TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @LittleFootLady

@LittleFootLady — DouglaGal 🇬🇾🇺🇲 💛🐝🪷Bartica 2 Bklyn & Beyond

Posted - July 5, 2025 at 12:50 PM

Saved - July 5, 2025 at 1:17 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

The conversation begins with a user expressing skepticism about the authenticity of certain letters, noting that official government documents follow specific formatting rules, including spelling out acronyms on first use. Another user responds by sharing a link to a full document related to military information and gain-of-function research, along with a reference to a report by USMC LtCol Joseph Patrick Murphy, which was mentioned in a congressional hearing. The exchange highlights concerns about the credibility of official communications.

@LittleFootLady - DouglaGal 🇬🇾🇺🇲 💛🐝🪷Bartica 2 Bklyn & Beyond

All the letters featured in this thread are suspect. The gov't has specific formatting that it follows for official documents, including spelling out acronyms on first use. Got to admire their comments to the lies.

@BlackTomThePyr8 - Tom Czerniawski

We are all the targets of a global genocide. It is being carried out with laboratory-originated strategic biological weapons of mass destruction. Our own governments created these bio-weapons. Then they told us to inject more bio-weapons, to be safe from their bio-weapons.

@BlackTomThePyr8 - Tom Czerniawski

@LittleFootLady https://assets.ctfassets.net/syq3snmxclc9/2mVob3c1aDd8CNvVnyei6n/95af7dbfd2958d4c2b8494048b4889b5/JAG_Docs_pt1_Og_WATERMARK_OVER_Redacted.pdf Here's the full document. https://www.projectveritas.com/news/military-documents-about-gain-of-function-contradict-fauci-testimony-under Here's where it was first covered. And here is USMC LtCol Joseph Patrick Murphy's DARPA OIG whistleblower report being brought up in a congressional hearing. :-)

Military Documents About Gain of Function Contradict Fauci Testimony Under Oath | Project Veritas Investigating and exposing corruption in both public and private institutions. projectveritas.com

@Bryce_Nickels - Bryce Nickels

Full exchange between Senator Rand Paul and USAID Administrator Samantha Power from today’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. https://t.co/ZJQC3aoC3z

Video Transcript AI Summary

A congressional committee member questioned a USAID representative about whether the agency funded gain-of-function research, presenting a 2015 paper co-authored by the Wuhan Institute of Virology and Dr. Barrick, funded by USAID's PREDICT program through EcoHealth Alliance, as evidence. The paper described creating a novel virus by combining the SARS virus backbone with an s protein from another virus. The committee member cited expert opinions stating this research created a novel virus that grows well in human cells and poses a new risk to humanity. He also mentioned the 2018 DIFUSE project, presented to DARPA and attended by USAID, which proposed creating a coronavirus with a furin cleavage site. He requested the name of the USAID attendee to understand why this project wasn't revealed to the public, especially after COVID-19 emerged. The USAID representative stated the agency had not authorized gain-of-function research and would look into the specific claims and the DARPA meeting. She acknowledged the importance of understanding the past to prevent future risks and assured cooperation with the committee.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Miss Powers, on, 04/26/2023, you testified before this committee that USAID did not fund gain of function research. I'd like to give you a chance to, correct the record. Is it still your position that USAID did not fund gain of function research? Speaker 1: We have no evidence that USAID has funded gain of function research and we certainly haven't authorized gain of function research. Speaker 0: Well, I'll help you. Behind me will list a paper from 2015. This is a paper produced by the Wuhan Institute of Virology and also by Doctor. Barrick from UNC. In this paper, if you'll see the funding aspect that's highlighted, it says USAID EPT predict funding from EcoHealth Alliance. So this paper was one where they took a virus, the SARS virus, the backbone of the SARS virus, and then took an s protein from an unknown virus they found in the wild and put them together. Are you aware that these experiments in the study were supported by USAID PREDICT and grant through ECO Health Alliance? Speaker 1: As I said, USAID has not authorized gain of function research. This is the first time seeing this. Speaker 0: We'll Alright. This is around since 2015. We've been over it numerous times. It's been in the public record. We've repeatedly said that, yes, USAID did fund gain of function research. Here's the evidence. But here's some comments from some different people about this study because some will try to argue this still is not gain of function. Simon Wayne Hopson is a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris. He points out that the researchers have created with this research funded by USAID a novel virus that grows remarkably well in human cells. If the virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory. Richard Ebrite from Rutgers says, the only impact of this work is the creation in a lab of a new nonnatural risk to humanity. So is your position that this study was not gain of function or that you didn't fund it? Which is your position? Speaker 1: We have had an awful lot of back and forth and provided thousands of pages of of documents on this. This article, I can't it looks like it's from 2015. Right. So, we will have to look into the specific claims. But, again, to put on the record It's a big USAID has not Speaker 0: But actually will not Speaker 1: That is your authorize gain of function. Speaker 0: Know that's your position, but the record will show that you did. Well And this was before your time. I don't know why we can't just admit it. It did happen. And the reason this is important is many people wanna collect all these viruses from around the world, but they don't wanna just collect the viruses to sort of have them and have a library of viruses. They take the virus, then they take an s protein from another virus, and they create a virus that doesn't exist in nature that often has ramifications that could be quite different or quite, serious. I'll give you the words of the authors of this paper. On the basis of these findings, scientific review panels may deem similar studies building chimeric viruses based on circulating strains too risky to pursue. So this was funded by USID. It was funded through the predict program. There's no question of that. And even the authors admit that it was gain of function. So we have to get beyond sort of quibbling over whether it was because we have to make sure in the future we're not doing this and that we don't fund this going forward. Now the predict program was going to be surpassed by another program going after viruses, and that has been suspended. That is all good. But we have to admit the past, be truthful about the past in order to go forward because millions of people died from COVID nineteen. The FBI has concluded it came from a lab in Wuhan. The Department of Energy has concluded that. Even the CIA initially, their scientific board voted six to one until they were overturned by higher ups at the CIA to say otherwise. They voted to say that this thing came from the lab as well. It only comes from the lab if we're if if if we're in favor of creating these things. We can't control everything China does, but we certainly shouldn't be funding it. So we have to be honest that this was funded. Now there was a warning sign to us that this was going on. There was something called the DIFUSE project in 2018 that was presented to DARPA, once again by Barrick and by doctors Shi and Wuhan. That's okay. The DIFUSE project was to create a coronavirus with a furan cleavage site, which doesn't exist in nature but makes it incredibly more infectious in humans. There was a briefing to 15 agencies. One of the agencies was USAID. There was a briefing about this diffuse project, but nobody from USAID and nobody from all 15 agencies ever told anyone about this project. It was hidden for years and years and only revealed by a brave lieutenant colonel Marine working at DARPA who exposed this when everybody else had hidden this. And my question is, USAID was in this briefing about a research project that had incredible danger to our country and finally wasn't funded. Will you provide the names of the people from USAID who were in this meeting so they can be interviewed so we can find out why didn't they tell anyone, or did they tell their superiors and nobody and people ignored them? Why was the public never made aware that they were trying to do dangerous research to create a virus very similar to what COVID nineteen became, and how could 15 agencies show up for a briefing and no one expose it to the public? And we only hear about it by a whistleblower. Will you provide for us the name of the person, the USAID, who attended this briefing in 2018 and let us interview them to find out what happened. Why was this never revealed to the public? So I Speaker 1: think within the 10,000 pages of documents you have from USAID are whatever documents we have on this DARPA proposers meeting. I received the letter we received the letter from your staff yesterday. We certainly look at the request. But just to give a little context, US government agencies often, on good days, show up for one another, go to each other's meetings. This is not something that USAID ever considered funding or was ever engaged substantive way. Speaker 0: The point is is that after hearing that somebody wanted to put a furan cleavage site in the virus, alarm bells go off. And then when you see the virus in 2020 and you say, oh my goodness, they did what they were asking, someone should have said, wow. I wasn't that hearing, and I didn't think anything of it at the time. But now I'm like, maybe I should tell somebody. Maybe I should call up the president. Maybe I should call up Anthony Fauci. Maybe somebody should be informed that we learned about this, and I didn't think anything of it at the time. You're right. It could have been inconsequential in 2018. In 2020, it becomes profoundly important. Why didn't anybody from government come forward to warn us that this could be a virus not from nature, which is not very infectious usually, and was incredibly infectious because it had been preadapted in a lab for human transmission? Speaker 1: Look. I just wanna come back to your earlier point. All of this ended at USAID in 2020. It is before my time. We don't feel defensive about these engagements. We've appreciated Speaker 0: That's all we're asking for is the the we'd like to interview the person who was at that meeting. Speaker 1: I understand. We will look at that request, but but what I just wanna make clear is that in a collaborative spirit, we also understand the the stakes, the human stakes of of of history, of recent history and and the risks. And you have raised flags in a manner that has required us to dig in, I think, in in important ways on top of what we had been doing previously. And so we will continue the back and forth with you in your office and and certainly don't ever wanna be in a position, to, do anything ourselves using taxpayer resources, to create risks. Speaker 0: Thank you. And I do appreciate the cooperation that your agency has given us. Speaker 1: Thank you, sir.