reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The transcript presents a cascade of allegations and observations surrounding the COVID-19 outbreak and related operations: - It is claimed that “every time there is something that comes out that is in fact false information that is starting to actually hamper our ability to address the pandemic,” and that there are two months during which “we have all these modern technologies” in place to respond after false information emerges. - A suggestion is made that the outbreak was simulated or anticipated two months before it began, with dialogue implying the virus had already circulated for two months, and that such foresight was connected to a simulated scenario tied to the Wuhan military games in October 2019. - The speakers allege that information about a novel coronavirus with a “fern cleavage site insertion” leaked during the Wuhan games, and that “they” knew this and prepared a cover-up over the next two months, launching a tabletop exercise with media, intelligence agencies, the Gates Foundation, the World Economic Forum, and others. - They describe a “tabletop exercise” for a pandemic, described as event two zero one, conducted with pharmaceutical executives, the deputy director of the CIA (who later became the director of national intelligence), Avril Haines, and others. They claim this exercise was run “the week of the Wuhan games,” and that it involved a simulated global spread beginning with a coronavirus outbreak and evolving into a pandemic. - The dialogue asserts that the exercise was “hosted at Johns Hopkins, funded by Bill Gates,” and references a scenario where pigs in Brazil, not pangolins in China, are the initial hosts, with the simulation detailing widespread illness, hospitalizations, and international travel turning local epidemics into a global pandemic. - They allege that the Central Intelligence Agency, in 2015, under Avril Haines (then deputy director), approached Ralph Baric to discuss gain-of-function research on coronaviruses, and that Baric was in contact with the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s Shi Zhengli (the “Bat Lady”) regarding a possible project on coronavirus evolution in humans. - The speakers question Haines’s qualifications, noting she is described as a physicist and “research engineer,” and suggesting she could run the CIA or the entire intelligence community, including participating in a coronavirus response simulation. - They cite today’s reports about social media platforms detecting and removing accounts spreading pandemic-related misinformation, and argue that the deputy director of the CIA—who later became DNI—led a pre-pandemic censorship conference about pressuring social media to ban conspiracy theories that the virus originated from a lab or was linked to U.S. military projects. - The overall narrative ties together claims of advance knowledge, the existence of pre-pandemic simulations (event 201), connections between Johns Hopkins, the Gates Foundation, NATO, and corporate media, and the involvement of Avril Haines in both pre-pandemic discussions and post-pandemic censorship efforts.

The speaker says their role is to present context that, in their view, the past four years involved “orchestration to assault the liberties of people” by “pretending” the situation was a public health emergency while enabling “inconceivable threat to liberties” and “violation of human rights.” They frame this as “lip service to tyrants” and as “domestic and international terrorism.” They argue that evidence begins in the UK in 1966, saying the UK’s wealth and trust decided to fund “the coronavirus as the preferred form of human manipulation” in 1966. They then claim that one year later, the United States and the UK agreed to “modify and manipulate coronavirus” to see what could be done to infect a healthy population (described as 1967). They characterize “Operation Warp Speed” as arriving after 56 years. They cite an imaged 2011 document, described as stating “antitrust collusion” involving the Wellcome Trust, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Gates Foundation, NIAID, and the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. The speaker claims this group established a mandate that “by 2020, the world would accept… a universal vaccine” by the end of 2020, and they say the group identified coronavirus as the thing nature would need for the plan to happen. The speaker then quotes a 2015 public statement: “To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, we needed to increase the public understanding of the need for medical countermeasures such as a pan influenza or pan coronavirus vaccine.” They say that at the time, the World Health Organization had officially declared coronavirus an eradicated disease, and they ask what world would need a vaccine for an eradicated disease. They argue that media hype drives economics: “A key driver is the media, and the economics will follow the hype,” and that “We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues.” They add that investors respond if they see profit, and characterize this as treason or terrorism. They say that Peter Daszak will testify in Congress in “a few short days” that the emergence likely came from a random event in Wuhan, China, where a bat and pangolin “got together and voila” by December, calling it “conspiracy level language.” The speaker asserts this is an admission of conspiracy “to commit acts of terror.” They also cite 2016 language, claiming an announcement that the Wuhan Institute of Virology Virus 1 was “poised for human emergence,” and treat this as part of the same “conspiracy.” Next, the speaker claims evidence includes a 2002 patent filed on “synthetic primary coronavirus,” which they say was “patented to be infectious and replication protective,” calling it “weaponized.” They further claim that in 2005, a curriculum vitae indicates “synthetic coronaviruses, biohacking, biological warfare enabling technologies,” and they question the meaning of that phrase, linking it to biological weapons. They state they have U.S. credentials since 2002 as a “biological weapons inspector” and say they briefed the matter since then. Finally, they cite a WHO Global Preparedness Monitoring Board announcement in September 2019, saying that between 09/19/2019 and September 2020 there would be “our greatest… accidental or intentional release of a respiratory pathogen,” emphasizing the word “release” as “not a leak” and suggesting no mention of accident likelihood.

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.

This virus likely did not originate naturally; it stems from scientific arrogance. In the early pandemic days, there were claims about a wet market origin, but evidence soon emerged showing many cases unrelated to it. By early January, I informed the National Security Council and Anthony Fauci that the virus was highly infectious in humans, suggesting a lab origin. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is well-known for coronavirus research, making the lab leak theory plausible. Despite discussions, Fauci maintained a focus on the wet market hypothesis, disregarding other possibilities. I believed a broader scientific investigation was necessary, but only a single hypothesis was considered.

Three years ago, anyone suggesting that COVID-19 originated from a lab was dismissed and censored. Doctor Redfield faced backlash for suggesting it came from a Wuhan lab. Doctor Fauci received emails from doctors Anderson and Gary stating that the virus appeared engineered and not consistent with evolutionary theory. However, he did not share these emails with Redfield or the CDC. Three days later, Anderson and Gary changed their stance, and the only intervening event was a conference call with Fauci. It is worth noting that Anderson and Gary later received a $9 million grant from Fauci. This raises questions about their sudden change in position.

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.

The issue at hand is that funding was provided to a lab in China, which is now embarrassing. The lab is located near the epicenter of the pandemic and has been involved in suspicious activities. The doctors were arrested and forced to sign nondisclosure agreements, lab reports were destroyed, and sequences from the lab were deleted from the NIH database. Two top virologists initially believed the virus likely originated from the lab, but later changed their stance in the media. It is worth noting that both scientists received a significant amount of money for further research, suggesting a potential conflict of interest.

Before the COVID pandemic, Dr. Fauci, as head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, provided millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund “dangerous gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses” at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, work described as the source of an unintentional lab leak that sparked the pandemic. On the final day as Director of National Intelligence, the speaker says they are releasing “never-before-seen communications and documents” intended to show how Fauci worked with “politicized career leadership” in the intelligence community to suppress the truth about his actions, the lab leak origins, and his role in directing U.S. funding for the research. The documents are said to demonstrate Fauci’s influence over and manipulation of intelligence community COVID-19 assessments and to show Fauci lied to Congress in 2024 by denying knowledge of or participation in discussions with intelligence officials about viral research. The speaker also states that multiple intelligence community whistleblowers provided testimony that they faced retaliation for challenging manipulation of intelligence regarding the virus’s origins. The speaker describes this as a “pattern of suppressing dissent, silencing critics, and burying the truth.” The speaker says Fauci’s close relationships with the intelligence community enabled him to occupy three roles that “shield[ed] him from scrutiny”: 1) Funding dangerous gain-of-function coronavirus research linked to big pharma and its pursuit of universal vaccines worth trillions of dollars. 2) Acting as a behind-the-scenes advisor, alongside hand-picked “experts,” to push the intelligence community to endorse a natural animal origin, framed as a way to hide Fauci-funded gain-of-function research using taxpayer dollars and to shift blame away from Fauci’s actions. 3) Serving as a “pandemic pundit,” publicly pushing “lies, disinformation, and censorship” across available platforms. According to “hundreds of reviewed emails” included in the release, the intelligence community “almost always incorporated Fauci’s recommendations.” The speaker says Fauci promoted a paper whose publication he helped prompt as legitimate information for intelligence community consideration. Senior analysts are described as praising Fauci as an “unbiased guide” to real coronavirus experts while ignoring experts who might dissent from Fauci’s narratives. The speaker further claims Fauci “blatantly lied” to Congress under oath during his 2024 testimony to the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, denying he spoke to any intelligence agency about COVID, and says the newly released correspondence directly contradicts that sworn testimony. The speaker reports whistleblowers described threats of retaliation, marginalization, and career setbacks for analysts who challenged Fauci’s conclusions. Examples provided include a contractor terminated days after coming forward to ODNI as a whistleblower, and managers telling advocates for the lab leak hypothesis or those expressing dissent that leadership would determine promotions. The speaker says senior leaders also attempted to undermine whistleblowers by removing anonymity required by the whistleblower process and insisting their managers or attorneys be present during ODNI meetings, described as creating an atmosphere of intimidation. The speaker concludes that the release is intended to provide transparency, truth, and accountability, citing “lies and censorship and coverups,” and describing the tactics used as part of a “deep state playbook.”

According to the speaker, including himself and Secretary Pompeo, the most likely origin of COVID-19 was a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. They claim that this is not just a possibility, but a probability and possibly a certainty. The FBI has been cultivating a crucial witness, Dr. Zhou Yousen, a close relative of a Chinese military scientist who worked at the institute. Dr. Zhou published a patent for a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, suggesting he started working on it no later than October 2019. However, he was found dead shortly after. While it is possible that he was killed by the People's Liberation Army for accidentally starting COVID-19, there is no evidence to support this claim. The Proximal Origins authors have been approached for comment.

The speaker suggests that American tax dollars funded gain-of-function research that created the virus. They claim that Dr. Fauci and various government agencies, including the NIH, State Department, USAID, and DOD, were involved. They argue that Fauci funded a study that taught Chinese military scientists how to build weapons of mass destruction and hide human tampering on the virus. They question why the U.S. government would fund such research and why they were teaching Chinese scientists. They also mention the CIA's involvement and their role in the cover-up. The speaker raises concerns about the lack of medical benefit and the potential bioweapons implications.

Before the COVID pandemic, the transcript claims that Dr. Fauci, as head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, provided millions in U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund “dangerous gain-of-function research” on bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, work it says is now widely viewed as the source of an unintentional lab leak that sparked the pandemic. It says the speaker, in support of President Trump’s “maximum transparency mandate,” is releasing never-before-seen communications and documents on the speaker’s final day as Director of National Intelligence. The transcript alleges the documents show how Fauci worked with “politicized career leadership” in the intelligence community to suppress the truth about his actions, the virus’s lab leak origins, and his role in directing U.S. funding for the research. It claims the documents expose Fauci’s “direct role” in influencing and manipulating intelligence community assessments on COVID-19 and that Fauci lied to Congress in 2024 under oath by denying knowledge of or participation in discussions with intelligence officials about viral research. It also states that multiple intelligence community whistleblowers testified that they faced retaliation for challenging manipulation of intelligence about the virus’s origins. The transcript says it reveals a “pattern” of suppressing dissent and silencing critics. The transcript attributes three roles to Fauci that it says shield him from scrutiny: (1) funding dangerous gain-of-function coronavirus research linked to “big pharma” and their pursuit of universal vaccines; (2) serving as a behind-the-scenes advisor who, with hand-picked experts, pushed the intelligence community to endorse a natural animal origin to hide the gain-of-function research Fauci funded; and (3) acting as a pandemic pundit who publicly pushed “lies, disinformation, and censorship” across multiple platforms. According to the transcript, “hundreds of reviewed emails” show that the intelligence community “almost always” incorporated Fauci’s recommendations, including promoting a “fraudulent paper” as legitimate information for intelligence consideration. It says senior analysts praised Fauci as an “unbiased guide” to coronavirus experts while ignoring experts who might dissent from Fauci’s narratives. The transcript reiterates that it claims Fauci lied to Congress in 2024 before the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic by denying he spoke to any intelligence agency about COVID, and says the released correspondence directly contradicts that sworn testimony. It further describes alleged whistleblower retaliation, including threats of retaliation, marginalization, career setbacks, a contractor terminated days after coming forward to ODNI, and managers telling those who advocated for or expressed dissent on the lab leak hypothesis that leadership would determine promotions. It also claims senior leaders undermined whistleblowers by removing anonymity required in the process and insisted managers or attorneys be present during ODNI meetings, creating an intimidation atmosphere.

This virus likely did not originate naturally; it stems from scientific arrogance. In the early pandemic, there were claims about a wet market being the source, but evidence soon showed many cases unrelated to it. By early January, it was clear the wet market narrative was misleading. I informed the National Security Council and Anthony Fauci that the virus was highly infectious, suggesting it had been engineered in a lab. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is well-known for coronavirus research, making the lab leak theory plausible. Despite discussions, Fauci maintained a focus on the wet market hypothesis, dismissing the need for broader scientific investigation.

During the early stages of the pandemic, a group of virologists were consulted by the NIH. Some believed that the virus could not have occurred naturally, while others thought it was a 50/50 chance between a lab or natural origin. However, only one narrative was publicly discussed. Later, a paper titled "Proximal Origins of the SARS CoV-two Virus" was released, claiming that the virus was natural. This paper referenced a 2014 article about a 2020 outbreak, which seemed odd considering the years in between. Additionally, a grant proposal called the "diffuse grant proposal" was discovered, stating that experiments were being conducted to test the infectivity of similar viruses and even insert a furin cleavage site, which is present in the virus causing the pandemic. These findings raise concerns about the origins of the virus.

According to Speaker 1, Dr. Fauci was informed via email on January 27, 2020, that NIAID had a financial connection to the Wuhan Institute through EcoHealth Alliance. Speaker 1 believes NIH was funding gain of function research. Speaker 1 also claims American tax dollars likely funded gain of function research that created the virus, not only from NIH, but also from the State Department, USAID, and DOD.

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.

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.

The speaker claims Anthony Fauci funded research at the Wuhan lab, providing them with the technology to develop coronavirus. It's alleged Fauci gave them the precise technology for developing the pathogen and published about it, crediting NIH for financing the studies. Ralph Barack from the University of North Carolina allegedly developed a technique called seamless ligation, which hides the laboratory origins of a manipulated virus. This technique, also called the "no see" technique, conceals evidence of human tampering. The speaker questions why Fauci would give this technology to the Chinese, as the lab was a military lab run by the military.

Project Veritas has obtained military documents revealing information about the origins of COVID-19, gain of function research, vaccines, and potential treatments. These documents contradict Dr. Anthony Fauci's claims that the US government was not involved in gain of function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The documents include a report from DARPA, a US Department of Defense agency, which states that EcoHealth Alliance approached DARPA in 2018 seeking funding for dangerous gain of function research. DARPA rejected the proposal, but the NIAID, under Dr. Fauci's direction, proceeded with the research in Wuhan and other US sites. The question arises as to why the NIH, NIAID, and EcoHealth Alliance disregarded the risks when even the Department of Defense deemed the research too dangerous.

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.

Anthony Fauci was aware of funding for the Wuhan lab from the start and has been involved in a cover-up alongside multiple government agencies. Despite Congress declassifying information, evidence is still being withheld. Emails from February 2020 reveal Fauci's concerns about the virus being manipulated and its potential origins in the Wuhan lab, contradicting his public statements over the past three years. Additionally, a safety committee meant to oversee such funding was bypassed, as Fauci allowed the funding to proceed without their review. This revelation could have significant consequences for Fauci.

The speaker discusses a theory about the funding of the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origins of the coronavirus. They mention a researcher named Ralph Barrick and his chimeric coronavirus research. They also talk about the US Center for Disease Control filing a patent on the coronavirus and its detection. The speaker suggests that the CDC had control over who could study the virus and profit from it. They imply that there may have been illegal actions involved in the manipulation of the coronavirus for monetary gain.

American tax dollars likely funded gain-of-function research that created the virus, according to the speakers. They mention funding from various government agencies, including NIH, the State Department, USAID, and DOD. They argue that Dr. Fauci, under whose direction the research was conducted, is responsible for teaching Chinese military scientists how to build weapons of mass destruction. They also claim that Fauci funded a technique called seamless ligation, which hides human tampering on the virus. The speakers question the justification for funding such research and highlight the involvement of USAID, the Department of Defense, and the CIA. They suggest a cover-up and raise concerns about the origins of the virus.

The speaker discusses a theory about the funding of the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origins of the coronavirus. They mention a researcher named Ralph Barrick and his chimeric coronavirus research. They also talk about the US Center for Disease Control filing a patent on the coronavirus and its detection. The speaker suggests that the CDC had control over who could study the virus and profit from it. They imply that there may have been illegal actions involved in the manipulation and patenting of the coronavirus.

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.