TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Dr. Hotez explains that while vaccines are often described as miraculous, the development was not a four-month process but a seventeen-year effort dating back to the post-SARS period. After SARS emerged in 2003, researchers identified the spike protein as the virus’s soft underbelly and began experimental vaccine development. When the COVID-19 sequence was released in January, the coronavirus community quickly concluded that a vaccine could be made, and attention turned to which technology would be fastest and most enduring. All vaccines discussed (AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, and the one being scaled in India) target the spike protein. He emphasizes that this was a deliberate long-term program, not a rushed push. Nicole notes the broader context of vaccine safety, particularly on a day when a vaccine-skeptical witness testified before the Senate Homeland Security Committee. Dr. Hotez clarifies that the virus behind the current pandemic comes from a family of coronaviruses scientists have studied for a long time, and that once specifics emerged, researchers could finalize the vaccine approach. He reiterates the importance of reassurance about safety in light of public skepticism. Dr. Hotez highlights the role of the NIH and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, led by Tony Fauci, and Francis Collins at NIH, in launching a major coronavirus program beginning in 2003. This funding enabled the development of some of the first prototype vaccines, illustrating a deliberate US government and NIH investment to advance vaccine research. He notes the ongoing need to assess rollout and production robustness, as this technology is brand new, and additional vaccines will be necessary to vaccinate populations. Looking ahead, the conversation acknowledges that the United States will require four or five different vaccines to achieve broad vaccination coverage, rather than relying solely on the two mRNA vaccines. The UK has begun vaccinations, marking an initial step, with plans to scale in the United States in the coming days. The discussion underscores a long road ahead to ensure scalable production, distribution, and multiple vaccine options to meet demand.

"You were the driving force behind Operation Warp Speed, these mRNA vaccines that are the gold standard. Now your health secretary is pulling back all the funding for research. He's saying that the risks outweigh the benefits, which puts him at odds with the entire medical community and with you. What is going on? Research on what? Into mRNA vaccines. Well, we're gonna look at that. We're talking about it, and they're doing a very good job. With Operation Warp Speed was, whether you're Republican or Democrat, considered one of the most incredible things ever done in this country. The efficiency, the the way it was done, the distribution, everything about it was has been amazing. But, you know, that was, now a long time ago, and we're on to other things. But we are speaking about it. We have meetings about it tomorrow, actually, tomorrow at 12:00, and we'll determine. We're looking for other answers to other problems, to other sicknesses or diseases, and I think we're doing really well. Like you, mister president."

In 2015, a 153-page agreement between Moderna and the US government reveals collaboration with Dr. Barrick on mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates. The NIH co-owns the vaccine, as shown in the agreement. This predates current events and raises questions about ulterior motives.

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.

In 2012, DARPA initiated the Adept Protect P3 Program, aiming to prevent pandemics using gene-encoded vaccines based on RNA or DNA. This approach was intended to stop a pandemic within 60 days. The development of vaccines under Operation Warp Speed, announced by President Trump, was not a new concept but had been in progress since 2012. The military, not Pfizer or Moderna, proposed the idea of messenger RNA vaccines. The military has various biological threat programs, including those for smallpox, monkeypox, and anthrax. The Emergency Use Authorization, initially designed for rapid military technology deployment, was first applied to the public during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The vaccines were developed by the NIH, not Moderna or Pfizer. The patents are 50% owned by the NIH, and they were manufactured by military contractors. Pfizer and Moderna were paid to put their names on the vaccines, but it was a military project from the start.

In 2015, a 153-page confidential agreement between Moderna and the US government is discussed. The agreement reveals collaboration between the NIH, Moderna, and Dr. Barrick on mRNA technology for a coronavirus vaccine. The government co-owns the vaccine candidates developed, raising questions about ulterior motives. This predates any current political affiliations.

Trump gave Moderna's COO a billion-dollar check to develop a vaccine quickly, bypassing FDA regulations. Human trials began after testing on mice. Many doubted the speed and safety of the process, but the vaccine was developed in 6 months. Concerns were raised by vaccine experts about the rushed development.

The speaker is questioned about the Health Secretary pulling funding for mRNA vaccine research, claiming the risks outweigh the benefits, putting him at odds with the medical community. The speaker responds that Operation Warp Speed was considered incredible, regardless of political affiliation, citing its efficiency and distribution. While acknowledging that Warp Speed was "a long time ago," the speaker states that they are "on to other things" and are looking for answers to other sicknesses and diseases. They mention upcoming meetings to determine the next steps.

In this video, the speaker discusses a confidential agreement between Moderna and the US government, spanning 153 pages. The agreement dates back to 2015, the same time when a paper on the Frankenstein coronavirus was published by Doctors Barrick and Shee. The NIH and Moderna collaborated with Doctor Barrick, as shown on page 106 of the agreement. The NIH appears to be transferring mRNA technology to Doctor Barrick, while also jointly owning the mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates developed with Moderna. The speaker finds it surprising that the government co-owns the vaccine, and clarifies that this agreement is not related to any recent political events.

The speaker discusses the development of a COVID-19 vaccine in collaboration with Moderna. While some companies see it as a moneymaker, the CEO of Moderna suggests that the virus may have been manipulated in a lab. The speaker also mentions funding for gain-of-function research and the possibility of a deliberate bioterror attack. There is a dispute over whether gain-of-function research was funded, with accusations of lying to Congress. The speaker addresses conspiracy theories and emphasizes the positive impact of vaccines. They also highlight the need to be prepared for future pandemics, whether natural or intentional.

Speaker 0 contends that the top organization that managed Operation Warp Speed and the pandemic was not a public health agency but the NSA, a spy agency, with the Pentagon as the second agency. He asserts that vaccines were developed not by Moderna and Pfizer, but by NIH, whose patents are owned 50% by NIH, and that vaccines were manufactured not by Pfizer or Moderna but by military contractors. He claims Pfizer and Moderna were paid to put their stamps on those vaccines as if they came from the pharmaceutical industry. Speaker 1 responds by stating it’s not warp speed, but has been happening since 06/10/1980 when entering a Fort Detrick military installation, where the sign was turned around with then-president Richard Nixon. He says, “Oh, we’re just gonna cure cancer,” but asserts they turned the sign around on the bioweapons lab, making it a historic landmark at Fort Detrick where they had the gas chamber for the end and a plaque was placed when a new lab was built. He characterizes it as all part of a “plague of corruption” and claims that those involved are protecting themselves because the government, and they played the game. Speaker 1 further alleges that it does not matter whether it is Deborah Birx or Robert Redfield, because they injected the military with HIV in the nineties, and that they know it. He references “HIV p n l four three” and claims to know the plasmid and the exact one, asserting that he knows the people who were injected and that this data exists in his freezer.

Speaker 0 argues that the world has been lied to for 110 years by a small group of criminal industrial conspirators who aim to subjugate humanity to enrich themselves, impoverish and kill others, and that the words “acceptable death rate” have become an industrial norm. They claim this is not just a political disagreement but a crime, asserting that the World Health Organization (WHO) and pharmaceutical companies authorized to begin the process of killing human beings in the interest of advancing their goals. The speaker declares this is a criminal cartel and states they will show documents proving it, insisting this is not an allegation but something that is provable by their own words. The four-step process alleged for executing nefarious plans is: 1) they begin by planning an exercise, 2) they fund that exercise, 3) they create the rationale for what they will do, and 4) they deploy and profit from it. They claim this violates 15 U.S. code section 19 (and connect it to the Clayton Act and the early formation of WHO in 1947), and they claim violation of the TFEU (the treaty for the functioning of the European Union), asserting Article 101 sets out that this was never public health but racketeering to instill terror to adapt population behavior. Data from Zurich is used to argue there was no pandemic: the speaker notes that during the death pandemic of the globe, life insurance claims fell by $30,000,000,000, stating that the data is unambiguous and that there was genocide rather than a pandemic. They pivot to the 2011 WHO, Welcome Trust, PATH, and Gates Foundation malaria vaccine program for children under six months, highlighting that 66 children in the vaccine group were murdered and 28 in the control group were murdered, with the control described as a cocktail of pathogenic injections rather than saline. The speaker references Article five, section 13, claiming immunity from arrest or legal process was designed as permanent immunity for a criminal organization formed in 1947; they connect the first WHO director general, Renee Sand (sic) from the Dachau-era milieu, to Brock Chisholm, who allegedly advocated population control as a primary objective. The claim extends to funding and influence: Gates Foundation allegedly provides 88% of WHO’s foundation donations, which the speaker says constitutes a tax and competition law violation in Europe and the United States. The four-step process is illustrated again with sourcing: to sustain funding beyond the crisis, to increase public understanding for medical countermeasures like pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccines, and to use media hype to attract investors who see profit at the end of the process, as documented by the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board and Peter Daszak’s partnerships. The 2014 Rand Paul–Anthony Fauci correspondence is cited, showing a letter from NIAID to UNC Chapel Hill stating that gain-of-function research would continue during a moratorium with a budget funded by DARPA and NIH. The speaker quotes that the Wuhan virus was anticipated, citing a 2016 publication stating SARS-like Wuhan Institute of Virology virus one is poised for human emergence, implying foreknowledge and manipulation of the virus in Wuhan and UNC Chapel Hill. The talk shifts to the characterization of the work as biological warfare enabling technologies, referencing Ralph Baric’s 2005 DARPA/MITRE presentation and subsequent NIAID and DARPA funding, concluding that the project was to produce biological warfare enabling technologies rather than public health measures. They highlight substantial profits for Pfizer and Moderna from public funds and accuse the WHO of laundering money via a budget expansion request of 11%. In closing, the speaker maintains this is not a public health crime or constitutional crime, but a criminal conspiracy of criminal racketeers. They call for ending the criminal organization itself and urge everyone to destroy the WHO.

Speaker argues for credit to federally funded researchers and the officials who funded their work, noting breakthroughs rely on decades of federal science. He states the mRNA vaccine story “does not start with operation warp speed” and that “the sprint actually began” as dedicated NIH and Moderna staff worked day and night. He traces investments back to Obama: “a 2010 PCAST report on reengineering vaccine production,” “a 2013 DARPA grant to Moderna,” and “a 2015 BARDA investment”; by the end of the Obama administration Moderna had mRNA vaccines and therapeutics under test in animals and humans. “This one liter bottle… would contain over 30,000,000 doses,” enough to vaccinate doctors, first responders, or seniors over 75, and “without those investments, frankly, project warp speed would not have squat.” Speaker 1 notes bipartisan support for biomedical research across administrations, mentions monoclonal antibody work and antiviral molecules, and cautions against proposed budget cuts.

The speaker discusses the decision-making process for the COVID vaccine, highlighting the role of Operation Warp Speed and the lack of FDA involvement. They praise the collaboration between NIH and FDA, emphasizing the dedication of the team. The speaker commends the public-private partnership and the effectiveness of Operation Warp Speed. They express a wish for earlier financial support from the government for the industry.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: Hi, it's Robert F. Kennedy Jr. here, your HHS secretary. At HHS, we have a division called the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, or BARDA. BARDA drives some of our most advanced scientific research. It funds developments of vaccines, drugs, diagnostics, and other tools to fight emerging diseases and national health threats. Over the past few weeks, BARDA reviewed 22 mRNA vaccine development investments and began canceling them. Let me explain why. Most of these shots are for flu or COVID, but as the pandemic showed us, mRNA vaccines don't perform well against viruses that infect the upper respiratory tract. Here's the problem: mRNA only codes for a small part of the viral proteins, usually a single antigen. One mutation and the vaccine becomes ineffective. This dynamic drives a phenomena called antigenic shift, meaning that the vaccine paradoxically encourages new mutations and can actually prolong pandemics as the virus constantly mutates to escape the protective effects of the vaccine. Millions of people, maybe even you or someone you know, caught the omicron variant despite being vaccinated. That's because a single mutation can make mRNA vaccines ineffective. The same risk applies to flu. After reviewing the science and consulting top experts at NIH and FDA, HHS has determined that mRNA technology poses more risk than benefits for these respiratory viruses. That's why after extensive review, BARDA has begun the process of terminating these 22 contracts totaling just under $500,000,000 To replace the troubled mRNA programs, we're prioritizing the development of the safer, broader vaccine strategies, like whole virus vaccines and novel platforms that don't collapse when viruses mutate. Let me be absolutely clear: HHS supports safe, effective vaccines for every American who wants them. That's why we're moving beyond the limitations of mRNA for respiratory viruses and investing in better solutions. Thank you. Produced by the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Credit for breakthroughs belongs to 'the long list of federally funded researchers' and bipartisan supporters of science. He notes the mRNA vaccine story 'does not start with operation warp speed' and that dedicated employees at NIH and Moderna understood the danger of COVID nineteen. He traces investments back to 2009, when 'president Obama' convened his scientific advisory panel and asked, 'how come you still make vaccines with chicken eggs?' In 2013, the Obama administration awarded a $25,000,000 DARPA grant to Moderna for an mRNA vaccine platform, followed by a 2015 BARDA investment of $125,000,000, so Moderna had vaccines and therapeutics in animals and humans. He notes 'thirty micrograms' can elicit a potent immune response, and that 'a liter bottle' would contain over 30,000,000 doses—enough for doctors, first responders, or seniors over 75. Fauci cites support and monoclonal antibody work; they discuss future investments amid budget-cut proposals by Trump and Mulvaney.

In 2012, DARPA initiated the ADEPT Protect P3 program for pandemic prevention using gene-encoded vaccines. The military had been working on mRNA vaccines since then, not as a response to COVID-19. Operation Warp Speed was not as rapid as claimed, with contractors like Moderna receiving funding in 2013. The military's involvement in developing vaccines and monoclonal antibodies predates the pandemic, with emergency use authorization primarily for military use. The FDA's lack of control over the process reflects its military origin, executed with military precision. No one is exempt from its reach.

If COVID-19 originated from risky experiments at the Wuhan lab, it's important to note that the lab received funding from America. During a congressional hearing, Senator Paul questioned Dr. Fauci about the NIH's funding of gain-of-function research in Wuhan, to which Fauci denied lying. However, a scientific paper from 2012 written by Fauci supports the benefits of gain-of-function research despite the risk of a pandemic. The decision to lift the ban on gain-of-function research during the Trump administration remains unclear. Former President Trump mentioned that Fauci did not inform him about the Wuhan Institute of Virology's activities, and emails later revealed Fauci's discussions about the possibility of genetic manipulation. Trump stopped the payments to the Chinese lab upon discovering them. Despite the controversy, Trump believes his administration did a great job with the vaccine and Operation Warp Speed.

In 2012, DARPA started the ADEPT Protect p3 program, aiming to use gene-encoded vaccines based on RNA or DNA to prevent pandemics within 60 days. This approach was already in progress when President Trump launched Operation Warp Speed in response to COVID-19. The military had been working on mRNA vaccines since 2012, with Moderna receiving its first contract in 2013. The military has various biological threat programs, including those for Smallpox, Monkeypox, and anthrax. The idea of mRNA vaccines originated from the military, not Pfizer or Moderna, and it was not a direct response to the Wuhan outbreak. Emergency use authorization, primarily for the military, was later applied to the public during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In 2015, a 153-page agreement between Moderna and the US government reveals collaboration with Dr. Barrick on mRNA tech for a coronavirus vaccine. The NIH co-owns the vaccine candidates with Moderna. This predates current events and raises questions about government involvement in vaccine ownership.

Big companies said it wasn't possible, but Trump gave Moderna's COO $1 billion to develop a vaccine quickly. They started human trials after testing on mice. Many were skeptical, but the vaccine was ready in 6 months. Some experts raised concerns about the rushed development process.

In 2015, a 153-page confidential agreement between Moderna and the US government reveals collaboration with Dr. Barrick on mRNA coronavirus vaccines. The NIH co-owns the vaccine candidates with Moderna. This predates current events and raises questions about ulterior motives.

In 2012, DARPA initiated the ADEPT Protect P3 program for pandemic prevention using gene-encoded vaccines. The military had been working on mRNA vaccines since then, not just in response to COVID-19. The rapid development of vaccines under Operation Warp Speed was part of a long-term military program. The FDA's lack of control over the process is due to its military origins. The military approach to vaccine development leaves no one exempt.

Speaker 0 discusses the origin and framing of pandemic prevention and vaccine development as a military-led initiative. He cites a 2012 DARPA program called the Adept Protect p three program, described as a pandemic prevention platform. The proposal outlined the use of gene-encoded vaccines based on RNA or DNA with the goal of stopping a pandemic within sixty days. He suggests that, by the time President Trump referenced “Operation Warp Speed” to develop vaccines, there should have been preparation and acknowledgement that this work dated back to 2012, making it not rapid innovation but a decade-long effort. He argues that the public narrative of rapid development and stunning innovation surrounding vaccines is deceptive and that contractors like Moderna had already secured multi-million-dollar contracts in 2013. He notes that the military operates programs addressing biological threats and also works on answers such as monoclonal antibodies and vaccines. The claim is made that the military originated the idea of messenger RNA vaccines, not Pfizer or Moderna, and not in response to the outbreak from Wuhan. According to the speaker, this is a military program in origin and administration. The speaker asserts that Health and Human Services, under Alex Azar, together with the Department of Defense, ushered the public into a vaccine era, framing Emergency Use Authorization as a mechanism to rapidly deploy new technology into the military rather than the public. He contends that this mechanism’s broad public application began with the COVID-19 pandemic, which is presented as evidence that the FDA lacks ownership or control over the process because the program is characterized as military in origin and execution. The overall claim is that the program operates like a military operation with universal reach and without exemptions, implying a deeply embedded military approach to vaccine development and deployment. Throughout, the speaker emphasizes the continuity from a 2012 program proposal through to the public health landscape observed during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, asserting that the military’s involvement, timeline, and governance underlie the current vaccine paradigm and its regulatory pathways.