reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Many of the U.S.-funded administrations’ biolabs conducted or continue to conduct research with dangerous pathogens, including so-called gain-of-function experiments, with virtually no control or oversight. Speaker 1 cites new evidence that biolabs on Ukrainian territory were funded and rebuilt using federal budget funds from the United States. This is said to be reflected in a published press release by the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which includes a map of biolabs in Ukraine. The documents list facilities in Kharkiv, Dnepropetrovsk, Lviv, Vinnytsia, Ternopil, Chernihiv, and “Addes.” Speaker 1 emphasizes that studies of plague agents, anthrax, tularemia, and Marburg and Ebola fevers were conducted there. Speaker 1 also states that previously identified locations of deployment and directions of research activity by the Russian Ministry of Defense and the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs are currently confirmed by materials from U.S. national intelligence. According to Speaker 1, the legal basis for organizing these studies was a cooperation agreement on preventing the spread of pathogens, technologies, and knowledge that could be used in the development of biological weapons—dated 2005—between the U.S. military department and the Ministry of Health of Ukraine. Speaker 1 adds that coordination of the work was carried out by the Office for Threat Reduction of the U.S. Department of Defense, and that the research was carried out under special secrecy, with restrictions on Ukrainian specialists’ access to information and premises.

The discussion centers on U.S. involvement in biological research in Ukraine amidst accusations from Russia. A U.S. official claimed that any biological or chemical weapon incidents would be attributed to Russia, which has been accused of using disinformation tactics. The conversation reveals that the U.S. has funded biological laboratories in Ukraine, which study dangerous pathogens. Despite denials from U.S. officials about developing biological weapons, there are concerns about the security of these materials in a conflict zone. The Chinese government has called for inspections of these facilities, highlighting international concerns about biological safety. The need for transparency and accountability regarding U.S. actions in Ukraine is emphasized, as the situation remains precarious.

Speaker 0 argues that anyone can file a complaint with a law enforcement authority for murder conspiracy and demand arrests and prosecutions. He points to a 2013 press release claiming that DARPA awarded Moderna Therapeutics up to $25,000,000 to develop messenger RNA therapeutics, noting that DARPA is the Pentagon and claiming the Pentagon bought, paid for, and envisioned these mRNA shots. He contends Fort Detrick was involved in developing COVID-19 at the UNC BSL-3 and asserts the Pentagon is on both sides of the argument, developing the weapon and the alleged vaccines. Speaker 1 asks whether there is any liability shield for deploying a biowarfare weapon and whether the narrative about congressional liability for Pfizer is a SIOP. Speaker 0 agrees that civil liability is separate from criminal liability, stating in his book Resisting Medical Tyranny that executives at companies developing these mRNA shots are guilty of murder and conspiracy to commit murder. He cites a Portugal report claiming that upwards of 300,000 Americans had been murdered by the mRNA Franken shots and invokes the JAB resolution, describing it as a Nuremberg crime against humanity and a violation of the Nuremberg Code. He defines a Nuremberg crime against humanity as murder, extermination, and other inhumane acts committed against civilians. Speaker 1 asks about liability for government officials who approved the vaccines. Speaker 0 says FDA officials who approved the shots could be indicted for murder and conspiracy to commit murder, noting the FDA’s involvement in developing COVID-19 as an offensive biological warfare weapon at UNC BSL-3, including a cited contract listing National Center for Toxicological Research and FDA as contributors. He claims the FDA, which approves the vaccines, was involved in this development. Speaker 1 questions the CDC and media accountability, noting the CDC’s recommendation of the vaccines and media promotion of boosters. Speaker 0 says the CDC, including Director Milensky (appointed by Biden, from Harvard Medical School), is complicit, and claims the CDC has a history dating back to the Reagan administration of handling offensive biological warfare projects, including shipping weaponized agents to Saddam Hussein with implications for U.S. troops after Gulf War I. Speaker 1 asks whether there are lawmakers with intel on gain-of-function biowarfare. Speaker 0 mentions Senator Rand Paul as having a strong understanding, but asserts that some lawmakers were threatened and obstructed after consulting him, recounting an experience with Walter Jones of the House Armed Services Committee who briefly engaged but then did not follow up, implying threats prevented action. Speaker 1 asks how citizens should respond, and Speaker 0 advocates reporting to sheriffs, district attorneys, and state attorneys, noting progress with a Collier County health freedom declaration. They discuss enforcement mechanisms, seizure, and incineration of stockpiles, and trial and sentencing for those responsible. Speaker 0 condemns China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology as a bioweapons lab, alleging it was a Chinese counterpart to Fort Detrick, with the Chinese president seeking his own BSL-4 program and an offensive biowarfare arsenal. Speaker 1 notes U.S. funding and international bioweapons labs, including Ukraine and Taiwan, and ends by referencing Lindsey Graham and a speaker labeled as a professor Boyle.

The speakers discuss concerns about unwanted attention on the relationships between Western virologists and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Speaker 1 claims that money was sent to a Chinese lab that was not following proper protocols and was conducting gain of function research, suggesting that this is where the virus originated. Speaker 0 agrees with this statement.

The speaker is working with Jay Bhattacharya and Secretary Kennedy to investigate US-funded gain of function research, including at the Wuhan lab, which they believe may have led to the COVID-19 pandemic. They aim to provide evidence linking this research to the pandemic. The speaker claims Anthony Fauci denied this research under oath and may have sought a preemptive pardon. They argue that gain of function research continues in biolabs worldwide, posing a risk of future pandemics. The speaker faced criticism for warning about US-funded biolabs in Ukraine. The speaker questions why the intelligence community was reluctant to conclude that COVID-19 originated in a lab, contrasting this with instances where they quickly make assumptions without conclusive evidence. They attribute this to the politicization of intelligence, citing the Iraq War as an example of intelligence being used to influence policy.

Over a year ago, we knew about the biolabs, their experiments, and related documents. It started in 2005 with the Defense Intelligence Agency, which created the Global Viral Forecasting Institute with Nathaniel Wolf, later Meta Biota. Rosemont Fonseca, an investment firm headed by Hunter Biden, Christopher Hines, and Paul Pelosi Jr., funded Meta Biota. This is a corrupt operation developed over the last decade to generate biological warfare against the Russians. They've been collecting DNA from Slavic people. General Igor Krylyov exposed this as a war crime because it violates the biological weapons agreement. America's 30 biolabs in Ukraine experimented on animal-to-human transmission, which is the origin of COVID-19. The research conducted in Ukraine will be directly connected to COVID-19. The United States created and opened this Pandora's box.

Four days ago, I wouldn't have believed the Biden administration was funding secret biolabs in Ukraine, but Under Secretary of State Nuland confirmed their existence during a Senate hearing. Despite fact-checks dismissing it as Russian disinformation, these labs are real, and Nuland expressed concern about their contents falling into Russian hands. The Russian Defense Ministry claimed the labs were developing military biological programs with US funding, possibly involving deadly pathogens like plague and anthrax. The US embassy in Ukraine has a web page explaining that American and Ukrainian scientists have worked on a whole bunch of different experiments like this. The US government is downplaying the situation, with the Pentagon calling Russian accusations "absurd."

Oliver Stone reveals that the US has biological research facilities in Ukraine, which Bill Maher was unaware of. Stone suggests that the possibility of a lab leak in Ukraine is more likely than the theory of bats being the source of the pandemic. He questions the purpose of these American labs and wonders if they were involved in developing various types of research, including agriculture. Stone mentions that the information about these labs has been concealed, and he speculates whether they were involved in creating anthrax or other unknown substances. Additionally, he expresses surprise that Maher is unaware of this information. Ukraine has biological research facilities that are of concern due to the potential risk of Russian forces gaining control of the research materials.

The Chinese State Council Information Office claims COVID originated in the U.S. A special team is investigating COVID's origins, with findings on covid.gov. Work is being done with Jay Bhattacharya and Secretary Kennedy, looking at U.S. funded gain of function research at the Wuhan lab and other biolabs, which has led to health crises. The goal is to find the specific link between gain of function research and COVID-19. If Peter Daszak's research with the Wuhan lab caused the pandemic, then the U.S. funded it, and Anthony Fauci denied it under oath. Gain of function research is ongoing in biolabs worldwide, like in Ukraine. Warning against U.S. funded biolabs in Ukraine led to accusations of being a Russian asset. The intelligence community was reluctant to say COVID came from a lab, possibly due to the politicization of intelligence. This politicization dates back to intelligence used to justify the Iraq regime change war.

Speaker 0 argues that the war is really about dark weapons, especially bioweapons, and focuses on labs near the Russian border that have moved from about 11 labs a decade ago to 30. He traces this back to President Obama, then Senator Obama in 2005, suggesting a long-running history that underpins current events. He contends there is substantial history to unpack and believes the investigation is worthwhile for understanding the situation. He notes that Gareth has long discussed American bio labs in Ukraine and acknowledges that people ridiculed that view in the past. He asks Gareth how he feels now that the topic is suddenly front and center in the news, suggesting a sense of vindication that the broader group knowledge is being disseminated. He claims to have an example in Andrew Weber, who worked with the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, showing Obama, when he was a young senator in 2005, a vial of anthrax in Kyiv at a bio lab. Speaker 0 states that the claim there are no bioweapons in Ukraine is hard to believe, and asserts that people would not look at the evidence. He says it took a war for people to realize the situation and compares it to a Cuban missile crisis for Putin, arguing that as weapons get closer, the plans become more concrete and closer to execution. He emphasizes the proximity of weapons and labs to Russia’s border as a critical element, implying that the risk profile has increased over time. He frames the current conflict as one where the existence and proximity of bioweapons labs are central, and he uses the example of a 2005 scene involving Obama and a vial of anthrax to illustrate what he views as established evidence. Overall, he presents a narrative that the war reflects long-standing concerns about bioweapons labs in Ukraine and their strategic implications, culminating in a perception shift only after war began.

After months of searching through intelligence community holdings and files, Speaker 0 released new evidence of longstanding US government funding of more than 120 biolabs in over 30 countries, including labs in Ukraine that could be at risk of compromise due to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. Speaker 0 said the intelligence community previously warned that a US-funded biolab in Ukraine likely housed dangerous pathogens and remained vulnerable to longstanding threats of Russian attack, seizure, or damage. Speaker 0 claimed that evidence about the full existence and funding of these laboratories had been knowingly withheld from the American people. Speaker 0 said many of these US government-funded biolabs are currently or have previously engaged in research using hazardous and highly contagious pathogens, and in some cases included dangerous gain-of-function research, with very little visibility or oversight. Speaker 0 stated that President Trump “clearly understands” the threat posed by dangerous gain-of-function research and said that on May 25, 2025, he signed an executive order to end federal funding of gain-of-function research around the world. Speaker 0 said that at ODNI, new guidance had been issued directing the intelligence community to increase collection on these laboratories and facilities overseas, and that new details were already being learned, including clinical trials underway at these facilities that are raising ethical, financial, and security concerns about supposed public health initiatives and US national security. Speaker 0 also claimed that politicians and health professionals, including Dr. Fauci, along with entities within the Biden administration’s national security team, repeatedly lied to the American people about the existence of US-funded and supported biolabs, and threatened those who attempted to expose the truth. Speaker 0 said the release breaks new ground because information about the existence, history, locations, and funding of these US-funded biolabs had been intentionally covered up by powerful people who falsely claimed the biolabs did not exist. Speaker 0 said that people who say otherwise are accused of being foreign assets and traitors to America. Speaker 0 concluded by saying ODNI will continue working with US government partners to identify exactly where the labs are and what pathogens they contain to end dangerous gain-of-function research threatening the health and wellbeing of the American people and people around the world.

The U.S. intelligence community has officially opened an investigation into more than 120 U.S. taxpayer-funded biological laboratories operating overseas, including 40 in Ukraine. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard says the probe aims to identify where the labs are located, what pathogens they contain, and what research is being conducted. Gabbard has previously accused officials of misleading the public about the existence and scope of U.S.-backed bio labs overseas, including claims tying the issue to the Biden administration and figures such as Anthony Fauci. The discussion references claims made during the Biden administration by Victoria Nuland, who admitted bio labs are in Ukraine and funded by the United States but said they were only for defensive research, while dismissing accusations as Russian disinformation. Questions are raised about claims of Russian findings, including reported COVID vaccine samples in labs during Russia’s takeover of territory, and claims of AIDS research on Ukrainian military personnel. Senator asks Ukraine-specific questions about chemical or biological weapons and whether there is doubt that any biological or chemical incident in Ukraine would be carried out by Russians. Ukraine is described as having biological research facilities, with concern that Russian troops may seek control of research materials, and statements that efforts are underway with Ukrainians to prevent research materials from falling into Russian hands. The exchange asserts that Russian propaganda blames Ukrainians for plots involving biological weapons and coordination with NATO, and that it is “classic Russian technique to blame on the other guy what they’re planning to do themselves.” Doctor Merrill Nass, a biological warfare epidemiologist and author, says it is notable that the government acknowledges such facilities, including about 40 in Ukraine and over 100 elsewhere, and adds that many countries have studied biological weapons agents, treatments, and vaccines since at least World War II. Nass argues that the law prohibits developing biological weapons and references the Biological Weapons Convention, noting that the treaty has no enforcement mechanism, and that there is no way to send teams to investigate other countries’ labs. He suggests there have been roadblocks to obtaining details, and that labs outside the United States reduce oversight. The conversation also discusses the idea of incentives and loopholes: Nass states that the U.S. has no legal control over private labs and that, in the U.S., it is possible to build high-containment laboratories and have scientists create whatever they like without a prohibition. Nass describes historical U.S. development and stockpiling of biological weapons agents, mentions evasion of antibiotics and vaccines, and argues that international restrictions do not prevent potential development efforts elsewhere. Nass says that specific biological weapon use is not known to have occurred within the United States except that “the potential exception of COVID,” asserting the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine should never have been developed “the way it was developed for COVID” because it included “the most toxic, problematic parts” of the virus. He also recalls work as a consultant to the Cuban Ministry of Health in 1993 regarding illness attributed to cyanide poisoning, describes reports that the CIA sent African swine fever virus to Cuba through Panama to dissidents, and notes that Cuba reportedly had to kill half a million pigs due to that outbreak. When asked whether researchers can be controlled and whether answers will emerge about roughly 120 labs, Nass says accountability and oversight are limited, citing a senate hearing where senators said the intelligence community is not under anyone’s control and is not accountable. He adds that if answers cannot be obtained in the U.S., they would not likely be obtained in other countries. Nass argues that lab-produced viruses could be distinguished from naturally occurring ones by analyzing genomes, describing prior work on reconstructing an epidemic and claiming that attention to whether viral genomes are natural or unnatural will enable future differentiation. He notes that he believes the risk of severe consequences reduces the likelihood of use. The segment ends with plans to bring Nass back as the investigation unfolds.

Real Smoke discusses the presence of bio labs in Ukraine and the false claim that Ukraine was developing biological weapons with US assistance. However, the US has been supporting Ukrainian bio labs to strengthen public health measures, and both countries have pledged to never produce or use biological weapons. The conversation also touches on the origins of the COVID-19 virus, with some arguing it came from a wet market while others believe it originated from a lab in China. The discussion highlights the political divide surrounding this topic.

Ukraine has biological research facilities that they are concerned Russian forces may try to gain control of. They are working with Ukraine to prevent any research materials from falling into Russian hands. Russian propaganda groups are spreading information about a Ukrainian plot to release biological weapons, but there is no doubt in the speaker's mind that if there is an incident, it would be the Russians behind it. The Russians have a history of blaming others for their own plans.

COVID-19 had telltale signs of being made in a laboratory from the beginning. The CIA has stated the virus came from a lab, but what they didn't say is that it was almost surely made in a US laboratory, possibly at the University of North Carolina, and may have been tested in a Chinese laboratory. The Biden administration hid this. One theory is that US scientists wanted to test the virus on a specific bat population in the Wuhan facility. The FBI should crack the case, as it is an inside US job. The University of North Carolina is withholding 2019 emails and fighting to keep them from public scrutiny. There is reason to believe that Tony Fauci funded reckless, dangerous research that went awry.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the origins of COVID-19, focusing on claims that the virus originated in a Wuhan lab and the handling of scientific debate around the lab-leak hypothesis. - Speaker 0 states that for two years Republicans connected the dots and exposed evidence supporting the belief that COVID-19 was developed and leaked from the Wuhan lab, while Democrats hindered hearings and blocked truth-seeking. He asserts mounting evidence supports a lab-origin theory and frames the hearing as a pursuit of truth for Americans who suffered from the pandemic. He notes Doctor Redfield pointed to the lab-leak hypothesis early on and urged Fauci to investigate both the lab and natural hypotheses. - Speaker 0 recalls a February 1 meeting convened by Jeremy Farrar with 11 top scientists across five time zones, inviting Fauci to join, with a preference for a tight, confidential group. He says Redfield was excluded from the call, and asks why he was excluded. - Speaker 1 confirms that in January and February 2020 he spoke with Fauci, Farrar, and Tedros about pursuing both hypotheses, and as a clinical virologist argued it was not scientifically plausible that the virus jumped bat-to-human and became highly infectious; he notes that coronaviruses differ from Ebola and that intermediate hosts are involved for SARS and MERS, and that they never learned to go human-to-human in those contexts. - Speaker 0 asks why Redfield was excluded from the calls. Speaker 1 responds that he was told there was a desire for a single narrative and that his viewpoint differed. - Speaker 0 references emails after the conference call in which four of the 11 scientists said the genetic sequence was inconsistent with evolutionary expectations, but three days later those scientists drafted the paper Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2 arguing the opposite. He asks how those scientists could conclude certainty about a natural origin after three days. - Speaker 1 describes the process as unfortunate and says the approach in January–February 2020 was antithetical to science, noting that science involves debate, which he claims was squashed. - Speaker 0 asks if Fauci used the Proximal Origin paper to hide gain-of-function research and to what extent the paper hides the truth. Speaker 1 declines to discuss Fauci’s motivations but calls the paper inaccurate and part of a narrative intended to negate the possibility that COVID-19 came from a laboratory. He emphasizes that the pandemic did not start in January at the seafood market and that infections date back to September. - Speaker 0 notes an email from 01/27/2020 stating NIH had a monetary relationship with the Wuhan Institute via EcoHealth Alliance, and asks if Fauci intentionally lied under oath about NIH funding of gain-of-function research. Speaker 1 asserts there is no doubt NIH funded gain-of-function research and says American tax dollars funded such research not only through NIH but also via the State Department, USAID, and the DOD. - The exchange ends with Speaker 0 signaling time and introducing Ms. Dink.

The Wuhan Institute of Virology is believed by some, including the speakers, to be a bioweapons lab with Chinese Communist Party officials. The speakers suggest that the US government may have been collecting intelligence on the lab through a scientist named Peter Daszak, who had a relationship with the CIA. They propose that the US government traded advanced biotech for access to the lab. The second speaker agrees with this theory and mentions that he received leaked documents related to the lab. The Department of Defense is also mentioned.

The speaker is working with Jay Bhattacharya and Secretary Kennedy to investigate US-funded gain of function research, including at the Wuhan lab, and its potential link to the COVID-19 pandemic. They aim to provide evidence showing why ending this research is in the American people's best interest. The speaker claims that Anthony Fauci funded the pandemic and then denied it under oath to Senator Rand Paul. They also suggest Fauci sought a preemptive pardon from President Biden. The speaker was attacked for warning against US-funded biolabs in Ukraine, fearing potential pathogen releases. The speaker questions why the intelligence community was reluctant to conclude that COVID-19 originated in a lab, suggesting politicization of intelligence to meet objectives or influence policy. They draw a parallel to the intelligence used to justify the Iraq regime change war and its consequences. The speaker emphasizes the need to address these issues within the intelligence community and highlights the importance of leadership.

The speakers discuss concerns about unwanted attention on the relationships between Western virologists and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Speaker 1 suggests that money was sent to a Chinese lab that was not following proper protocols and was conducting gain of function research, which is believed to be the origin of the current situation. Speaker 0 agrees with this statement.

The speakers discuss the possibility of the Sarscov 2 virus being a laboratory-made chimera. They mention that it is possible to create a virus in the lab that is indistinguishable from a natural one. They also mention a database created by Professor Shi, containing information on over 20,000 bat and rodent viruses. The database included details such as GPS coordinates, virus type, and whether the virus was sequenced or isolated. However, the webpage containing this information was removed from the web in June 2020.

A member of the World Health Organization team reveals that some researchers at a Wuhan lab studying coronaviruses got sick with flu-like symptoms in the fall of 2019. However, there were only 1 or 2 cases, which is not significant. China claims that the lab researchers tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 in March-April 2020, and there is no credible evidence of a lab leak. A 300-page joint report between the WHO and China will be published soon, but concerns have been raised about the WHO team's lack of proper access and the need to clear their report with Chinese scientists. China insists it has been transparent, while the Biden administration questions its transparency.

After months of searching through intelligence community holdings and files, Speaker 1 is releasing “new evidence” that the US government has funded more than 120 biolabs in over 30 countries, including locations such as Ukraine. Speaker 1 says the intelligence community previously warned that a US-funded biolab in Ukraine likely housed dangerous pathogens and remained vulnerable to longstanding threats of Russian attack, seizure, or damage. Speaker 1 also says evidence about the full existence and funding of these laboratories had been knowingly withheld from “the American people.” Speaker 1 claims many US government-funded biolabs have engaged in research using hazardous and highly contagious pathogens, and in some cases included dangerous gain-of-function research, with “very little visibility or oversight.” Speaker 1 states that President Trump “clearly understands” the threat posed by dangerous gain-of-function research and took action by signing an executive order on May 25, 2025 to end federal funding of gain-of-function research around the world. Speaker 1 further says that, at ODNI, they issued new guidance directing increased collection on overseas laboratories and facilities, and that increased collection is already producing new details, including clinical trials underway at these facilities that are raising “significant ethical, financial, and security concerns” about the supposed public health initiatives and US national security. Speaker 1 says politicians and “so-called health professionals like Dr. Fauci,” along with entities within the Biden administration’s national security team, “lied repeatedly” about the existence of US-funded and supported biolabs, and threatened those who attempted to expose the truth. Speaker 1 characterizes the release as breaking new ground because information about the existence, history, locations, and funding of the US-funded biolabs had been intentionally covered up by powerful people who claimed the biolabs didn’t exist. Speaker 1 adds that anyone who says otherwise is accused of being foreign assets and traitors to America. Speaker 1 concludes by saying ODNI and Speaker 1 will continue working with partners across the US government to identify exactly where these labs are and what pathogens they contain to end dangerous gain-of-function research that threatens the health and well-being of the American people and people around the world.

Ukraine has biological research facilities that they are concerned Russian forces may try to gain control of. They are working with Ukraine to prevent any research materials from falling into Russian hands. Russian propaganda groups are spreading information about a Ukrainian plot to release biological weapons, but there is no doubt in the speaker's mind that if there is an incident or attack, it would be the Russians behind it. The speaker believes it is a classic Russian technique to blame others for what they plan to do themselves.

Scientists are investigating claims that COVID-19 was manipulated in a lab. They are analyzing data to determine the accuracy of these claims. The possibility of a lab accident cannot be ruled out, as humans make mistakes. It is being examined whether the Wuhan lab in China was conducting virus enhancement or gene modification, leading to an accidental infection. The team is carefully examining a genetic sequence that matches one patented by Moderna for cancer research. This analysis takes time.

The speaker claims a CIA whistleblower will testify before a Senate committee that the intelligence community has covered up the origin of COVID for years. The speaker asserts evidence shows the U.S. government funded research in Wuhan and that the virus likely escaped from a lab, adding that CIA scientists concluded it came from a lab leak and that someone later “scribbled out” their conclusion at 2AM and changed the report. The speaker frames CIA involvement as part of a larger effort involving military-related covert operations, stating the CIA has two reasons to live: covert support for the State Department or for the military. The speaker argues that over time, long-term CIA covert actions become USAID programs for logistical reasons, especially when scaling beyond a small “need to know” group and security-clearance constrained operations. The speaker says covert action requires secrecy, skiffs, close-hold communications, and a small number of people, so a public-facing program is needed to broaden participation. In that model, the speaker says USAID or state department programs can engage the private sector, nonprofits, universities, researchers, activists, and media, with public messaging and political support to help scale the underlying aims while keeping the core plan secret. The speaker links this asserted COVID narrative to historical biological warfare and “gain of function” research, citing declassified documents from the 1950s and Operation Northwoods-era plans involving Cuba. The speaker claims Cold War U.S. military and CIA planning included “gain of function” research and the dropping of disease-infected ticks and insects over Cuban agricultural areas to induce crop failures and economically destabilize Cuba without a conventional military invasion. The speaker further claims the plans involved making biological agents appear to be of natural origin and avoiding traceable external attribution, describing discussion of using “nonlethal insect borne biological warfare agents” and coordinating planning information with specific people and labs. The speaker states that, according to their account, biological warfare planning involved references to Fort Detrick and the Rocky Mountain lab in Montana, which they say also played a key role in both COVID-19 and Lyme disease. They claim the same lab used for Lyme was connected to plans for accidental releases intended to look natural. From there, the speaker argues that COVID-origin research ties into personnel and timelines. They claim that in 2015 the CIA and ODNI reached out to Ralph Baric to discuss coronavirus evolution and adapting coronaviruses to humans, and that shortly afterward Baric collaborated with Zheng Li Shi (“the bat lady”) on research funded through USAID’s PREDICT program. The speaker also claims that in 2018 Baric and Zheng Li Shi were listed as collaborators on a DARPA proposal involving a furin cleavage site, and that in January 2020 Baric was summoned by ODNI biological sciences experts to brief officials on coronavirus origins, discussing a possible accidental lab release at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The speaker asserts Avril Haines, then deputy head of the CIA, later became head of ODNI and played a key role in the Event 201 simulator. The speaker concludes by tying these threads back to the alleged CIA-to-USAID scaling mechanism and to CIA contractors and censorship efforts, claiming that the CIA’s role explains why CIA-walked scientists concluded a lab leak and why the conclusion was allegedly altered. They also discuss NIE/DOD/USAID/NED linkages, asserting that NED is suited for the role of supporting covert objectives with indirect public-facing infrastructure.