reSee.it - Related Video Feed

In this video, the speaker discusses a simulation event that took place in October 2019, hosted by Bill Gates, Thao Chi, and April Hayes. The last simulation focused on pandemic planning and the suppression of freedom of speech. The speaker mentions that COVID-19 was likely circulating by mid-September, but the Chinese government restricted information about it. They also mention that Bill Gates bought and sold shares of BioNTech vaccine, which later became the Pfizer vaccine. The speaker suggests a connection between Gates' actions and the announcement that the vaccine didn't work. They also mention that Gates provided funding to the speaker's institution.

The discussion connects multiple individuals and organizations to alleged covert intelligence activity and influence over major events. It begins by referencing Robert F. Kennedy’s campaign and Teddy Kennedy’s chief counsel, then claims that attorney Jeffrey Blattner (executive chairman of HIAS) told Ted Kennedy not to run against incumbent Linda B. Johnson, after which Robert Kennedy ran anyway. The transcript then links Jules Kroll to Robert Kennedy’s campaign team and asserts that Jules Kroll is IDF unit 82,300 while Jeffrey Blattner is Mossad. It claims that in 1972 Jules Kroll and his wife Lynn Korda Kroll began a private intelligence operation called J. Kroll and Associates, which later became Kroll Incorporated and grew into a major private intelligence and investigative firm. The speaker says Kroll and K2 Intelligence are related “distinction without a difference,” and that Kroll worked for clients including the Vatican and Bernie Madoff, as well as being used in cases such as Harvey Weinstein investigations. The transcript also claims that the firm’s Tel Aviv spinoff later had a chief technology officer who was an IDF sergeant in unit 82,300, described as an Israeli signals intelligence equivalent to the NSA. The “plot” relevance is tied to the speaker’s claim that Kroll’s wife had a role in UJA Federation (United Jewish Appeal), and it expands into UJA Federation’s alleged connections to broader power networks. It identifies Larry Silverstein as former chairman of UJA Federation (1994–1997), describes him as connected to “old money” Jewish families and Mossad-related figures, and brings in Brian Michael Jenkins (described as deputy chairman of Kroll) and L. Paul Bremer. The transcript claims French intelligence suspected Jenkins and Bremer of promoting threat prevention strategies and then causing attacks when organizations didn’t adopt them. It further states that the New York Port Authority hired Kroll in 1993 to conduct a terrorism vulnerability threat analysis for the World Trade Center Plaza and that the report included a line item suggesting (it said) it was unlikely but possible that the towers could be vulnerable to being hit by jet airliners. The transcript then asserts the Port Authority hired Kroll to run security for the World Trade Center Plaza immediately after Jenkins’ report, and links that year to Larry Silverstein becoming president of UJA Federation. A Mossad whistleblower is introduced: Victor Ostrovsky. The transcript says Ostrovsky, after serving in the Israeli Defense Force beginning at age 14 and becoming a Mossad agent for fourteen months, became a “burn notice”/whistleblower and wrote two books: *By Way of Deception* and *The Other Side of Deception*. It claims the books’ content was managed to avoid “mass scale antisemitism,” and lists ADL (Jonathan Greenblatt), APAC, and UJA as entities said to be arms of Mossad, citing social media training claims and appointment/training activities mentioned in the transcript. The transcript then moves to post–September 11 financial and structural changes, asserting that Solomon Smith Barney (described as the largest tenant of World Trade Center Building 7) was “crashed” and consolidated, and it claims $2.3 trillion referenced by Donald Rumsfeld was consolidated among Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, BlackRock, Blackstone, Apollo, and a little to Goldman Sachs. It states there were 3,800 Jews who worked in both towers and claims only four Jewish deaths were reported on 09/11, including Daniel Lewin (cofounder of Akamai) described as reportedly the first 9/11 casualty and said to be IDF. Additional claims focus on corporate ownership: the transcript asks who is the largest shareholder of BlackRock and asserts Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley ownership (with Merrill Lynch said to own 45%), and it links BlackRock’s founding to Steven Schwarzman of Blackstone, and Rob Capito as UJA Federation. It further asserts connections among Blackstone, BlackRock, Apollo Global Management, Larry Silverstein, and James Tisch, alongside Mark Rich (born Marcel Reich), and describes Mark Rich as having brokered deals involving Iran, Israel, and the Ayatollah through Mossad agents that allegedly reduced oil costs despite US sanctions. It then identifies Michael Chertoff as “second generation Mossad” and claims he coauthored the Patriot Act with provisions to protect Israel from future investigation, later appointing him as secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and later chairman of BAE Systems. The transcript claims Rumsfeld later chaired a pharmaceutical company (Eli Lilly) and sat on boards connected to Investor AB. The discussion culminates in claims about COVID-19: it introduces Alvin Krongard, alleging he controls conservative media, helped plan and cover up COVID, and made trades before September 11 and before related outcomes. It asserts that BlackRock’s Aladdin (and similar tools “In-Q-Tel” and “Lab 72/Lab 41”) was used to model pandemic impacts, and claims Avril Haines (described as working directly for Tony Blinken) was sent to “Event 201” to seize control of the global financial system. Finally, it asserts COVID was “calibrated” to affect certain populations through ACE2 receptor polymorphisms, and it connects Sergei Brin and 23andMe to access to patient DNA data used for calibration. The transcript ends mid-sentence as it continues discussing these claims.

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.

According to a report sent to Washington, SARS CoV-two was created in a Wuhan lab with unsafe conditions, funded by Fauci. The US intelligence community was actively involved and aware, using groups like In-Q-Tel. This was allegedly done despite the Chinese Communist Party's desire for bioweapon technology. The speaker calls for investigations into public and private partners connected to EcoHealth Alliance and Wuhan, including Meta Bioda and Rosemont Seneca, questioning if the president was involved in a cover-up to protect his son. Fauci allegedly coordinated a cover-up with Peter Dasek on the lab leak theory. Ralph Barack and UC Davis were also allegedly involved. The speaker accuses Fauci of lying about gain-of-function research and suggests he should be in jail. Fauci and others are allegedly profiting from the pandemic. The speaker advocates for focusing on those responsible for the pandemic instead of internal conflicts. Others discuss the potential for future outbreaks and the need for better preparedness and funding for research and vaccine development, including mRNA technology.

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.

In October 2019, an event called event 201 took place in New York, simulating a pandemic. The speaker questions why the CIA was involved, suggesting they want to use the pandemic as an excuse to limit free speech and control the population. They mention that the CIA discussed restricting criticism of government policies and the lab leak theory before the Wuhan outbreak. Another speaker suggests flooding communication channels with trusted sources instead of controlling communication. The speaker expresses concern about the CIA using future pandemics to undermine American democracy and the bill of rights.

The speaker discusses how the pandemic was misused for control and profit by the pharmaceutical industry and to introduce surveillance measures. They highlight the involvement of intelligence agencies and the military in the pandemic response, with the NSA and Pentagon leading Operation Warp Speed. The speaker claims that vaccines were developed by NIH and manufactured by military contractors, with Pfizer and Moderna acting as fronts. They also mention multiple simulations of coronavirus outbreaks sponsored by the CIA, including one in October 2019. The speaker questions the origins of the virus and the involvement of the CIA and Chinese CDC. They suggest a historical connection between the CIA and bioweapons research, and how the Patriot Act revived the bioweapons arms race.

The discussion ties together a web of individuals, organizations, and events to present a claim-driven narrative about control of politics, security, finance, and health crises. Key figures and their alleged connections: - Jules Kroll: On Robert Kennedy’s campaign staff; an IDF Unit 82,00 agent. With his wife Lynn Korda Kroll, he founded J. Kroll and Associates (later Kroll Incorporated) and then K2 Intelligence with his son Jeremy. Kroll reportedly worked for the Vatican, Bernie Madoff, Harvey Weinstein (via Black Cube), and other major cases; a chief technology officer in Kroll’s Tel Aviv spin-off allegedly came from IDF signals intelligence. - Jeffrey Blattner: Chief counsel to Ted Kennedy; executive chairman of HIAS; described as central to the plot. - UJA Federation (United Jewish Appeal): Described as a critical, undercredited organization tied to the plot; Larry Silverstein is named as former chairman (1994–1997). The claim extends to UJA’s alleged Mossad alignment rather than a pure philanthropic lobby. - Larry Silverstein: Chairman of UJA Federation (1994–1997) and owner of the World Trade Center towers; linked to other financial and political actors in the narrative. - Warburg family: Mentioned as early leadership of UJA; ties to Warburg Pincus and broader Jewish financial networks. - Tony Blinken: Described as a direct descendant of the Warburg clan; linked to Mossad-inflected networks via family connections. - Mark Rowan (Apollo Global Management), Leon Black (former Apollo chair), James Tisch: Named as figures connected to UJA and to financial consolidation post-9/11, including relationships to Epstein and related entities. - Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley: Identified as pivotal players around 9/11 with connections to World Trade Center security contracting and consolidations that allegedly funded later financial behemoths (BlackRock, Blackstone, Apollo). - BlackRock, Blackstone, Apollo, and related firms: Described as products of post-9/11 consolidation, with alleged Mossad founders or ties through various executives; linked to funding and ownership structures of today’s financial system. - Alvin Krongard (Krongard): Alleged to control conservative media and to have inside-traded around 9/11; connected to Alex Brown and to the broader pandemic and financial narratives. - Michael Chertoff and Philip Zelikow: Named as key figures in surveillance, Patriot Act architecture, and the 9/11 and post-9/11 security/legal framework; Chertoff is described as second-generation Mossad, involved with DHS and later corporate boards. - Johns Hopkins, Carlyle Group, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation: Linked to pandemic planning and global health policy through a web of relationships; Carlyle’s David Rubenstein and Johns Hopkins are cited as central nodes in coordinating policy and funding. - Jeffrey Epstein connections and related entities: Mentioned as part of the broader network. - Viktor Ostrovsky (Mossad whistleblower): Cited for his books detailing Mossad’s global influence and for claims about how Israel’s intelligence apparatus interacts with global policy and law enforcement. - Aladdin (BlackRock’s platform): Described as the AI/quantum platform used to model financial and crisis scenarios; alleged to have been used to plan or simulate impacts of crises like a pandemic. - Event 201 and related figures (e.g., Avril Haines): Described as part of a coordinated effort to influence and seize control of the global financial system in the wake of crises. Chronology and claimed causal threads: - 1968–1972: Jules Kroll’s path from campaign staff to private intelligence to Kroll, Inc., with ties to IDF and Mossad-linked figures; Jeffrey Blattner’s roles tied to Kennedy politics and HIAS. - 1990s–2000s: Kroll’s expansion (Kroll, K2 Intelligence; Tel Aviv spin-off); Larry Silverstein’s leadership in UJA Federation; Brian Michael Jenkins and L. Paul Bremer’s roles in security analysis for World Trade Center planning; post-9/11 consolidation among major financial firms (Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley) leading to BlackRock, Blackstone, Apollo. - Post-9/11: Claims of insider trading patterns and the consolidation of financial power; ties to Mossad-linked individuals and entities; discussion of Mark Rich’s pardon and energy/policy maneuverings involving Iran, Israel, and sanctions. - COVID-19 era: Allegations that COVID was engineered or calibrated via genetic/polymorphic targeting (ACE2 receptor) with involvement from 23andMe’s linking data and a chain of actors (Gates Foundation, Rockefeller-associated groups, Carlyle Group, DHS-linked individuals); use of Aladdin to model crises; Avril Haines cited in Event 201 alignment; claims of deliberate health and economic disruption to reshape global systems. The speakers emphasize interwoven elite families, intelligence agencies, and financial behemoths as the unseen drivers behind major historical events, asserting deep Mossad and Israeli-lobby connectivity across politics, infrastructure, and health policy.

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 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.

Speaker 0 notes: “Have them write the information.” Speaker 1 points out that two people were sitting together: George Gao, director general of the Chinese CDC, and the deputy director of the CIA, who later became head of the entire intelligence community, at an event during the Wuhan military games two months before the Wuhan outbreak. They remark on how conveniently they were seated near each other given how closely they would coordinate two months later. In this segment, social media is mentioned 19 times. Speaker 2 comments that social media is now the primary channel for news, that interruptions to platforms could curb misinformation but also limit access to legitimate sources, and that health ministries worldwide are trying to combat misinformation and disinformation. Speaker 1 describes the tabletop exercise: the deputy director of the CIA becomes head of the ODNI as soon as Biden takes office and is dealing with social media issues. The speaker notes that George Gao attended the exercise, asking why the simulation—which was about an animal-borne coronavirus outbreak in Latin America—had the China CDC head at the table and the U.S. ODNI head present, while the outbreak was said to start in Brazil, and there were no Latin American health officials present. The president of the UPS foundation is mentioned as the only Latin-named figure. The speaker questions why the Brazil CDC director isn’t in the exercise if it’s simulating a Latin American outbreak and points to the arrangement as contradictory to the premise. Speaker 3 repeats that experts agree new disinformation campaigns are generated daily, describing the problem as huge and potentially undermining pandemic response and governance. Speaker 1 emphasizes disinformation keeping us from ending the pandemic, noting the Wuhan games are ongoing in Wuhan, and describing rumors that the US military engineered the virus and that USAID funded work, with a web of claims about public health, vaccines, and pharmaceutical company misdeeds. The speaker asserts that Pfizer, Moderna, and Gates Foundation funding are involved, including claims that Moderna patented the coronavirus vaccine before the outbreak and that Moderna is a Pentagon arm with no prior successful vaccine. Speaker 2 warns that unrest from false rumors and divisive messaging is rising and undermining response efforts as trust declines. Speaker 1 mentions the “China CDC, in charge of the Wuhan lab,” and notes that healthcare workers, if poorly trained, might give wrong information or say “I don’t know,” which erodes public trust. Speaker 0 recalls a Sierra Leone radio interview about whether Ebola was man-made, highlighting the importance of the TOT (tabletop exercise) and ensuring that nobody suspects a man-made origin. Speaker 4: Proposes steps to prevent spreading misinformation on social media by collaborating with telecommunications companies to control information access and ensuring a trusted source floods the zone with messaging, including trained influential community leaders and health workers to disseminate the desired messaging. Speaker 1 questions the idea of flooding the zone with messaging and notes the need for a rapid response to disinformation, while acknowledging that there are intelligence sources identifying foreign disinformation campaigns as part of a larger effort to address the pandemic.

In a pandemic simulation called Event 201, the CIA discussed using the pandemic as an opportunity to limit free speech and control communication. They aim to prevent criticism of government policies and discussions about a lab leak. The CIA has been conducting these simulations since 2001, practicing how to execute a coup d'etat against American democracy and the bill of rights. This raises concerns about their intentions and actions.

"In 2010, the Rockefeller Foundation had published a report about technology in the future, and one of the scenarios was a flu pandemic. And what we followed in 2020 was exactly what was written out for that script." "fall twenty nineteen, the Johns Hopkins, the Gates Foundation, and the World Economic Forum put together a three and a half hour event online called event two zero one." "Critical really critical a so called tabletop exercise." "Nothing about health. Nothing about vitamin d, good nutrition, repurposed available drugs." "It was all about suppressing dissent. It was all about militarization of society." "It was led by Averell Haynes who had been with the CIA." "In my view, clearly, explicitly, Operation Warp Speed was a military operation." "Department of Defense was over health and human services and over the pharmaceutical industry."

The speaker discusses how the pandemic was used to assert control, profit the pharmaceutical industry, and introduce surveillance measures. They highlight the involvement of intelligence agencies and the military in the pandemic response, with the NSA and Pentagon leading Operation Warp Speed. The speaker claims that the vaccines were developed by NIH and manufactured by military contractors, not by Moderna and Pfizer. They also mention multiple simulations of coronavirus outbreaks sponsored by the CIA over the years. The speaker questions the origins of the virus and the involvement of the Chinese CDC and CIA in suppressing the lab leak theory. They connect the history of bioweapons research to the CIA and Pentagon's interest in gain-of-function research.

Speaker 0 thanks the committee for a complimentary introduction and for dedication to transparency and accountability. Speaker 0 says they are a career CIA operations officer. They report that they were on joint duty at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, working with the National Intelligence Directors Initiatives Group (DIG), from March 2025 to April 2026. Speaker 0 states their responsibilities included leading the DIG’s investigation into COVID origins, anomalous health incidents, and unidentified anomalous phenomena. Speaker 0 says they are appearing to discuss “the COVID cover up,” the national security implications tied to the DIG’s investigative findings, CIA refusal to comply with lawful oversight, and how to remedy these problems. Speaker 0 describes how intelligence community leaders and senior analysts downplayed the possibility that the COVID pandemic originated as the result of a lab incident. Speaker 0 says that motives were difficult to define given the scope of the DIG’s review. Speaker 0 then states that, “intentional or not,” the IC’s actions resulted in a cover up, wasted resources, and a failure to properly inform policymakers. Speaker 0 says that public health policy would have been very different if the American public had been made aware that a virus from a lab in China was going to serve as the foundation for emergency use authorization mRNA products that were mandated by the former administration. Speaker 0 then addresses Doctor Fauci’s role. Speaker 0 states that Doctor Fauci’s role in the cover up was intentional. Speaker 0 says Fauci influenced the analytical process and findings by using his position to ensure that the intelligence community consulted with a conflicted list of curated subject matter experts, public health officials, and scientists. Speaker 0 states that this included some of the authors of the paper “The Proximal Origin of SARS CoV-two.” Speaker 0 further says the process included other public health experts who have been in Fauci’s orbit for the last twenty plus years. Speaker 0 frames these points in relation to the DIG investigative findings and ties them to national security implications, CIA refusal to comply with lawful oversight, and proposed remedies for the problems Speaker 0 describes.

In a pandemic simulation called event two zero one, the CIA discussed using the pandemic as an opportunity to limit free speech and control communication. They aim to prevent criticism of government policies and discussions about a lab leak. The CIA has been conducting these simulations since 2001, practicing how to use a future pandemic to undermine democracy and individual rights. This raises concerns about their intentions and actions.

Event 201 was a simulation exercise that occurred right before the COVID-19 lockdowns. It was hosted by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the same group that accurately predicted the 2001 anthrax attacks with a similar simulation beforehand. Event 201 involved actors who greatly benefited from COVID-19 policies. Avril Haines, a long-time consultant for Palantir and former CIA Deputy Director under Obama, was directly involved in the simulation. Haines, who is now the Director of National Intelligence, essentially the CIA's boss in the Biden administration, attempted to remove her connection to Palantir from her online biographies when she joined the Biden campaign.

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.

- Gain of function research is a disaster that has given us diseases, and there is evidence that even Spanish flu came from vaccine research. HIV may also have come from a vaccine program. - Event 201 was a simulation right before COVID hit that focused on turning America into a totalitarian state and imposing censorship. There have been 22 of these simulations, sponsored by the CIA, with Fauci and Bill Gates playing key roles. Gates proposed a partnership with Fauci to vaccinate the world. These simulations involved hundreds of thousands of people, including police officers and healthcare workers, and were a way of practicing a coup d'etat against American democracy. - Tulsi Gabbard is working with someone who says the creation of weaponized SARS COVID goes back to Fauci and was an Obama project. The director of national intelligence is investigating Fauci for his role in creating COVID-19. - The Trump administration, through Kennedy and Gabbard, is preparing to bring forward irrefutable evidence that COVID-19 was made in the USA and shipped to China for plausible deniability as a political coup d'etat against the West. Trump is moving to reveal that COVID was made by Democrat globalists as a weapon against the West. - Methylene blue increases electrochemical activity and gives a tingling sensation.

The speaker suggests that Cyrus had all the elements of the grant, including Barrick, Daszek, and possibly Dr. Fauci. They believe that DARPA officials should have acknowledged in January 2020 that the virus resembled one they were working on at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, indicating a possible lab origin.

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.

- Speaker 0 describes a doctrine where an agent or pathogen works best as a binary weapon if followed by mass exposure with vaccines, noting the insistence on gene transfection technologies to create a peptide with a prion-catalyzing epitope and pointing out that lipid nanoparticles are highly labile and inflammatory, constituting a combination of chemical and biological warfare. - Speaker 0 adds that if this was a weapon release, it may be done and now data will reveal its effects, and expresses doubt about how much trust can be placed in normal scientific methods and institutions to relay data to the public, inviting Speaker 1’s thoughts. - Speaker 1 (Stephanie) says the discussion has been an incredible and difficult ride since things began unfolding, with questions about natural versus lab-based origins, vaccine development versus biowarfare, and concerns about funding by China for bioweapons, acknowledging the impossibility of definitively answering many questions. - Speaker 0 agrees that ambiguity is the point and calls it the strength of the weapon. - Speaker 1 asks why someone would inject something to inflict a bioweapon on the entire population, suggesting population control as a possible motivation. - Speaker 0 notes the need to consider literature from top transnational power structures and corporations, asserting that it is not hidden. - Speaker 1 recalls prior concerns about population-control vaccines, referencing reports about vaccines used in Argentina and Africa that allegedly caused infertility, describing an example where a vaccine given to teenage girls could lead to antibody development to a fetus, making infertility less detectable over time. She mentions a memory of a “benign disease” vaccination program in Argentina that led people to suspect infertility, and notes that it could be a stealth method. - Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the idea that vaccines may have had effects on fertility and reference terms like human chorionic something, with Speaker 1 acknowledging possible occurrences in India as well as Africa and Argentina. - Speaker 0 refers to bioaccumulation seen in reproductive organs and cites pharmacokinetic studies beginning in Japan, noting the vaccine’s presence in the placenta and testes and recalling reports of harmful effects on male reproductive organs. - Speaker 0 mentions Anna Burkhart’s data as dark regarding spike protein expression in reproductive organs found in autopsies, while acknowledging uncertainty about how much weight to attribute to that data, but maintaining that biowarfare cannot be dismissed. - The discussion returns to the mechanism of biowarfare being distinct from a pathogen, describing a scenario where exposure leads to effects years later due to the disease mechanism being induced, rather than immediate pathogen-driven illness.

The transcript discusses a narrative that connects Bill Gates, Jeffrey Epstein, and a global, pre-planned approach to pandemics, presenting a sequence of alleged events and structures designed to profit from health crises. It begins with a claim that new vaccines and health services could be improved and costs reduced by ten to fifteen percent over the next five to ten years, and that a future pandemic will occur regardless of current efforts. It is stated that the pandemic risk is two to three percent per year and that attention to preparedness will continue, noting that the pandemic was predictable and could be far more severe in the future. One speaker asserts they had predicted the risk of a pandemic and that it came true. The brand-new Epstein files are then introduced, claiming they show Epstein planned the whole thing from the start and expose a financial system designed around pandemics that operated long before COVID-19. The documents allegedly reveal a hidden network directly connecting Bill Gates, Jeffrey Epstein, and other powerful individuals. Epstein is said to have helped design the financial apparatus that later secured over 100 million dollars in funding for the Gates Foundation, advising JPMorgan executives on pitching a Gates Anchored Donor Fund to attract vaccine investments under the guise of philanthropy but designed to generate profits. It is claimed Gates had already invested in vaccines from the early 2000s but faced controversy over mass vaccine distribution and promises of disease eradication, which allegedly sometimes worsened problems. Gates is also quoted as saying vaccines could reduce the global population by a significant amount. There is a point-by-point timeline: the world’s population is described as 6.8 billion, headed toward about 9 billion, with a suggestion that great work on vaccines and reproductive health could lower that by ten to fifteen percent. In 2013, the Gates Foundation allegedly created the Global Health Investment Fund, allowing private investors to fund drug and vaccine development with a stated health purpose, while offering a 60% guarantee of principal, meaning investors would risk only 40% while the remaining 60% of potential losses would be covered by philanthropic and public money. This structure is said to convert global health issues into profitable opportunities with low risk, securing funds and enabling subsequent actions. Epstein’s role is described as expanding Gates’ influence in pandemic preparedness. The 2011 funding groundwork allegedly paved the way for broader governance, with Gates Foundation discussions in 2015 about pandemics and global responses, involving groups like the International Peace Institute, World Health Organization, World Bank, MSF, and UN officials. It is claimed Epstein acted as a back-channel intermediary to spread Gates’ influence, maintaining contacts even after funding refusals, by forwarding Gates’ articles on pandemic preparedness. The timeline continues with 2017 being a turning point, where pandemics were discussed as business opportunities rather than disasters, and Epstein was said to broker specialists into Gates’ office for pandemic simulations. A doctor’s text is cited indicating pandemic simulation as a key credential, with Epstein recommending a connection to Gates. That year also saw the World Bank launch the first emergency financing facility, raising $320 million in bonds named to cover coronavirus risks, implying planning for a coronavirus-style outbreak years in advance. In October 2019, six weeks before COVID-19, Event 201—a pandemic simulation modeled on a novel coronavirus—was co-hosted by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Economic Forum, and the Gates Foundation, focusing on government policy during a viral outbreak, distribution of drugs, media messaging, social media management, public compliance, and unified global response. Six weeks later, the real outbreak began. While the documents are not proof, and other evidence such as patents and gain-of-function funding are cited, the narrative suggests a pattern of pre-planned preparation, money, simulations, networks, vaccines, and elite alignment. The closing question asks readers to consider who benefits when such world-stage events occur, proposing that identifying beneficiaries clarifies the situation.

The speaker discusses how the pandemic was used to assert control, profit the pharmaceutical industry, and introduce surveillance measures. They highlight the involvement of intelligence agencies and the military in the pandemic response, with the NSA and Pentagon leading Operation Warp Speed. The speaker also mentions that the vaccines were developed by NIH and manufactured by military contractors, not by Moderna and Pfizer as claimed. They discuss the numerous pandemic simulations sponsored by the CIA over the years and the involvement of April Haines, the former deputy director of the CIA. The speaker questions the origins of the virus and the role of the CIA and Chinese CDC in suppressing the lab leak theory. They also provide a historical context of the US bioweapons program and its connection to the CIA and Pentagon.

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.