have done in just a few weeks has been garnering a lot of “I told you so” from the conspiracy realist community and alternative media that was suspicious of the “Covid origin story” from the beginning, but getting lost in relishing the fact that there may be some truth to the suspicions we had could still be playing into the hands of the popular narrative. I had a feeling that there was something very odd about this sudden change of heart about the narrative suddenly accepting a lab leak when so many of us were mocked and labeled as “Covidiots” for not totally buying the bat story, the pangolin story, or the new raccoon dog story. Now that the tables have turned and the lab leak hypothesis is being taken seriously by some popular media outlets, there are predictably, in true internet fashion, memes and social media posts calling out conspiracy realists and dissenting voices for being hypocritical for taking the FBI director’s words seriously, saying ‘I thought you didn’t believe what the government says? So you only believe it when it fits your narrative?’ as a kind of ‘gotcha’ for anyone that is saying ‘I told you so.”  But there is a crumb of truth in that sentiment. It seems that the troll-esque “I thought you didn’t believe the government,” is, admittedly, a bit of a “gotcha.”

The American popular media has legitimized the idea that SARS-COV-2 may have come from the Wuhan lab, therefore incorporating what was once a dissenting opinion that warranted de-platforming and censorship into their “official” narrative. While this may appear to be an absolute win for the truth, there are some details of these stories that still constitute scrutiny.

1. The admission from the FBI director that “the FBI has for quite some time now assessed that the origins of the pandemic are most likely a potential lab incident in Wuhan.”

Before getting too ahead of ourselves with this information, there’s also the detail that the US Energy department denied the ‘lab leak theory’ until February of 2023, only conceding and making a statement after a review of classified documents. ANd other government agencies are supposedly undecided. At this point, there are at least two government agencies that have suggested that the origin of the virus may not be zoonic. According to a March 1^st Reuters article, “Four other agencies, along with a national intelligence panel, still judge that the pandemic was likely the result of a natural transmission, and two are undecided, the Journal reported.” Chinese researchers have scoffed at the US’s insistence on the lab leak idea, and claim that the United States is engaging in a political game with China as opposed to a genuine search for truth. American agencies are expending considerable effort in determining the origins of SARS-COV-2, directing their focus at Wuhan. What is peculiar about all of this news and the investigations that are underway is the singular focus on Wuhan and the virus origins. Obviously, if we are to really get to the ‘bottom’ of the coronavirus crisis, it would be important to know the true origins of the virus to help manage future endemics and pandemics and novel viruses… right? Is that really the motivation behind the search for the origin, or is to to shift blame onto a group to diminish the impact that governments all around the world had on their populations while dealing with this virus? While paying such close attention to the news coming out about US officials revealing what they know about the virus’ origins in China, we are at risk of misdirection to equally, if not more important factors of the Covid story: whether the rules and regulations and emergency powers our governments and international agencies enforced over us in the name of safety from this virus were legitimate, both with the information they were working with at the time and in hindsight. Professionals and lay people alike have been more vocal about their doubts about the mandates that were put in place in retrospect, now that the heavy censorship, bullying, and manipulation by the state and their media henchmen has toned down. But there is still little media attention placed on these details, which would actually call to hold hundreds of government officials accountable for poor judgement at best and a reach toward authoritarianism at worst. Nearly every national government in the world followed the direction of the WHO and their respective national disease control agencies to shut down entire economies, yet their reasoning and justifications have not been questioned nearly as much as the ‘Covid origin’ narrative that is currently forming in popular media. As I will explain in depth in future posts and a book I am working on, the actual scientific evidence the State and the WHO used to justify many of their protocols were not as sound and unquestionable as the public was led to believe. This is not me suggesting the oversimplified platitude ‘look at the news story and see what they are distracting you from!’ but pointing out that that this narrative shift about the lab leak theory is still in the hands of the state, and they will take the narrative where they want it to go. The FBI director stating that they highly suspect a lab leak will add a layer of confusion to the origin story of Covid and begins a “blaming China” chapter that will likely live on in the collective memory of Americans. So whether the lab leak theory from Wuhan turns out to be true according to the United States popular narrative, they are still controlling the discourse of the ‘Covid story’ and telling the public what that story is. And it appears that this story does not, or at least not yet, hold accountable anyone in the United States government or agencies for the choices they made for their citizens during the pandemic, which still should be scrutinized if we are to ever truly ‘clear the air’ about the pandemic. What is happening instead, almost predictably, is the United States government finding ways to point the finger at China, name scapegoats, and absolve themselves of any other mistakes or outright unethical breaches of power that have been made in the past three years. But the damage is already done, and the irreparable harm done to society won’t be undone no matter how many answers we try to dig up.

So it is true—it appears that the FBI and the department of Energy are confirming what conspiracy realists and diligent students of American propaganda have suspected—that there is a trail of evidence leading to Wuhan. But it also remains true that suddenly trusting the judgement of these groups because it fits “our” narrative puts us at risk of taking the bait and getting on board with their grand narrative about Covid and forgetting that many questions remain unanswered and that the “official” narrative is still incomplete.

2. The  COVID–19 Origin Act of 2023 calls for the Director of National Intelligence to declassify only intelligence and other documents regarding a potential lab leak at the Wuhan Virology Institute in China.

In reading the bill itself, you will notice that the call for declassification ends there. Senator Hawley does not include declassification of documents regarding any other person, place or thing that may have been involved in the Covid crisis. This makes the bill specific, but also this specificity is telling. A breakthrough about how China is responsible for unleashing SARS-COV-2 would shift an amount of blame so large as to absolve everyone else of responsibility for the choices they made in handling the crisis. To further this investigation into the Wuhan lab, there are popular news sources claiming that the NIH did, in fact, fund gain-of-function research at the Virology Institute in Wuhan. If NIH involvement with the lab leak hypothesis is legitimized by the US government, it would also implicate Anthony Fauci, who has stepped down from his government appointment, of lying before Congress about whether or not America was funding this research or knew about the gain of function research being done on chimeric viruses. Creating a narrative that blames The Wuhan lab may also implicate the NIH and Fauci for any funding of research happening at that lab, creating a convenient scapegoat for the State to use in shifting blame to one or a group of people while distracting from the mistakes made by the Whitehouse and state governments in the US, who enforced mass lockdown of cities and came up with highly contested rules and regulations about COVID safety that have come under scrutiny by both concerned citizens and people in government. If the US continues to push the lab leak theory, the scrutiny placed on US officials could be overshadowed by a cacophony of news stories and hearings about how China is to blame for the virus’ leak and spread, thereby dismissing any other concerning aspect of the way the pandemic was handled and cementing the narrative of SARS-COV-2 as a Chinese virus leak. This narrative, in true American fashion,would paint the entire concept of China as a ‘bad guy’ and America as the hero just trying their best to stop the spread and cope with with the horrible thing they spread to us. Centering the narrative about Covid around the conclusion that China and some bad apples in the US government are responsible and everyone else is the good guy of the story is the US’ means of taking control of the narrative that they have fought to keep control of since the virus spread to the US: one of panic and emergency authorizations of government authority. If Americans believe that China is the culprit of the pandemic, then they may be more willing to accept the extreme government overreach the Unites States controversially took over its otherwise fairly free citizens (as well as backing up other countries for doing the same). While many of us are still questioning and demanding that members of the United States government to be held accountable for damages done to society by their choices, the narrative is again shifting focus. As long as popular media outlets outrage or confuse the public about the origins of SARS-COV-2, there will be less focus on other important questions that are constituted by the millions of lives forever changed, businesses closed, jobs lost, addictions worsened, and children’s lives forever altered by social distancing, quarantine requirements, lockdowns, and vaccine mandates. And the psychological impact of years of gaslighting by the State and their propaganda machine. But answering these questions may not be where the popular narrative goes, no matter how important the answers are. Maintain our own understanding of the events of the past three years is still important. We should not be conceding to the State as soon as they admit or speculate something that is closer in alignment to a more independent view of things. For all of us who were suspicious about NIH funding gain of function research in Wuhan since Fauci first testified to congress and denied it, it may seem like some kind of win that this suspicion may have been true after all. When even the most critical readers and researchers take this ironic turn of news at face value, we miss one of the most important aspects of world changing events and the news coverage and narrative formed around them: that the way most citizens remember world events is via a curated narrative, and any curated narrative sold as an absolute “truth” is bound to be an intellectual scam—dividing the world into good guys and bad guys—actors—telling us which side we should be on and what we should believe about crises like the spread of SARS-COV-2.

But there is little incentive for popular media sources and governments to implicate themselves in any wrongdoing. This is why you would be hard pressed to find a narrative in a school book or on TV about how these two powerful institutions working together have any part in the misconduct or lies that they speak of. Of course, it only benefits the State-media conglomerate to convince us to trust the narratives they produce and to mistrust any narrative or dissensus being brought up by other experts or regular observant people. News channels and State officials will stand in the spotlight and tell citizens that misinformation and fake news is a threat to our society, pointing the finger at us and at social media, and never at themselves—being all too capable of lying and all too capable of deceiving by taking advantage of the trust and protective cover of plausible deniability they demand from citizens. “We will uncover the truth for you, so don’t you be listening to anyone else,” they say, like a manipulative partner or parent, again taking advantage of the fact most people don’t realize that what powerful institutions and the State call truth is a constructed narrative with some parts left in, some taken out, some changed, and others completely distorted depending on who is in charge of creating ‘truth’ for us in that moment. Citizens who do not question the narratives that our governments and the media allies create are often unaware that other legitimate narratives, explanations, and science exists. There are billions of dollars poured into media efforts to push State approved messaging. We are told that anyone who questions the hegemonic discourse of society is an idiot, need to shut up, and is harmful to society, no matter how accomplished, acclaimed, or knowledgeable they may be. A “fact checker” is always waiting to shut down an expert testimony with an appeal to definition, a straw man, or any other assortment of clever fallacies only few of us have ever been taught how to detect. All dissensus is considered misinformation and conspiracy theory. But those of us who have always been suspicions of the State’s “official” explanations of things, we are constantly chasing the tail of the American Propaganda Machine. It feels like treading water. While we may feel one step ahead of them—such as with the lab leak theory—we are actually several steps behind. While we are astutely poking holes in the narrative and pulling at loose strings here and there, thinking that we are finding our own sense of truth within their narrative, they are still ten steps ahead creating their own version of events and a version of reality that is scarcely scrutinized by the vast majority of people. Journalist Ron Suskind, in 2004, wrote about the Bush administration and about US presidency in general in the New York Times in an article called “Faith, Certainty, and the Presidency of George W. Bush.” Suskind was critical of Bush’s narrative of the “war on terrorism” and the justification of the war in Afghanistan. Similar to the Covid narrative in the US, the Bush administration, within hours of the attacks at the World Trade Center, were already forming a warmongering grand narrative that is cemented in any American’s mind whether they were alive to witness it or not. Those who questioned this were and still are considered fringe, even those who were deemed “heroes” at ground zero had their concerns and questions dismissed, with some even being bullied into silence by the State. Dissensus against the “war on terrorism” narrative was met with force by the Bush administration. After being cornered for writing an article that the Whitehouse didn’t approve of, Suskind shared some words with an aide to a senior adviser to the Bush administration that is difficult to forget. The exchange illuminates the struggle of the independent journalist, but also exposes the mentality of those in control of the narrative the public is fed. Suskind wrote that with his visit with the advisor,  

“The aide said that guys like me were “in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who “believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. “That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

While the Bush administration is, for most, a distant memory, these statements—in what seem to be a proud admission of power and influence over the public—reflect the monopoly over citizens’ opinions the State has had over the American public for decades and decades. And only speaks to the “conspiracy theory” notions that people in power do, indeed, often have sinister intentions. Those who have sinister intentions are laughing in the faces of astute researchers and independent journalists trying to get to some sort of ‘truth,’ knowing that they are the ones that ultimately record their own course of history with their abuses of power and thin veil of trustworthiness. This is not to discourage the formation of decentralized understandings of history and to record them, but a justification of that very process despite the hegemony. People of the present and future deserve a more in depth and honest explanation of what’s going on.

Just as the State initiated the 9/11 commission report, investigations into the war on terror and WMD’s in Iraq, and investigations into the United States’ true intentions in Vietnam, and now the “true” story of the origins of SARS-COV-2, the State will now investigate themselves using their own appointed committees and pay popular media companies to flood their message and allow no dissensus to be taken seriously by demeaning and insulting the intelligence of anyone who dares to question their version of reality—which is packaged and sold as absolute truth. Those with the power to create these grand narratives investigate their own conflicts of interest on their own terms, deciding what is worth investigating and what is not—or obfuscating what are otherwise critical details—and then present their narrative about what took place and close the book as a “solved” case. If anyone is anticipating a formal US report being demanded in regards to the origins of SARS-COV-2 in similar fashion to the 9/11 commission report, you could probably make a profitable bet that, just like the committee that the Bush administration put together to investigate 9/11, it would be “designed to fail” and only portray a version of reality that does not implicate anyone requesting the report of any wrongdoing or contradict any major plot points of the long formed narrative. The aide’s remarks to Suskind many years ago are not just reflections of a bygone era of grand narratives created by the State and disseminated by their apparatuses of influence, but a sobering testament to the fact that in our many “I told you so!” moments over the years when the narrative finally takes into account what was once a dissenting opinion, we forget that the State’s narrative is not ours and we do not have to buy their ‘truths.’ The judicious students of the American Propaganda Machine are at risk of being stuck as audiences of the people who consider themselves the “actors” or history. To play into the hands of the narrators crafting this story with ‘I told you so!’ to others just catching on to the narrative shift is simplifying the repeating patterns of misdirection, cover-up, and scapegoating that occurs within the State and the popular media subsidiaries and figures they pay to legitimize their narrative.

We are chasing the tail of the State and their allies.  

It is true that the only way out of the narrative is through it: to know how their story goes so we can compare it to alternative sources and our own empirical experiences. To know what games they are playing while regular people are just trying to exist and pick up the pieces after every crisis. Writing and sharing our own stories instead of conceding to the State and feeling that we have “won” when a certain piece of popular news or statement appears to confirm our convictions is the only way to remain sane under the manipulative “care” of the State—just as going to therapy and unlearning manipulative narratives about one’s life is the only way to keep a victim of abusive parents sane.

One could spend a lifetime disentangling, interrogating, and chasing each new development of the “official” narrative and cheer when it includes things you like and jeer when it includes things you don’t. But as you do so, you may get the sense—your intuition may tell you—that the next chapters are already drafted, scripted, and unfolding as you judiciously study the previous chapters.