reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Sonia Elijah’s book, three eleven viral takeover, is described as a deep forensic investigation into the COVID era, built from years of FOIA requests, leaked documents, timelines, interviews, and scientific literature to examine unanswered questions from the period. The host, Clayton, frames the discussion around why the pandemic happened, how it happened, and which power structures created populations that largely complied with lockdowns. Elijah explains that March 11, 2020, marked more than a health response; it was a global reset. She compares it to 9/11, arguing that while 9/11 led to citizen surveillance, three eleven led to citizen compliance with the state, with mass lockdowns and surrender of civil liberties. She characterizes the day as a turning point into a new era. The book argues that COVID marked a shift from a post-9/11 surveillance state to direct citizen compliance, facilitated by weaponized fear. In the UK, messaging campaigns spent hundreds of millions of pounds to tell people that “if you go out, you’re going to kill grandma” or “you’ll die,” which helped create a climate of fear. Elijah cites hypocrisy in leadership during lockdowns, noting Boris Johnson at parties and senior New York public health officials at drug-fueled gatherings, while ordinary citizens faced harsh restrictions. The narrative includes stories such as a family member being pressured to isolate a non-COVID patient and care-home policies that contributed to elderly deaths. Elijah discusses the personal toll of the lockdowns, including experiences with hospital visiting restrictions during a family member’s stroke and the broader trauma seen in children and mental health. She cites a child psychologist and the emergence of “COVID anxiety syndrome” as diagnoses, noting that the public messaging and fear-based coercion affected behavior and well-being. The book emphasizes the role of censorship and the disinformation apparatus after three eleven. Elijah highlights a machinery of censorship, including the World Health Organization’s influence on what was deemed scientific, and the suppression of the lab-leak theory and early vaccine harms discussions. She points to the Trusted News Initiative, coordinated by BBC leadership, which she claims enabled big tech to downrank or remove dissenting voices, including doctors and scientists who advocated for early treatments like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. The narrative includes examples of vaccine-injury discourse being shut down, with veteran platforms and media networks flagging or removing related content. Elijah details the epidemiological and testing framework that supported lockdowns, focusing on the PCR test’s use, high cycle thresholds, and the rapid antigen tests from Innova Medical Group. She argues these tests, funded through substantial procurement schemes and criticized by the FDA, helped justify continued restrictions. She discusses a “VIP lanes” procurement environment in the UK and the role of Innova and related networks in driving large-scale testing and surveillance. A major thread is the diffuse network surrounding gain-of-function research and the origins debate. Elijah discusses EcoHealth Alliance, the DEFUSE proposal, and the Wuhan Institute of Virology, noting that Fauci’s NIAID funded related work after a DoD rejection. She references emails and FOIA material showing that a core group of scientists coordinated a public narrative that favored a zoonotic origin while privately wrestling with lab-leak possibilities. The Great Barrington Declaration is described as a focal point of dissent that was aggressively attacked; Francis Collins reportedly questioned “these three fringe epidemiologists,” leading to professional repercussions for Kalodorf and others. Elijah’s closing argument positions COVID as a planned, coordinated effort toward a global biosecurity state, with ambitions including digital IDs and alignment with Agenda 2030. She cites NATO involvement in disinformation policy as evidence of state and military coordination, and she frames the book as a road map to prevent future similar actions. Her aim is to empower readers with knowledge and truth as antidotes to potential future crises. The book, she says, is written to chronicle these events for humanity, hoping that awareness will reduce fear and increase vigilance.

In the investigation into the origins of COVID-19, it has been significant to discover that a scientific debate on the topic was actively suppressed worldwide. Sir Richard Dearlove, former head of British spy agency Mi6, claims that Anthony Fauci led the stifling of this debate. Meetings were held where one side of the argument was supported while the opposing view was denied media attention. Instead of disclosing suspicions about a lab leak, Fauci diverted attention away from this theory. Despite claims by evolutionary virologists that the virus evolved naturally, there was no intelligence or scientific data supporting this. These developments have shed light on the suppression of the origins debate. (116 words)

COVID, Ebola, and AIDS have all been blamed on lab experiments involving Anthony Fauci. The speaker questions the origins of these viruses and highlights the role of a particular author in proving their natural origins. They discuss the controversial history of HIV and AIDS, including the use of chimpanzees and the development of vaccines. The speaker raises concerns about the manipulation of data and the potential cover-up of information. They call for transparency, research, and open discussion to uncover the truth.

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 this video, the speaker emphasizes the importance of pursuing both hypotheses regarding the origins of the virus. They express skepticism about the virus originating from a bat and becoming highly infectious to humans. The speaker believes that the exclusion from certain calls was due to their differing viewpoint. They discuss how a group of scientists initially found the genetic sequence inconsistent with evolutionary theory but later drafted a paper arguing the opposite, allegedly prompted by Dr. Fauci. The speaker criticizes the approach taken in February 2020, stating that it goes against the principles of science. They suggest that the narrative of the virus originating from a wet market was predetermined and aimed to suppress discussion about a lab leak. The speaker also acknowledges that gain-of-function research was funded by various organizations, including NIH, State Department, USAID, and DoD.

My name is Charles Rixey, a member of Drastic, and a former CBRN specialist. My research indicates SARS CoV-2 exhibits gain of function characteristics, fulfilling all seven US government categories, and ranks as the fourth most attractive potential bioweapon. Experiments conducted across multiple countries show a pathway to creating a virus like SARS CoV-2, with EcoHealth Alliance acting as a key partner. The virus uniquely combines elements never before seen in a single coronavirus, like the furin cleavage site, enhancing its transmissibility and pathogenicity. These suspicious elements, common in bioweapons research, were censored by Fauci and others. The DEFUSE proposal, hidden by the intelligence community, shows intent to create such a virus. This cover-up and the resulting censorship obstructed justice, with horrific implications for global public health.

Richard Ebright is known as a vocal critic of Anthony Fauci, with tensions between them spanning two decades. Ebright suggests that deliberate misfeasance may have contributed to the pandemic, resulting in significant loss of life and economic cost. Neil Harris, a scientist from Columbia, is assisting in a congressional investigation into COVID's origins and potential cover-ups. Emily Kopp, a health reporter, shifted her focus to COVID origins in 2021, driven by a moral obligation to uncover the truth. She has been instrumental in obtaining freedom of information documents, revealing communications between Fauci and other scientists. Charles Rixey, a member of the decentralized investigative group "drastic," believes COVID was engineered in a lab, motivated by personal experiences with the virus.

Richard Ebright is described as Anthony Fauci's "worst nightmare," with animosity between them spanning 20 years. One individual claims there was "willful, deliberate misfeasance" that caused the pandemic, killed 20,000,000, and cost $25,000,000,000,000. Neil Harris, a scientist at Columbia, tracked COVID from the beginning and is assisting a congressional investigation into its origins and a potential cover-up. Emily Kopp, a health reporter with US Right To Know, shifted to covering COVID origins in 2021, driven by a "moral obligation" to find answers. She focuses on behind-the-scenes communications between Fauci and a group of scientists. Charles Rixey is part of "drastic," a decentralized investigative team of scientists, web sleuths, and veterans. Rixey, after contracting COVID, began investigating the virus's origin full-time and believes it was engineered in a lab.

In this video, the speaker discusses how Dr. Fauci misled the public about the origins of COVID-19. Two virologists initially believed the virus was engineered and not consistent with evolutionary theory, but changed their position after a conference call with Dr. Fauci. The speaker suggests that Dr. Fauci's motivation for downplaying the lab leak theory was to protect his narrative and the funding he provided to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Criticism of Dr. Fauci is growing, and there are calls to outlaw gain-of-function research and investigate the grant money given to the virologists. The speaker also highlights the FTC's investigation into Elon Musk's communications, which they view as an attack on the First Amendment.

My name is Charles Rixey, a member of Drastic, investigating the pandemic's origin since 2020. My research indicates SARS-CoV-2 fulfills all seven categories of gain of function experiments. A NATO expert group ranked it as the fourth most attractive potential bioweapon, rivaling smallpox. I've identified over 50 papers detailing experiments producing a virus resembling SARS-CoV-2, with EcoHealth Alliance acting as a key intermediary. The DEFUSE proposal, leaked by Major Joseph Murphy, outlined characteristics found in the virus's genome. The virus uniquely combines a polybasic furin cleavage site, an SEB analog sequence, and high human ACE2 affinity. Evidence suggests a coordinated effort to censor discussions on the virus's manipulated origin, involving Fauci and others. The implications are horrific, demanding a thorough investigation into these crimes against humanity. I offer my testimony for the victims of the pandemic.

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.

In a world exclusive, a former high-ranking US government official, Dr. Robert Kallic, reveals private discussions with Anthony Fauci about downplaying the lab leak theory. Dr. Kallic explains that the intention was to prevent accusations and allegations, but it backfired. Fauci's concern for his reputation and lack of visibility into the grants supporting the Wuhan Institute of Virology may have influenced his actions. Dr. Kallic feels an obligation to share the facts, not seeking sympathy or forgiveness, but to provide a factual account of what happened.

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

The speaker is working with Jay Bhattacharya and Secretary Kennedy to investigate US-funded gain of function research, including at the Wuhan lab, and its potential link to the COVID-19 pandemic. They aim to provide evidence showing why ending this research is in the American people's best interest. The speaker claims that Anthony Fauci funded the pandemic and then denied it under oath to Senator Rand Paul. They also suggest Fauci sought a preemptive pardon from President Biden. The speaker was attacked for warning against US-funded biolabs in Ukraine, fearing potential pathogen releases. The speaker questions why the intelligence community was reluctant to conclude that COVID-19 originated in a lab, suggesting politicization of intelligence to meet objectives or influence policy. They draw a parallel to the intelligence used to justify the Iraq regime change war and its consequences. The speaker emphasizes the need to address these issues within the intelligence community and highlights the importance of leadership.

The video discusses a congressional hearing on the origins of COVID-19, focusing on the lab leak theory. Scientists are accused of misleading the public and censoring dissenting views. Dr. Fauci and others are criticized for downplaying the lab leak theory. The conversation highlights the lack of accountability and potential cover-up by those involved. The testimony reveals conflicting opinions among scientists and government officials, with accusations of fraudulent behavior. The video emphasizes the need for transparency and honesty in investigating the origins of the virus.

Project Veritas says it has obtained never-before-seen military documents about the origins of COVID-19, gain-of-function research, vaccines, potential treatments, and government concealment. Fauci testified the US government was never involved in gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Major Murphy’s report claims EcoHealth Alliance approached DARPA in March 2018 to fund gain-of-function research on bat-borne coronaviruses. DARPA rejected the proposal as too dangerous and potentially violative of the gain-of-function moratorium. Documents allegedly show NIH/NIAID did not reject it and continued research at Wuhan and elsewhere. Fauci has maintained NIH/NIAID were not involved. Murphy’s report cites concerns about the gain-of-function program, concealment of documents, and suppression of potential curatives like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, and the mRNA vaccines. Veritas sought comment from DARPA; questions remain about how and why risks were disregarded and who buried the report that could have prevented the pandemic.

The convergence of interest in COVID was, holy crap, we funded this. "Let's outsource this to China. What's your first thought? We've got to cover this up." And that's exactly what he was doing. "The minute by minute of him going till three in the morning that first night, emails going back and forth and back and forth." "I didn't know what a burner phone was. I had to buy a burner phone." "It was no big deal. It turns out it just came from animals." "These people were very concerned. Maybe not that they were gonna be killed by foreign agents, but that the public was going to find out that they had been funding this very dangerous research and that millions of people die because of lack of oversight." "There's never been a more extraordinary cover up in the sense that these people were saying in public the opposite of what they were saying in private." "Freedom of information became the tool that uncovered a lot of this." "In private, Fauci is saying, I'm fifty fifty, whether this came from the lab or animals." "In public, you're a conspiracy theorist ... we should bring you down." "Him and Francis Collins are talking back and forth about bringing down Jay Bhattacharya." "This is just extraordinary. We have the proof."