reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0: It is based on the sworn statement of the late professor Doctor Francis Boyle, who has determined and concluded. Professor Boyle is the greatest authority in the field of bioweapons legislation. He is the author of it. So he knows what is legally meant by it. He knew. Like no other that the COVID-19 mRNA injection is a bioweapon. He has also made that loud and clear to the world known. After which despite being in good health, he passed away shortly after he had declared himself willing to give testimony under oath about this in court. The core of Professor Boyle's argument is that the COVID-19 mRNA injections contain derivatives of illegal military gene function research. As a result, the COVID-19 injections qualify by definition as a military biological weapon system, a bioweapon in other words. This bioweapon consists of two integrated components. The pathogenic load and the delivery mechanism. It is beyond doubt that the pathogenic load is the product of illegal gene or function research. Boyle refers to an article in the scientific journal Nature Medicine, of which I have included the link in this plea note. If you open that link, you will immediately read the warning that true scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus. You will also immediately know that what is called the new normal, true scientists, are not scientists but faith fanatics. These are the scientists behind whom the respondents hide. The article in Nature Medicine that Boyle reports on was published in 2015. And the title reads translated, a cluster of circulating coronaviruses in bats similar to SARS shows potential for human infection. I present to you. What the summary of this research included in the article reveals. It states based on these findings, we have synthetically created an infectious fully SHC zero fourteen recombinant virus developed and demonstrated robust viral replication. Both in vitro and in vivo. So it states, we researchers have created a SARS like coronavirus with a spike protein optimized for human infection. I cannot provide a better example of illegal gain of function research. And who wrote that article from 2015? Among others, researchers affiliated with UNC Chapel Hill and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Wuhan. Yes, Wuhan. You know, where according to the official narrative, people suddenly dropped dead on the street when COVID-19 broke out because there was a bat mutated. The spike protein, the pathogenic payload of the bioweapon is the result of this research. So it's not about a natural spike protein, but an illegally developed synthetically made pathogen that has been optimized for human infection. The spike protein mRNA with the instructions to human cells to produce this very pathogenic spike protein is one of the two crucial building blocks of the COVID-19 bioweapon. Now the delivery system, the NLPs, you know, the nanolipid particles that encapsulate the mRNA payload and deliver it into the interior of the cells. The propaganda term for this is fat globules. What did Boyle declare about it? Boyle declared that it is actually about a nanotechnology enhanced delivery platform. This technology is, as Boyle declared, paid for, developed, financed and conceived by the Pentagon and its research institute DARPA. This technology platform nanotechnology platform was not an afterthought. Doctor Boyle points out that the virus itself was aerosolized and engineered with nanotechnology from the very beginning. This indicates a long term program aimed at the application of advanced delivery systems. And this technology has been used in the COVID-19 injections. Boyle determined that the NLP delivery system in the injections is the result of a specific teacher sponsored program for nanotechnological biological weapons. In the presentation by Samsung you can read further about the legal implications of this. It is also argued that Gates and Borla qualify as suspects of crimes against humanity as defined in the Rome statute concerning the international criminal court.

Gain of function research funded by the NIH in a lab in Wuhan is under scrutiny. Senator Rand Paul accused Dr. Anthony Fauci of funding the lab, which was initially criticized by the media. However, the NIH now admits to funding risky research in Wuhan. The theory that COVID-19 originated from a lab leak gains traction as evidence suggests it came from the lab, not animals. Lab leaks have happened before, and the FBI and Department of Energy support the lab leak theory. Gain of function research involves making viruses stronger, but its effectiveness in creating vaccines is questionable. The media's lack of curiosity about the origins of COVID-19 is concerning. The NIH continues to fund gain of function research, posing a potential risk to humanity.

There is evidence suggesting that the Chinese Communist Party leaked the virus from a laboratory in Wuhan. They hid the truth about person-to-person transmission, which hindered our response. The Chinese Communist Party continues to conduct risky research, even using American funds. We recently discovered they are working on a COVID virus that affects the brain. We need a moratorium on this type of research. Witnesses who could provide information have mysteriously died, and the Chinese Communist Party has removed DNA sequences that could prove our theory. We must prevent future situations by stopping gain of function research and not aiding our enemies. The scientific community in China collaborates with the military and the CCP, posing a serious threat to us.

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.

A US health official working for Dr. Fauci expressed safety concerns about a lab in Wuhan, China, six years ago. The lab was planning to reverse engineer the Ebola virus, but the official was ordered to delete any mention of Ebola in her report. The lab, which is believed by some to be the source of COVID-19, was visited by the official just before it opened. During the tour, a technician at the lab mentioned the illegal importation of Ebola for study. The official expressed shock and worry about the potential consequences if this information became public. Two days later, she was instructed to delete her comment.

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.”

The COVID-19 pandemic likely originated from a lab accident at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, rather than a natural zoonotic spillover. Evidence suggests that the virus was genetically manipulated through gain of function research. Investigations have shown no pre-pandemic infections in Wuhan, and extensive testing of animals and environmental samples yielded no evidence of the virus in markets. The unique genetic features of the virus, including a furin cleavage site, further support a lab origin. There is a consensus among experts that understanding the origins of COVID-19 is crucial for preventing future pandemics and ensuring transparency in research practices. Additionally, concerns about the transfer of American genetic information to China highlight potential national security risks.

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.

COVID world 10/09/2022 reports estimated extra deaths of 31 million and estimated serious adverse effects of 1.9 billion for three years of SARS CoV-two virus and vaccine bioweapons. The two main differences with the previous estimates on 10/01/2022 are: First, 11 countries, for about 600,000,000 people, were added to the estimate base data. As such, the current estimate base data consists of 47 countries for about 2,300,000,000 people, making the current estimates more representative for the whole world. Second, for estimating the serious adverse effects the extra deaths of 2021 and 2022 are taken fully into account as input instead of half in the previous estimates. The extra deaths estimates for 2020, 2021, and 2022 are based on officially reported and factual deaths in the countries mentioned in the table below. For the source of all the used data see the Our World and Data links in the appendix. Extra deaths (see columns twenty twenty ED, twenty twenty one ED, and twenty twenty two ED in the table below) are calculated as the difference of the factual number of total deaths in the concerned year. The missing months of the incomplete 2022 year are estimated by extrapolation of the monthly average of all known months from January 2021 on. The for yearly evolution corrected average of the five preceding years 2015 to 2019. The yearly correction factor used is 0.75% and was calculated based on the evolution of the sum of deaths of all countries below in 2015 to 2019. For the 2020 ED estimate the correction factor 0.75 was three times (reference year twenty seventeen) applied on the five year average, for 2021 ED four times and for 2022 ED five times. In other words, the extra deaths estimates are in fact the excess deaths after correction for an expected yearly evolution and expected yearly without the mass vaccination and COVID bioweapons. Then to calculate the 2020 ED estimate for the world, first the column ED100 ks extra deaths per 100 ks people of the country is calculated. Then this column is aggregated which results in 112 extra deaths per 100 ks people. The latter value is applied on the world population which results into nine million extra deaths in 2020, the first year with the COVID bioweapon deployed. To calculate the 2021 ED estimate for the world, first the column ED21M doses, extra deaths per million doses given in the country, is calculated. This column is aggregated which results in nine sixty one extra deaths per million doses. The latter value is applied on the world doses which results into twelve point one million extra deaths in 2021, the first year with the vaccine bioweapon and second year with the COVID bioweapon deployed. To calculate the 2022 ED estimate for the world, first the column ED22M doses, extra deaths per million doses given in the country, is calculated. This column is aggregated which results in seven sixty three extra deaths per million doses. The latter value is applied on the world doses which results into nine point six million extra deaths in 2022, the second year with the vaccine bioweapon and third year with the COVID bioweapon deployed. Press CTRL plus four more image detail below. The estimate for people with serious adverse effects is calculated by multiplying the estimated extra deaths in 2021 and 2022 by an estimated ratio reported adverse effects/reported deaths after COVID vaccination. The ratio used is 87.6 and was calculated from the table Estimated probabilities after COVID vaccination for all ages in the article below. This results in an estimated one point one billion serious adverse effects for 2021 and zero point eight billion for 2022. Considering the estimated thirty one million extra deaths and estimated one point nine billion serious adverse effects for three years of deployed SARS CoV-two virus and vaccine bioweapons the words bioweaponized, propagandized, lured, coerced and mandated depopulation and genocide should not be taboo. Furthermore, there are about ten million extra deaths yearly worldwide since 2020. If these extra deaths are continued this will result in one hundred and ten million extra deaths by the end of 2030 from these bioweapons since 2020. For the sake of estimating, certain assumptions about the domain were introduced. If one or some of those assumptions would be far off target, for example as more data becomes available and is integrated in the estimation or some data appears faulty, the current estimates and trends could be seriously unvalidated. Because of the mass propaganda, corrupted science, lack of truthful science and censorship in the mainstream media and on tech platforms, thus the elites, many people still think SARS CoV-two is a naturally evolved virus. Truthful science though proves beyond any doubt SARS CoV-two is designed and made by humans in a biolab. After all and first of all, science shows the genetic code of SARS CoV-two contains several lab made inserts, not natural mutations or recombinations of natural viruses. Because these inserted codes PRRA (HIVGP120) are much too large and too many, and because these genetic codes only appear in other natural viruses that are genetically much too different from SARS CoV-two, the probability that SARS CoV-two has naturally mutated or recombined from other natural viruses is quasi zero. Furthermore, there exists a substantial trail of documents and testimonies, years before and after the release of SARS CoV-two about these genetic codes and the existing biochemical technology needed to insert them, financing of the research, scientific documents, patents. See the links below for sources and science. Doctor. Richard M. Fleming, MD, sworn testimony that COVID-nineteen is a bioweapon. Doctor. Richard Fleming on Montanier's discovery of HIV and spiked protein. The virus comes from a lab, appears from the Veritas Revelation Project. Are our scientists lying to us? SARS CoV-two is likely a lab construct. The origin of SARS CoV-two. Since the Genentech COVID vaccines make the human body cells produced during months up to years huge amounts than the average, dominantly only mucosal, infection with SARS CoV-two itself which for the majority of healthy unvaccinated people causes hardly any illness, just cold like symptoms, these Genentech COVID vaccines are of course themselves bioweapons and much worse than the virus itself. Furthermore, not only the produced toxic spike protein but also other components and contaminations of these vaccines are cause of serious health damage. See the links below for information about the devastating effects of the COVID vaccine bioweapons. Images, press CTRL plus for more image detail. The article COVID World 10/09/2022, estimated extra deaths thirty one million and estimated serious adverse effects 1,900,000,000 for three years of SARS CoV-two virus and vaccine bioweapons was written by Pak Osmol, 10/09/2022. Appendix A Data Source. Our World in Data Excess Mortality Raw Death Count. Click the Download tab below the graph on the displayed page. Downloaded CSV September 2022 from Our World in Data Excess Mortality Raw Death Count. Right click the link and then Save Link As.

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.

A Chinese lab in Wuhan conducted mad science experiments, partly funded by the American government. The experiment went astray, leaked, and caused havoc. China is now claiming the U.S. is to blame, which is considered ridiculous. The Chinese were responsible for allowing these experiments to happen in a low-security lab. The lab leak occurred, and they covered it up.

Secretary Pompeo's recent comments about Xi Jinping and the release of COVID-19 have provided confirmation of previous claims made by Miles. It was previously suggested that Xi Jinping was directly responsible for the virus release, but many dismissed it as accidental or natural. However, it is important to clarify that Chinese people do not eat bats and that the virus did not originate from such practices. The video that circulated, featuring a non-Chinese woman, was likely propaganda from the CCP to shift blame onto Chinese culture. This recent confirmation is a significant step forward in validating previous claims made by Miles in 2019 regarding the CCP's plans to release the virus. Additionally, it was exposed a few months ago that the CCP has built 11 biological labs in different countries, indicating their use of unrestricted weaponry.

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.

"So I believe that it is possible that scientific research sponsored in part by the NIH but also lots of other entities including the Chinese government may have been the cause of the pandemic." "the kinds of biological exercises people did in order to try to prevent a pandemic, go find viruses in weird bat caves, bring them into city centers, and then augment their capacity to infect humans," "The reason why they did that was I think they were arguing that we needed to do that in order to prepare just in case a pandemic happens." "But think no matter what you believe about whether the cause of the pandemic was this kind of research, I think everyone can agree that that kind of research is potentially very 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.

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

CIA analysts who supported the lab leak theory were allegedly bribed to change their stance, diverting attention from China and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Adrian Keane, head of global health security at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, was reportedly promoting the natural origin narrative while having a history with the World Health Organization. Keane's potential conflict of interest remains undisclosed. The ODNI stated they followed intelligence community standards, but former ODNI director John Ratcliffe believes a lab leak is highly likely. Those with access to extensive intelligence, including Ratcliffe and Secretary Pompeo, agree that a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology is the most probable cause of COVID-19.

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.