reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Many drones, likely from communist China, are increasingly flying near our military bases. This uptick coincides with more incursions by Chinese nationals. It seems they are preparing for a potential attack on the U.S. from within our own borders. There's no need for an explicit warning from Beijing; the threat is evident. We are at risk of being targeted, yet we are not taking adequate measures to safeguard our bases or protect the American people.

You were attacked by a directed energy weapon. The intelligence community has obstructed congressional investigations, indicating a cover-up that should alarm all Americans. A recent report suggests a foreign adversary may be responsible for injuries like vertigo and traumatic brain injuries among U.S. personnel, including those in various countries. Many victims, including a retired CIA officer, report debilitating symptoms and believe they were gaslit by the CIA. Despite the Department of Defense acknowledging their experiences, the CIA remains dismissive. The officer expresses frustration over the treatment of women and the lack of accountability within the CIA. She hopes for change, emphasizing the need for proper investigation and care for victims to prevent future incidents.

Speaker 0: If these assessments are correct, they are very covert weapons, aren’t they? Speaker 1: That’s correct. There’s no entry or exit wound. How they’re designed is to make the target feel like they’re crazy, like they’re imagining things. Speaker 0: And you also said these attacks are happening right here in this city. Is that correct? Speaker 2: I mean, have been some that have gone public with respect to Washington DC. Speaker 0: I think it was Mister Grozov said you spoke to a Russian agent who said that they believe that Americans are using the same weapons on them. Is that correct? Speaker 3: That is correct. Speaker 0: Might that have something to do with part of the CIA’s motive to cover up the existence of the this tech and these weapons? Speaker 3: That is a very logical possibility. Speaker 0: Thank you. Mister chairman, I yield back. Speaker 2: Gentleman yields. Chair now recognize the gentleman from New York, Mister Goldman, for his random questioning. Speaker 3 (Mister Goldman): Thank you, Mister chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for being here. Mister Grosev, I want a follow-up on the interactions you’ve had with Russian intelligence about these AHIs. Mister Zaid, I want to ask—this is hypothetical—but I’m trying to understand why the U.S. government would try to block information sharing or conceal information that they have. One thing that comes to mind is whether there’s an operational risk to revealing any of the details of their investigation. Is that something you have come across in any of your work? Speaker 2 (Mister Zaid): There are a lot of reasons why the information might not be publicly released. I do think that’s something we could address more in a classified environment to explain that, but there are understandable reasons why the U.S. government has not revealed much of what it knows. Speaker 1: There’s some long-term things that needs to be done in terms of new acts. But in the short term, we need to do things like implement the original Havana Act.

The speakers discuss covert weapons causing no entry or exit wounds, making targets feel crazy. Attacks are reported in Washington, DC. Russian agents suspect Americans of using similar weapons. CIA may be covering up the technology. Reasons for withholding information include operational risks. Long-term solutions are needed, such as implementing the Havana Act.

- Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the possibility that a friend was murdered and suggest that both victims died suddenly from fast-moving cancer, a method they say the agency uses overseas to eliminate people. Speaker 1 admits he cannot prove this but notes the sudden deaths. - The conversation asserts that the US government has technology to infect people with fast-moving cancer and to perform cognitive and directed-energy warfare. Speaker 0 states the government has the technology to infect with fast-moving cancer and to do so absolutely. - In 1997, Speaker 1 describes a hearing on asymmetric threats where he chaired the research committee and focused on four threats: drones, cyberattacks, electromagnetic pulse (EMP), and cognitive warfare. He asserts that cognitive warfare is now being labeled by some as Havana syndrome and that directed-energy weapons are the underlying technology. - Speaker 2 recounts a recent homeland security hearing about foreign adversaries using direct weapons against US citizens, enabling incapacitation. He emphasizes the chilling nature of the briefing and criticizes current domestic leadership as foolish, corrupt, incompetent, and wicked. - Speaker 3 notes that up to 40% of the Air Force equipment budget in the 1990s was classified, making much of it “black.” He emphasizes that military and security research often precedes civilian medical science, and that servicemen were used in experiments without fully informed consent, referencing NK Ultra-era disclosures of thousands of service members used as subjects. - Speaker 4 discusses MKUltra, describing a Canadian experiment involving psychic driving with massive LSD doses, eye-tracking, and memory loss, funded by MKUltra and affecting civilians. He mentions Project Midnight Climax, where Johns were observed in brothels while subjected to LSD, and notes similar experiments by the British Royal Air Force and Army. The results of Midnight Climax are unknown, with no published after-action reports. - Speaker 3 adds that Secretary of Energy O’Leary stated under Clinton that over a half a million Americans had been used in human experiments over four decades without informed consent, including mind control, with no accountability. He argues that mind-control technology has advanced, and questions who should govern its use, given the lack of legal frameworks. - The discussion covers mind-effects research and the lack of treaties governing such technologies. They reference a European Parliament security and disarmament resolution (1999) addressing mind-effects and mind-control technology, and Russian Duma resolutions (2002) seeking similar safeguards. Zabigniew Brzezinski’s Between Two Ages is cited regarding electronically stroking the ionosphere to influence behavior over geographic areas, connecting it to HARP and other electromagnetic carriers capable of mass or individual influence. - Speaker 6 explains historical demonstrations of electronic mind control, starting with Jose Delgado’s remote manipulation of a charging bull using radio energy and electrodes, and notes later work showing noninvasive techniques to influence behavior using low-power magnetic fields. Speaker 7 reiterates Delgado’s animal studies and the potential for noninvasive methods to affect emotions and memory, with broader implications for humans. - Speaker 3 discusses the progression of research funded by DARPA and others toward higher-resolution control of brain activity, enabling controlled effects that override senses and create synthetic memories, raising questions about future justice and evidence. They describe European Parliament and NATO/US military interest in mind-control technologies and the absence of robust legal protections. - Speaker 9 presents advances in AI-enabled brain-reading and memory-altering devices, including mind-reading and emotion decoding, while Speaker 10 and Speaker 12 discuss privacy concerns, brain-data privacy laws (Colorado’s law adding brain data to privacy protections), and the availability of consumer devices that decode brainwaves. They warn that brain data can be misused by insurers, law enforcement, advertisers, and governments, with private companies often sharing data without clear disclosure. - The segment concludes with a note that devices can infer attention and thoughts, and that DARPA’s N3D program aims for noninvasive neuromodulation with implantable electrodes read/write capabilities. It references 1980s–1990s discussions of RF energy as a potential nonlethal mind-control technology, and a 1993 Johns Hopkins conference listing low-frequency weapons as attractive options.

CIA whistleblower reveals a cover-up by the Biden administration regarding attacks from directed energy weapons by foreign adversaries. In an interview, the whistleblower confirms being attacked and states that the intelligence community has obstructed congressional investigations, calling it a terrifying cover-up. The whistleblower discusses experiencing gaslighting from the CIA, which aimed to make victims doubt their injuries. A recent congressional report suggests foreign involvement in these injuries. The whistleblower expresses gratitude for the report and criticizes the CIA for betraying its personnel. She urges for acknowledgment of the situation to prevent further harm and hopes for change under a potential Trump administration, emphasizing that those involved in the previous report should not be allowed to handle this issue.

The speaker emphasized the dangers of Julian Assange's actions, highlighting how WikiLeaks' publication of unredacted State Department documents put lives at risk and hindered diplomatic relationships. They mentioned the State Department's efforts to protect individuals named in the documents but couldn't confirm specific harm. The discussion also touched on Assange's potential entry into the US and the judge's ruling on victims. The State Department's challenges in maintaining trust due to leaked information were noted, with concerns raised by foreign counterparts. The conversation concluded with a reference to private conversations and concerns raised by foreign leaders like Berlusconi.

Directed energy weapons are real and have been used against US government personnel, causing brain disruption and cell death. Mike Beck, a retired counterintelligence officer, was attacked while on assignment and subsequently diagnosed with Parkinson's. A leading expert confirmed Beck's condition was due to microwave weapon exposure, more clearly documented than in Havana syndrome cases. The US government is accused of a cover-up, denying worker's compensation and delaying payments for Beck's assisted living. There are reportedly nearly 2,000 attacks in over a dozen countries. James Giordano, an advisor to the US military, identified sonic and microwave weapons as the primary types used. A CIA whistleblower, Alice, described similar attacks and resulting health issues. While an intelligence community assessment downplayed foreign adversary involvement, Marco Rubio acknowledged unexplained brain injuries. There's a perceived shift towards recognizing the reality of these weapons and the need for support. Beck's family seeks equity and asks for a cleanup of inaccuracies and for the US to prioritize the safety of its citizens.

The discussion centers on concerns about the CIA’s influence over American media and how covert connections abroad could affect news domestically. Speaker 0 states a real concern: planted stories intended to serve a national purpose abroad could come back home and be circulated and believed in the United States, implying the CIA could manipulate the news in the U.S. by channeling it through a foreign country. The participants agree to examine this matter carefully. Speaker 1 raises a targeted question about individuals paid by the CIA contributing to major American journals, effectively asking whether there are CIA-paid contributors to prominent news outlets. Speaker 2 acknowledges that there are people who submit pieces to American journals and asks about whether any are paid by the CIA who are working for television networks, indicating a potential broader reach across media. Speaker 2 suggests that detailing “this kind of getting into the details” is something they would prefer to handle in an executive session, signaling a desire to limit public discussion at that stage. Speaker 3 provides historical context from CBS, noting that “the ships had been established” by the time the speaker became head of the news and public affairs operation in 1954, and that he was told to carry on with them, implying an established framework of CIA involvement or collaboration. Speaker 0 reiterates the need to evaluate the information and to “include any evidence of wrongdoing or any evidence of impropriety in our final report and make recommendations,” indicating a plan to compile findings and address possible abuses. The question is revisited: “Do you have any people being paid by the CIA who are contributing to the national news services, AP and UPI?” Speaker 2 again wants to move the discussion to an executive session, suggesting sensitivity about the specifics and possibly broader implications. Speaker 0 notes that the final report’s content or title “that remains to be decided,” leaving unresolved how the findings will be presented. Speaker 3 asserts that correspondents at the time “made use of the CIA agent chiefs of station and other members of the executive staff of CIA as sources of information which were useful in their assessments of world conditions,” indicating direct use of CIA personnel as information sources. The question is asked whether this practice continues today, and Speaker 3 responds affirmatively, though with caveat: due to revelations of the 1970s, a reporter “has got to be much more circumspect” and careful, or risk being looked at with considerable disfavor by the public. The speaker emphasizes the need for greater prudence in contemporary reporting in light of those revelations.

The speaker argues that Iran, despite being an energy-rich country, has squandered its potential by pursuing a radical ideology that diverts wealth away from its people. He states that millions of Iranians protested because their quality of life did not match what it could or should be, and he attributes this disconnect to the Iranian state’s priorities. The speaker contends that Iran is the number one state sponsor of terrorism because it takes the money it earns and invests it in tunnels, missiles, launchers, UAVs, and other militarized capabilities, and that those investments are being destroyed and degraded “in historic proportions.” He emphasizes that Iran may still possess some capability and will attempt to hold people at issue, signaling ongoing threats that require vigilance. In response, the speaker asserts that efforts to compel Iran are ongoing every single day. Regarding embassies and consulates, he notes that unlike previous administrations, the current approach is to double and triple down on ensuring the safety of personnel, regardless of which department—Whether Department of War or Department of State—cits involvement, the aim is to protect facilities and personnel. The maxim “the best defense is a good offense” is invoked to justify proactive measures, including targeting or pursuing those who would threaten diplomatic facilities. He asserts that there are numerous actors attempting to target U.S. diplomatic missions, and that the U.S. is not surprised by Iran’s indiscriminate targeting, asserting that such attempts are still occurring. The overall message is one of a persistent, aggressive stance against Iran’s destabilizing capabilities and an emphasis on protecting U.S. personnel and facilities abroad while continuing to degrade Iran’s ability to project power.

These covert weapons leave no physical evidence, making it easy for adversaries to deny their use. The attacks are happening in Washington DC, with reports of similar weapons being used by Americans on Russians. This could be related to the CIA's efforts to conceal this technology.

The press can't investigate CIA operations without solid proof. The intelligence community can retaliate against those who challenge them. The CIA denies involvement in assassinations and kidnappings. Social media, intelligence agencies, and mainstream media are closely linked. Some believe the January 6th attack is misrepresented. Many distrust mainstream media and Congress. The laptop scandal is compared to the Russia hoax. There's talk of irregular warfare and digital soldiers.

The recent assassination attempts on Trump raise serious questions. The first involved a shooter with no apparent motive, advanced skills, and no online presence. Secret Service failures are glaring, particularly the lack of surveillance on a nearby rooftop. A second attempt, weeks later at a golf course, involved an assailant with an AK-47 and body armor. These incidents, barely covered by the mainstream media, suggest a potential conspiracy. The lack of investigation into these attempts, and the continued lack of security around Trump, is deeply concerning. Trump’s reaction to these events, demonstrating resilience and a continued focus on his duties, is remarkable. His calm demeanor and focus, especially during his recent inauguration, show a change in him since the attempts. The incidents highlight a worrying lack of accountability within the government.

These covert weapons leave no trace, making it easy for adversaries to deny their use. They cause targets to feel crazy with no visible wounds. Attacks are reported in Washington DC, with suspicions of Americans using similar weapons on Russians. This could be linked to the CIA's mission to conceal such technology.

Discussion centers on 'Guys, if your, assessments here are correct, these are very covert weapons, aren't they?' 'There's no entry or exit wound. How they're designed is to make the target feel like they're crazy.' 'And you guys also said that these attacks are happening right here in this city. Is that correct?' 'I mean, have been some that have gone public with respect to Washington DC.' 'I think it was mister you mister Grozov said you spoke to a Russian agent who said that they believe that Americans are using the same weapons on them. Is that correct?' 'That is correct.' 'Might that have something to do with part of the CIA's motive to cover up the existence of the this tech and these weapons?' 'That is a very logical possibility.' 'There's a lot of reasons why the information might not be publicly released.' 'There's some long term things that needs to be done in terms of of new acts. But in the short term, we need to do things like implement the original Havana Act. DOD'

Foreign nationals are trying to enter military bases, claiming to be students or enthusiasts. The Navy encounters this 2-3 times a week, leading to involvement of NCIS and biometrics. Passports are often present, but motives are unclear. Incidents involve individuals from various countries like Russia and China. Additionally, there are reports of drones flying over American military bases at a rate of 2-3 per week.

There's no entry or exit wound. How they're designed is to make the target feel like they're crazy, like they're imagining things. And you guys also said that these attacks are happening right here in this city. I mean, have been some that have gone public with respect to Washington DC. that they believe that Americans are using the same weapons on them. That is correct. Might that have something to do with part of the CIA's motive to cover up the existence of the this tech and these weapons? That is a very logical possibility. There's a lot of reasons why the information might not be publicly released. And I do think that's something we could address more in a classified environment to explain that, but there are understandable reasons why the US government, has not revealed much of what it knows.

The FBI is being accused of corruption and targeting politicians, parents, and ordinary citizens. Whistleblowers have bravely come forward, facing retaliation and being blocked from working both inside and outside the FBI. This is a troubling time for the American people.

We are addressing members of the military and the intelligence community who take risks daily to keep Americans safe. Senator Alyssa Slotkin, Senator Mark Kelly, Representative Chris DeLuzio, Congresswoman Maggie Goodlander, Representative Chrissy Houlihan, Congressman Jason Crow, and others speak directly to you, acknowledging the immense stress and pressure you face. They state that Americans trust their military, but that trust is at risk, as this administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens. They remind you that you swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. The threats to our constitution aren’t just abroad but also at home. Our laws are clear: you can refuse illegal orders, you must refuse illegal orders, and no one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our constitution. They recognize it is hard and a difficult time to be a public servant, but emphasize that whether you’re serving in the CIA, the Army, the Navy, or the Air Force, your vigilance is critical. They assure you that they have your back. Now, more than ever, the American people need you to stand up for our laws, our constitution, and who we are as Americans. Don’t give up. Don’t give up. Don’t give up. Don’t give up the ship.

The speakers discuss explicit reward figures tied to harming federal law enforcement personnel and describe a rising level of danger for officers in Chicago. They begin by listing bounties: $5 to $10 for kidnapping of ICE agents or Customs and Border Patrol agents, non-lethal assaults, and $50,000 for the assassination of high-ranking officials. Greg Movino, who works in Chicago, says he has personally experienced a bounty placed on his head, illustrating the immediacy of the threat. The panel emphasizes that there are now “$50,000 bounties on the heads of federal law enforcement officers” and that criminals are involved in ramming vehicles and bringing guns to protests. They insist this is not ordinary street crime, but attacks against federal law enforcement, including assaults on border patrol agents, ICE officers, and allied agencies, occurring daily and often multiple times per day. They warn that the lethality of these assaults is increasing, highlighting the growing danger faced by officers enforcing the rule of law. In response to these threats, the speakers discuss measures and leadership strategies. They note that “there's power in numbers” and “safety in numbers,” suggesting collective protection as part of the response. They reference actions at the national level: Secretary Noem reportedly hardening ICE facilities since the terror attack in Dallas, and President Trump having called in the National Guard, viewing these steps as indicative of strong leadership during the crisis. The speakers describe the situation as a coordinated, highly organized “war on our law enforcement on the streets of Chicago,” implying a systematic campaign by adversaries. A key point is the claim that foreign terrorist networks are targeting law enforcement, using a tiered system of bounties to pursue officers. The threats are described as extending beyond direct attacks to include doxxing family members, kidnapping, and even murder. The language frames these actions as deliberate tactics by hostile groups to destabilize and intimidate those enforcing the law, underscoring the perceived severity and organization behind the threats as testified by the speakers.

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

The segment compiles a series of high-profile disappearances and deaths connected to prominent scientists and military-related figures from July 2023 through the present, noting that some cases remain unexplained or lack full public detail while others appear sudden with few answers. The overarching implication presented is that these cases involve individuals tied to advanced national security work, prompting calls for heightened inquiry. Most recently, retired Air Force General William McCaslin vanished in February. He walked out of his Albuquerque home, leaving behind his phone, after having previously overseen some of the Pentagon’s most advanced aerospace programs. In the same month, astrophysicist Carl Grillmeier—who worked closely on NASA missions—was killed outside his home; a suspect has been arrested in that case. Eight months prior to these events, US rocket scientist Monica Reza disappeared while hiking in California’s Angeles National Forest; records indicate she worked on advanced aerospace materials. The report notes that Congress is weighing an FBI involvement: Congressman Eric Burleson is calling for an FBI investigation, underscoring the perceived severity of the cases and the potential implications for national security. In supporting remarks, a statement attributed to Burleson emphasizes the unusual nature of the individuals involved and the seriousness of the situations. Speaker 1 (the reporter’s interlocutor) adds context by describing these victims as not ordinary citizens but “some of the most advanced scientists that are working on our some of our most critical, nation’s secrets.” The speaker frames the situation as having “all of the hallmarks of a foreign operation,” signaling a belief that foreign involvement could be a factor, and stresses the need for investigation. The report notes that, to date, no local authority has publicly connected these mysterious deaths and disappearances. When the inquiry was directed to the FBI, they declined to comment. The segment closes with a follow-up acknowledgment from the host that these cases have heightened curiosity and understanding but remain unresolved in many aspects. Overall, the compilation highlights a pattern involving high-profile scientists and aerospace professionals with missing or violent end-points, the call for federal scrutiny, and the lack of publicly disclosed connections by local authorities, while the FBI maintains silence on the matter.

Foreign adversaries are using direct energy weapons on US citizens, known as Savannah Syndrome. A classified briefing revealed the severity of the situation, leaving the speaker, a former Navy SEAL, shaken. The speaker emphasizes the importance of the upcoming election due to leadership failures.

Chinese cyber warfare and espionage pose an existential threat to America. There are concerns about sleeper cells infiltrating critical infrastructure, including water systems, natural gas lines, and telecommunications.